Friday, September 17, 2010

Principles, Tolerance and Success

J's version of reality got me thinking....

"You can content yourself with the fact that your kids are receiving a better education than the kids you left behind in that other school; that your schools are the "best of the worst." Or You can complain loudly and at length that your school is not all that it ought to be and that its failings are as follows, in a very lengthy list. "

Is he correct? or Is there a way to do both? What will be more productive and help your child to be more successful? Which behavior do you want to model for them?

Now, I am a huge fan of "How To Win Friends and Influence People" by Dale Carnegie. His theory is pretty simple regarding Influence. Develop a true concern for the other person's situation, share your concern with them, prove to them you are capable and then you can influence them to look at the situation differently, because they will trust you. It is not manipulation, it is influence because you are seeing things from their perspective and trying to help.

Of course, Sun-tzu and Michael Corleone had a different perspective. "Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer." Which probably is good if you want to manipulate or destroy them...

Sticking with Carnegie's healthier concept, I feel a person needs to spend time with those that they disagree with, work with them, develop empathy for them and strive to understand. Only then can you understand their perspective, and possibly get them to value your perspective and ideas.

Therefore I try to balance both of J's extremes:
  • I work with the Teachers and Administration to help where I can. (ie funds, volunteer, etc)
  • I am thankful for the good things that the district offers. (ie Facilities, Programs, Teachers, etc)
  • I continually critique the key concerns I have regarding the District. (ie Tenure, Bldg retention, Monopolistic tendencies, etc) While posting ideas for improvement...

Is this failing to stand up for my Principles? Or is it living my Principles by showing Tolerance and Respect while continually working to improve a situation? It is an interesting thing to ponder. I hope my children are watching and learning as I strive to reach balance in this endeavor...

To me it seems like what most of us have to do everyday at work... Live and succeed within the company/system, while slowly improving it where we can. Probably a pretty good skill to learn.

Or.... We could go to the President of our company with a list of all the things we think are wrong within the company... I mean many of us are stockholders in the firm... How dare they mismanage our comapny... I wonder how that would impact our success? Or improve the company?

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

That particular passage struck me entirely wrong, too, and I had a response ready to J's original post, but diplomacy won out. I'm glad you're teeing up the idea for a closer look.

So, the orignal question is, basically, which is better--complacency or conflict? Reductive reasoning much?

The idea of approaching the situation with a strategy of "complaining loudly and at length" (with a length list, of course) makes it clear that the goal isn't change or improvement, just noise and misanthropy.

So, to your point, I agree that working as a parent, a volunteer, and an engaged citizen to understand the complexity of the problem is a good place to start. That requires an open mind, a willingness to gather new information and possibly adjust one's viewpoint.

I think it's interesting that the original post was about how infuriating it is when parents aren't engaged with their kids' education. But being adversarial with the teachers and administrators isn't any more productive. Your point of what is the better example to your children is rock solid--we've all seen the kids of the angry bull-headed complainers, and they're angry, bull-headed, complaining kids. It's no more charming or useful in an adult than it is in a child.

--Annie

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but you were the one who originated the idea of an either/or situation. In the comments of the previous post, you adequately defended the notion of positive participation and cooperation versus howling from the wilderness. Now you suggest that the better solution is to cooperate and then offer "constructive criticism," what you call "both." Unless you raise your voice, it isn't "both." Nothing wrong with that, except it DOESN'T WORK.

I would have agreed with you, if you read my comment correctly, that there is nothing wrong with doing the best you can for YOUR kids, within the system. Teacher conferences, formal and ad hoc, are a part of that. But adding constructive criticism, in my experience, has a very limited effect, certainly insignificant compared to the size of the problem. Loud complaining doesn't do any better, because it hardens resistance to the new ideas needed for true education reform, so that path, too, is fraught with frustrations, but what other choice is there? If "the system" will not change of its own volition, either through constructive criticism or adversarial engagement, the only real hope is to force change upon them, meaning that loud, specific criticism is the better choice, rallying public support for something better. It's still not going to be anything that benefits your kids and, indeed, you may find your kids suffering retaliation by "the system." It happens, I know. You ask what lessons your kids will learn if you joust against the schools. Try it, and they may learn first hand.

J. Ewing

Anonymous said...

And Annie, you make it sound as if there were nothing to complain about. How badly do your kids, all kids, and the taxpayers have to be abused before you take exception?

J. Ewing

Anonymous said...

Here's my take on the "abuse":

My kid? My kid is getting what is, by any measure, an exemplary education. It's a great school in a top state for education, the teachers are fantastic, and any concerns I may have are addressed efficiently and to my satisfaction.

The taxpayers? You've never heard me complaining about my taxes being used to create the situation outined above. There are things I'd prefer my taxes not be used towards, but education isn't on that list.

Other people's kids? I have deep and personal concerns about children whose parents aren't willing or able to support their kids' education. That's why I give my time and my contributions to organizations that help ameliorate that situation. It's why I have a tremendous respect for teachers. That's why I'm interested in promoting research-based best practices that can help those kids achieve success in school.

I'm perfectly capable of taking exception. I think the issue we're discussing here is one of style: hostility or harmony, conflict or consensus. Believe it or not, I'm a highly engaged, very opinionated citizen. I make my voice heard and work toward change. Just in a very different manner than you.

