KARE Givers

Prepare the Path for the Child

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 26 May 2026 05:13:07 +0000

Why student support should begin with the learning environment, not the blame we place on behaviour.

I keep coming back to a problem that shows up in schools more often than we like to admit.

When student behaviour becomes challenging, we often spend too much time locating the problem inside the child and not enough time examining the environment we are asking that child to function in.

That does not mean behaviour does not matter. It does.

But blame is not design.

We cannot simply wish students into better regulation, stronger skills, more flexible thinking, or greater readiness to learn. And as much as we may want to, we do not have direct control over who a child is, what they have experienced, what they are carrying, or how quickly they can meet the expectations placed in front of them.

What we do have much more control over is the learning environment.

The routines.
The relationships.
The transitions.
The predictability.
The sensory load.
The clarity of expectations.
The consistency of adult response.
The quality of instruction.
The design of support.
The systems we expect children to navigate every day.

Sometimes the issue is not that the child is refusing to fit the system. Sometimes the issue is that the system has not been designed well enough for the child to access it.

That is where schools need to think more carefully about the relationship between systems and design. A system can be consistently applied and still poorly designed. A support plan can look organized and still fail to account for the actual conditions a student is living and learning within. A behaviour response can be efficient and still miss the point.

This is the work I keep thinking about through EDUkare. Kids are not “at-risk.” Kids live, learn, and grow inside environments that may place them at risk. EDUkare exists to help adults understand those environments and build better ones.

How do we teach adults to engineer better learning environments on behalf of kids?

How do we move away from triangulating the child as the source of every problem and move toward examining the conditions around the child with more honesty, precision, and skill?

How do we build student support systems that are not just reactive, but intentionally designed?

Kids are not problems to be solved. They are human beings responding to environments, relationships, expectations, histories, stressors, supports, and systems.

The adult work is not to blame for the behaviour.

The adult's work is to design better conditions for growth.

That is EDUkare in action.

But, This Is The Job...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 19 Apr 2026 16:58:00 +0000

There’s a shift happening in education right now, often framed as a return to “back to basics.” On the surface, that sounds reasonable—necessary, even. Literacy, numeracy, order, and structure are foundational to good schooling, and few would argue against the importance of calm, focused classrooms where learning can occur.

What is less often acknowledged, however, is what is sitting just beneath that language. Increasingly, there is a quiet but growing belief that some students simply do not belong in those spaces.

More specifically, the students being pushed to the margins are not those with identified learning disabilities, medical needs, or cognitive delays. As a profession, we have made meaningful strides in supporting those learners. The students we continue to struggle with are those whose challenges present behaviorally—students who are defiant, dysregulated, non-compliant, or, at times, aggressive. These are the students who disrupt classrooms and, in doing so, disrupt the expectations teachers have for what teaching should feel like.

The response, whether explicit or implied, is becoming more common: remove the child.

It is easy to interpret this trend as a lack of care or compassion. I don’t believe that’s the case. A more honest—and more uncomfortable—truth is that many educators do not feel adequately prepared to support these students effectively. Rather than addressing that gap in capacity, we have begun to redefine the problem itself. Exclusion becomes “structure.” Removal becomes “rigor.” Avoidance becomes “back to basics.”

Teaching Human Beings, Not “Students”

Years ago, I attended a session led by Phyllis Cardinal at Samson Elementary School, and her message has stayed with me ever since. She reminded us that children who are hungry, angry, lonely, or tired are not ready to learn, and that our role is not to teach abstract “students,” but to teach human beings.

That distinction matters. When we think in terms of “students,” it becomes easier to define success in terms of compliance, productivity, and performance. When we recognize that we are working with human beings, we are forced to consider the broader context each child brings into the classroom. Their behaviour is not random; it reflects their experiences, their needs, and the conclusions they have drawn about themselves, others, and the world around them.

Where Our Thinking Breaks Down

What is striking is that we already know how to respond to difficulty—just not consistently.

When a child struggles with reading, we do not assume intent. We do not interpret the difficulty as defiance or laziness. Instead, we assess the situation, analyze the underlying issue, and adjust our instructional approach. We treat the struggle as information, and we respond with thoughtful, intentional design.

That same logic rarely carries over to behaviour.

When a child struggles to regulate emotion, follow directions, or engage appropriately with peers, the response often shifts from curiosity to judgment. The question changes from “What skill is missing?” to “What is wrong with this child?” In that shift, the systems thinking we rely on in academic contexts disappears.

Design Thinking as the Missing Link

This is where Ross Greene's work becomes critical. Through his Collaborative and Proactive Solutions (CPS) model, advanced through Lives in the Balance, Greene challenges a deeply embedded assumption in education. His premise is simple but profound: kids do well if they can.

If a child is not doing well, it is not a matter of will—it is a matter of skill. More specifically, it is a matter of lagging skills and unresolved problems.

This is entirely consistent with how we approach academic learning. When a child cannot decode text, we identify the gap and intervene. When a child cannot manage frustration or navigate social situations, however, we are far more likely to interpret the behavior as intentional and respond with a consequence rather than instruction.

The inconsistency is difficult to justify. In one context, we see struggle as a call to teach. In another, we see it as a reason to remove.

What We Actually Control

An important reality often gets lost in these conversations: we cannot control the child, but we have significant control over the environment in which that child is expected to learn.

That environment includes expectations, structures, relationships, instructional approaches, and the ways adults respond in moments of difficulty. In other words, it includes the very conditions that shape whether a student is successful.

Systems thinking helps us recognize patterns and understand how different elements interact. On its own, however, it is not enough. Without corresponding design thinking—without a willingness to adjust the environment in response to what we are seeing—systems thinking becomes little more than observation.

If behavior is information, then it is also an opportunity. It tells us something about the fit between the learner and the environment. Our responsibility is to respond to that information in ways that improve that fit.

This aligns closely with the perspective I explored in an earlier piece on redefining failure. When viewed through a systems lens, failure is not simply a student falling short of a standard; it is an indication that something within the system is not functioning as intended, and therefore requires reflection and adjustment.

Trust and the Conditions for Learning

The importance of relationships in this work cannot be overstated. In The Five Dysfunctions of a Team, Patrick Lencioni identifies the absence of trust as the foundational issue in ineffective teams. The same principle applies in classrooms.

As Nel Noddings reminds us, children will do remarkably complex and even unexpected things, like adding fractions, for adults they trust. Without that trust, the conditions for learning are significantly diminished.

A Necessary Confrontation

This leads to a tension that is not often addressed directly. As educators, we regularly assert that we care about all students. At the same time, our actions can suggest that our care is conditional—extended more readily to students who are compliant, regulated, and easy to teach.

When students challenge those conditions, our willingness to include them is often tested.

It is not uncommon to hear the assertion that addressing behavioral complexity is not the teacher’s role. This raises an important question: if teaching is not about responding to the full range of human needs present in a classroom, then what exactly is the role?

If we define teaching narrowly as content delivery, then the argument for exclusion becomes easier to make. If, however, we understand teaching as the development of human beings within a learning community, then the students who challenge us most are not peripheral to the work—they are central to it.

The Moral Imperative

Michael Fullan describes this as the moral imperative of education. It is not limited to improving academic outcomes; it extends to improving lives. It requires educators to shape environments that support both learning and human development, even when doing so is complex and demanding.

This is not a standard that can be adjusted for convenience. Difficulty does not reduce responsibility.

Rethinking “Back to Basics”

If the profession is genuinely interested in returning to foundational principles, it is worth reconsidering what those principles actually are. They are not limited to content coverage or classroom order. They include the conditions that make learning possible in the first place: connection, trust, understanding, and thoughtful design.

Schools are often described as a reflection of society. There is truth in that idea, but it is incomplete. Schools also reflect what we choose to value.