I work hard to see others' POV, but I admit I'm getting really tired of the angry antics that are emerging in our culture. I don't think it leads anywhere I want to go.

--Annie

Anonymous said...

Annie, that's very well said and I'm not even beginning to suggest that you aren't doing everything you think is right. I would hope you would concede the same of me. I do not believe our differences are as much about style as words would seem to suggest, either, but perhaps just a different degree of emphasis.

I am happy with the education my kids receive, in a "good" school district, from "good" teachers, but the financial management of the district is just not up to snuff. I've suggested millions of dollars of possible spending reductions, when asked, and then had them dismissed out of hand because, essentially, "we've always done it that way." I am NOT happy to pay taxes for education only to have them go to something other than actual education.

Even more troubling to me is results for other people's kids. Now here both you and Give have consistently challenged my negative attitude, and perhaps rightly so, but I cannot see how saying "half the kids passed the basic standards test" does anything to correct what I see as the horrendous half-empty glass of "half the kids FAILED." I suppose you could address the board saying, "I'm glad half the kids passed BUT....", but I have come to believe that they are like children who hear what they want to hear, and simply ignore everything starting with "But." If that were not true, then surely we wouldn't continue with the intolerable situation we have, would we? My question is not why you think I'm angry, but why aren't YOU angry?

J. Ewing

Anonymous said...

J, question made me pause and give it some thought. I am angry, but I'm not particuarly angry at schools. I'm angry at a system where poverty is the single largest indicator of physical health, life expectancy, academic achievement, and future generations' wealth. I get angry about children born to children who can't possibly support them financially, emotionally, academically. Parenting, when done well, is hard work. Some parents don't have the education or skills to do a good job. I get angry about things that, in my view, are further up the food chain of the problem. By the time a kid is doing a rotten job in school, it's not only the school's fault (though, yes, there are models that are significantly more successful) and it may be beyond the school's ability to fix the situation.

And I actually do get irritated (if not angry) at the explosion of special ed spending, because I happen to believe many of those diagnoses--particularly the behavioral ones--could be prevented with education. Spending a little in the first 5 years to prevent spending a lot for the next 12 years.

So THAT'S what makes me angry. I want better access to birth control and education, I want the earliest possible intervention for support in families where there are high risk factors, I want intensive education and support for those familes so the kid can get a solid foundation for the schools to build upon and for the parents to learn parenting skills. I don't see any real point in (only) railing at the schools once the die is cast and the situation has been set in motion for 6 or 8 or 16 years.

Angry? Yes. At schools? I happen to find that a bit too simple. Maybe my "anger" is the passion with which I defend and advocate for early childhood ed. It's not the only fix, but imo it's the best one available at this point.

So I do recognize the validity of your anger. I just think it's misdirected.

--Annie

John said...

J and Annie,
I was holding back in hopes that you would continue. I think this is an excellent discussion with great points on both sides !!! Thank you !!!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Annie, let me try to summarize, and then you can tell me where I am wrong :-).

We agree that parents should be paying more attention and participating more in their child's education (through teacher conferences, monitoring homework and the like). We agree that not enough parents do and that such is one reason why students may fail to achieve as much as they otherwise might. I would suggest that one reason for Paris not participating is because of the futility of it all. If you have a school where most students are succeeding, including yours, the inclination is to let schools do what you pay them for. If you have a school where most students are succeeding but not yours, you need to be involved. If you have a school where most students are NOT succeeding, then you can't do better for your kid without changing the whole system, and frustration turns to despair, just like many inner-city parents express today.

We also agree that it is a good thing for parents and other citizens to become "constructively engaged" with the public schools, and believe that they would be better if far more citizens did so. There's nothing wrong with the positive engagement that you prefer – volunteering in the classroom and the like – but I see nothing wrong with the negative (your description, not mine) engagement – arguing against poor curriculum or policy choices, for example. This form of engagement actually helps more than just your kid. It is above and beyond the call of parental duty, so kudos to all those who do so. (Pardon me if I do not extend that to those who blindly push a levy referendum without ever understanding the underlying budget.)

The next step up, where we try to improve the entire system, for all children, seems to be where we part company.you seem to believe that this can happen through positive engagement and that simply pointing out the flaws in in the system through constructive dialogue, will create positive change. I'm of the opinion that the system simply will not change because it has not. The schools know they are failing and have known it for years, but their only solutions – more money, smaller class sizes, "new math," and blaming the parents, have not resulted in significant, if any, improvement. I'm convinced that only widespread public criticism will create the necessary [political] pressure for the substantial and necessary change.

In your last post, you took that one step further. I can only say that, if I get frustrated trying to change the education system for the better, I can only imagine how frustrated you are going to become trying to change the whole society by eliminating poverty, single motherhood and cultural rot. I agree with your diagnosis [especially special ed costs], but I prefer to go after the "low hanging fruit" of bringing the education system up to somewhere near where it could be if we just cleared away all the accumulated rubbish and started following best practices across the board. I guess I'm lazy that way. :-)

Be well,
J. Ewing

John said...

FYI... The delete was just a duplicate...