At present, efficiency, control, and predictability appear to be taking precedence. The question that remains is whether we are prepared to prioritize something more demanding—whether we are willing to act with the level of care, responsibility, and courage required to support all students, including those who make the work more difficult.

Because working with those students was never an additional expectation layered onto the profession.

It has always been the work itself.

We’re Getting Louder, Not Smarter

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Thu, 16 Apr 2026 03:26:00 +0000

How performative outrage and groupthink are reshaping education—and why it matters.

There’s a shift happening in education right now—and it’s not a good one.

What used to be professional frustration has started to harden into something else entirely.

Identity.

Spend any time in online education spaces, and you’ll see it unfold in real time:

Teachers positioning themselves as the only ones who understand what’s happening in classrooms
Administrators are painted as disconnected, performative, or incompetent
System-level decisions reduced to sound bites and outrage
Complex realities flattened into “common sense” solutions

It’s not just venting anymore.

It’s groupthink.

And it’s being rewarded.

The rise of performative outrage

There’s a new currency in education discourse:

Say something sharp. Make it simple. Make it emotional. Pick a side.

And watch it spread.

The more absolute the take, the more traction it gets.

“Bring back consequences.”
“Ban technology.”
“Go back to basics.”
“Teachers aren’t being listened to.”

These statements feel powerful. But they’re not analysis, they’re reactions, and reactions—especially when amplified at scale—have a way of becoming belief systems.

The lie that’s gaining traction

Let’s say it plainly:

The “admin bad / teacher good” narrative is intellectually lazy.

It collapses an entire profession into opposing camps for the sake of emotional clarity, and it ignores a fundamental truth:

The system being criticized is made up of educators.

Principals are teachers.
Consultants are teachers.
Curriculum leads are teachers.
Student services teams are made up of teachers.

Different roles don’t mean different values; they mean different vantage points.

When we pretend otherwise, we stop engaging professionally—and start reacting tribally.

Consultation is not a democratic free-for-all

Another idea gaining traction:

“If teachers weren’t consulted, the decision is flawed.”

That sounds fair, but it’s also unrealistic.

Public education is not a flat structure. It can’t be. There are layers of responsibility, timelines, legal obligations, and system-wide considerations that require decisions to be made without full consensus every time.

That’s not disrespect. That’s reality.

And when every decision that doesn’t include full consultation is framed as a failure, we create a system where trust erodes faster than any initiative can succeed.

Nostalgia is not pedagogy

“Back to basics” is trending again. It always does when things feel hard, but let’s be honest about what’s being implied:

More punishment (rebranded as “accountability”)
Less flexibility
Less responsiveness to individual needs
A return to a system that worked better for adults than it did for many kids

Here’s the problem:

None of this is grounded in current, peer-reviewed research as a universal solution. It’s grounded in memory, and memory has a way of editing out the students who didn’t thrive under those conditions.

We know better—and that matters

Modern research hasn’t made education softer. It’s made it more precise.

Frameworks like the Neurosequential Model have helped us understand something critical:

You can’t expect skills from students who haven’t developed the capacity for them yet.

This isn’t theory. It’s neuroscience.

Regulation precedes cognition
Development drives behaviour
Stress impacts access to learning

So when a student struggles, the response isn’t:

How do we tighten control?

It’s:

What’s missing, and how do we build it?

That’s harder work.

It’s also the only work that actually moves the needle.

The real risk: when frustration replaces thinking

This becomes dangerous when enough people repeat the same emotionally charged ideas; they start to feel like the truth.

Not because they’ve been tested, but because they’ve been echoed. That’s how groupthink works. In a profession that should be grounded in evidence, that’s a problem.

Because once frustration becomes identity, you stop questioning it.

You defend it.

This isn’t about silencing teachers

Let’s be clear:

Teachers should speak.
Teachers should advocate.
Teachers should challenge systems.

That’s part of a healthy profession, but advocacy without grounding becomes noise. Noise doesn’t build better schools.

It just makes it harder to hear what actually works.

At eduKARE, the work is not about ideology.

It’s about alignment with what actually helps kids learn and grow:

Relationship before compliance
Regulation before expectation
Skill-building over punishment
Precision over generalization

Not because it sounds good.

Because it works.

A necessary gut-check

Before we post, share, or double down on the latest viral take, there are questions worth asking-

Is this grounded in evidence?
Or is this just how I feel right now?

Because those are not the same thing. Right now, education doesn’t need louder voices.

It needs clearer thinking.

Frustration without evidence is just noise.

Cultural tales...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Thu, 05 Feb 2026 03:48:00 +0000

It is often said that we should learn from our mistakes. It stands to reason, then, that we should also learn from our successes. Both failure and success carry lessons, but those lessons rarely exist in isolation. They come alive when they are shared.

When we tell our stories of what went wrong, what went right, and of what surprised us along the way, we create vessels for learning that extend far beyond ourselves. Stories allow experience to travel. They give us insight to be carried from one life to another, from one generation to the next. This is what makes storytelling so powerful and so essential. If we became better at telling our stories, and just as importantly, better at listening to them, entirely new possibilities would emerge.

Human history, in all its brilliance and brutality, is built on story. Every act of compassion and every act of harm, every innovation and every collapse, has been shaped by the stories we tell ourselves about who we are, what we belong to, and what matters. Our stories are not history accessories—they are history. To move forward wisely, we must reconnect meaningfully and purposefully with what might be called our “long now” history: an understanding of the past that informs the present and shapes the future with intention.

This requires us to think carefully about how we contextualize our experiences across time. How do we frame our past without being trapped by it? How do we live fully in the present without losing perspective and imagine a future that is informed by wisdom rather than reaction? These are not abstract questions; they are deeply human ones.

Yet, amid the pace of modern life and the relentless pressure to get ahead, many of us have lost touch with our own cultural roots—and with the cultural stories of others. A curious irony emerges here. We are more connected than ever before. Technology places us in constant proximity—physically, socially, and communicatively. We see more of one another, hear more from one another, and have unprecedented access to global perspectives.

And yet, we are simultaneously more distant than ever.

In our quest to define ourselves, to protect our identities, or to carve out a sense of certainty in an increasingly complex world, we have built silos. We curate our circles, filter our feeds, and retreat into spaces that feel familiar and affirming. While this can offer comfort, it also narrows our understanding of the environments in which we find ourselves. Proximity without connection is not the same as a relationship. Exposure without curiosity does not lead to understanding.

In Canada, we often celebrate our multiculturalism—and rightly so. Diversity has long been, and continues to be, a defining strength of our society. But in a globalized world, multiculturalism alone is no longer enough. Different people have always coexisted on this planet. What is required now is a shift toward interculturalism.

Interculturalism moves beyond the idea of simply existing alongside one another. It calls us to engage. Our race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, style, emotional expression, ways of thinking, and lived experiences all contribute to our personal cultures. These elements shape how we see the world and how the world sees us. They connect us to groups while also helping us to be uniquely ourselves.

Agreement is not the prerequisite for understanding. Whether we share the beliefs or perspectives of others is far less important than whether we are willing to learn about them. Tolerance is passive. Acceptance is a starting point. Understanding, however, requires effort, humility, and the right amount of time.

And there is no better way to build understanding than through story.

Stories humanize what might otherwise feel abstract or distant. They invite empathy where judgment might otherwise take hold. When we truly listen to someone’s story, we are reminded that behind every perspective lies a person shaped by their experiences, context, and meaning. In doing so, we learn about others and deepen our understanding of ourselves.

If we are serious about building more connected, compassionate, and resilient communities, we must reclaim storytelling as a shared responsibility. We must make space for unheard voices, histories that have been overlooked, and experiences that challenge our assumptions. Only then can we begin to bridge the distance that modern life has created.

Our stories are not just reflections of who we are. They are tools for who we might become.

Hope in the Hard Places.

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 27 Jul 2025 06:34:00 +0000

HOPE in Action: The Roots of KARE Givers

This is the post that should have come first—because at the heart of KARE Givers is a life lived, a struggle faced, and a decision made: to choose hope not as an idea, but as a commitment to action.

I grew up in a home marked by hardship that most children should never experience. There was violence, addiction, and emotional chaos. And yet, somehow, amid all of it, there were also moments of love—small, fleeting, but powerful enough to plant the seed of something I couldn’t yet name: hope.

A warm hug from my mom, even when everything around us was broken. A quiet nod of approval from my dad after I cleared the driveway of snow just the way he liked. The sunshine on my walk home from school, the smell of summer grass, and the illusion—for a moment—that everything was okay.

These memories weren’t grand, but they were grounding. They gave me a sense of safety, connection, and calm. That’s where hope lived—not as a promise, but as a possibility.

Hope Is More Than a Feeling. It's a Framework.

Today, after more than three decades in education, I can clearly name what I couldn’t back then. HOPE is what sustained me. And it’s what I now work every day to give to others—not just in spirit, but in action. HOPE, for me, stands for:

Health – Physical, emotional, and relational wellness. Healing from harm and building the strength to move forward.
Opportunity – Access to spaces where people can grow, discover, and dream again.
Privilege – Not in the inherited sense, but in the chosen one: the privilege to listen, support, and uplift others with empathy and care.
Education – Lifelong learning that equips people to understand their past, reclaim their power, and build a better future.

At KARE Givers, hope isn’t passive. It’s a practice. It’s the phone call you make. The lunch you share. The gentle word you offer when someone’s world is falling apart. It’s helping people take their next step, however small, toward stability, healing, and meaning.

Everyone has a Story. Everyone Deserves HOPE.

I can’t rewrite the story I lived. But I can help shape what happens next—for myself and for others. That’s what KARE Givers is for. It’s the living embodiment of hope built from pain. It’s about turning our lived experience into a beacon of hope for someone else who feels lost.

I carry deep empathy for the people in my past. But more than anything, I assume a responsibility moving forward—to take the love I was shown, even imperfectly, and amplify it for others.

If you’re reading this and your story feels heavy or unresolved, know this: HOPE is not beyond you. It is within you, and it can be built through small acts of courage, care, and connection.

KARE Givers exists to help you take action toward hope—every day.

With gratitude,
Sean

Free Will Is Far From Free

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 20 Jan 2025 04:14:00 +0000

"Free Will" (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) by Headphonaught

“Free will” is a misleading term. We can take action to self-actualize, but detractors and restrictors always impact our decisions and efforts. Everything about us is influenced by the external environment including the interactions we experience with others. Character is something we display on our terms, but the choice is impacted by the sum total of how we think, and those thoughts are based on our experiences. We can't completely manipulate the influences in our lives that control our perspectives and outcomes.

This Next Big Idea podcast, "Free Will: Are We Better Off Without It?" is very thought-provoking regarding who we are and how much that’s determined by our personal desire to be “ourselves”. In his exploration of free will, Robert Sapolsky's work offers a compelling challenge to "personal autonomy". From his teenage years, Sapolsky was captivated by the concept of free will, ultimately concluding that it doesn’t exist. His conclusion is rooted in his background as a biologist, neurologist, and neurosurgeon, where he argues that human behaviour is influenced by a complex web of biological, genetic, and environmental factors, rather than by an independent, autonomous will.

"The world is really screwed up and made much, much more unfair by the fact that we reward people and punish people for things they have no control over -Robert Sapolsky

Sapolsky’s stance is not just a theoretical perspective; it’s one that he builds on extensively in his book Determined. He delves into mechanisms like brain chemistry and genetic predispositions, that shape our actions, decisions, and thoughts. According to Sapolsky, the illusion of free will is a product of our brains processing information in a way that makes us feel in control, but, in reality, is created by neural activity.

Moreover, Sapolsky goes beyond the mere negation of free will; he also proposes that recognizing the lack of free will can have profound, positive implications. Understanding that people are shaped by factors beyond their control could lead to a more compassionate and humane society where individuals are judged less harshly for their actions and treated more empathetically when they struggle with behaviours often attributed to "choices."

His perspective ties into larger philosophical and ethical debates about responsibility, punishment, and the nature of consciousness. If we accept that we are not truly in control, Sapolsky suggests, we might build systems more focused on rehabilitation, understanding, and social support, rather than retribution. Considering this, a significant possibility emerges to improve how we approach support for kids in school.

A school of thought is emerging in education and social services prioritizing awareness of the lived experiences of the student, or client. Whether working through trauma-based care in Dr. Bruce Perry's Neurosequential Model, Dr. Ross Greene's Collaborative and Proactive Solutions Model, or my own HOPE Wheel Model; the awareness that we can't effectively support another person without consideration for the environmental influences they've endured is fundamental. Limiting ourselves to the person in front of us and the private logic they express without knowing the story behind their story puts us at a significant disadvantage in helping them at all. We have will, but it's not free from the barriers and determiners of our past.

Ultimately, Sapolsky’s argument against free will challenges long-standing views on autonomy and moral responsibility and offers a framework for rethinking how we structure society and deal with issues like crime, mental health, and personal development. By recognizing the biological and environmental factors driving behaviour, we can foster a society emphasizing empathy and compassion over judgment and punishment.

Symptom Bearers

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Fri, 06 Dec 2024 21:39:00 +0000

"RJ" (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) by Don J Schulte

An individual assigned as the family “symptom bearer” is used as a scapegoat for anger, wrongdoing, or trouble within the family. Rather than parents and siblings taking a look at their own role in any issues, they deflect and blame it on the IP (Identified Patient) of the family. (Health, 2023)

There's no doubt that teachers are dealing with a high volume of complex realities in their classrooms. They're working hard to serve kids who arrive from environments that may not necessarily offer the appropriate support necessary for them to survive. This is the reality. We can let that consume us, or we can find ways to function more responsively and effectively.

I'm always looking for a silver lining. It just seems like an objectively intelligent, albeit difficult thing to do. It involves an adjustment of our lens to see things from a different, purposeful perspective. I often say we need to glare at strengths, while glancing at weakness. Individuals who are confronted by adverse experiences beyond their control, whether they like it or not, acquire intuitive skills that the general population typically may not because they don't have to. They do this out of necessity, likely unconsciously, but that is not to diminish the reality.

Kids who live traumatic realities tend to develop intuitive skills in order to survive their environments. Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) are a set of ten identifiable environmental risk factors.

The Adverse Childhood Experiences, or “ACEs,” quiz asks a series of 10 questions (see below) about common traumatic experiences that occur in early life. Since higher numbers of ACEs often correlate to challenges later in life, including higher risk of certain health problems, the quiz is intended as an indicator of how likely a person might be to face these challenges. (Harvard, 2013)

What’s In the ACEs Quiz?

For each “yes” answer, add 1. The total number at the end is your cumulative number of ACEs.
Before your 18th birthday:

Did a parent or other adult in the household often or very often… Swear at you, insult you, put you down, or humiliate you? or Act in a way that made you afraid that you might be physically hurt?
Did a parent or other adult in the household often or very often… Push, grab, slap, or throw something at you? or Ever hit you so hard that you had marks or were injured?
Did an adult or person at least 5 years older than you ever… Touch or fondle you or have you touch their body in a sexual way? or Attempt or actually have oral, anal, or vaginal intercourse with you?
Did you often or very often feel that … No one in your family loved you or thought you were important or special? or Your family didn’t look out for each other, feel close to each other, or support each other?
Did you often or very often feel that … You didn’t have enough to eat, had to wear dirty clothes, and had no one to protect you? or Your parents were too drunk or high to take care of you or take you to the doctor if you needed it?
Were your parents ever separated or divorced?
Was your mother or stepmother:
Often or very often pushed, grabbed, slapped, or had something thrown at her? or Sometimes, often, or very often kicked, bitten, hit with a fist, or hit with something hard? or Ever repeatedly hit over at least a few minutes or threatened with a gun or knife?
Did you live with anyone who was a problem drinker or alcoholic, or who used street drugs?
Was a household member depressed or mentally ill, or did a household member attempt suicide?
Did a household member go to prison?

*Source: NPR, ACEsTooHigh.com. This ACEs Quiz is a variation on the questions asked in the original ACEs study conducted by CDC researchers.

The ACEs quiz gives no insight into whether an individual child might be more or less sensitive to adversity and asks no questions about whether there may have been any protective relationships in place to help buffer the child from stress. So the ACEs quiz can only give insight into who might be at risk—not who is at risk—for certain later-life challenges. (Harvard 2013) Fair enough, however, where there's smoke, there's usually fire.

In fact, the ACE Score in any given case is an optic that excludes other possible risk factors opening the possibility that it may underestimate the adversity experienced by any given child. Missing from the assessment are:

Stressors outside the household (e.g., violence, poverty, racism, other forms of discrimination, isolation, chaotic environment, lack of services)
Protective factors (e.g., supportive relationships, community services, skill-building opportunities)
Individual differences (i.e., not all children who experience multiple ACEs will have poor outcomes and not all children who experience no ACEs will avoid poor outcomes—a high ACEs score is simply an indicator of greater risk) (Harvard 2013)

More recently, the same researchers that developed the ACE protocol realized the added-value of complimentary research referred to as Positive Childhood Experiences.

In September 2019, lead researcher Dr. Christina Bethell released the results of a study of 6,188 adults at Johns Hopkins seeking to identify Positive Childhood Experiences (PCEs) that could buffer against the health effects of traumatic ones. A percentage of kids with high ACE scores do nevertheless grow up to have normal development and good adult emotional health. The researchers were looking to identify the factors that created a level of resiliency in these kids that helped them to thrive despite difficult childhoods. (Positive Childhood Experiences (PCEs), n.d.)

A major principle of resiliency research asserts that reducing risk factors is a beneficial action to take on behalf of kids for at-risk environments. It stands to reason that a reciprocal effort to increase protective factors should also be made. This is where PCEs enter the process. We can't always change the conditions of a child's environment away from school, but we can support efforts to help them become antifragile; the ability to navigate, cope, and eventually thrive amidst adversity. Antifragility is a state of malleability in which an individual possesses the ability to bend, but not break so their core coping ability remains stable, albeit modified. People who possess a myriad of protective factors can adapt more routinely as they respond to their environmental condition.

The PCEs study helps shape research moving in an additional direction: increasing positive childhood experiences to build resilience in kids who have experienced trauma, and those who may in the future. The relationship between PCEs in childhood and good mental health in adults is dose-responsive; the more PCEs a child gets, the better their adult mental health is likely to be. (Positive Childhood Experiences (PCEs), n.d.)

Children with PCEs become adults who are able to seek social and emotional support. The 7 PCEs are:

The ability to talk with family about feelings.
The sense that family is supportive during difficult times.
The enjoyment of participation in community traditions.
Feeling a sense of belonging in high school.
Feeling supported by friends.
Having at least two non-parent adults who genuinely cared.
Feeling safe and protected by an adult in the home. (Positive Childhood Experiences (PCEs), n.d.)

It seems like a simple formula because it is; reduce risk, increase protection. However, and this is a big "however", caring significant others are impacted by the same uncontrolled environmental conditions that the person they care for is. This is a difficult reality. But, and this is a big "but", we do have the ability to completely control the environments we create to support them. The process of determining what that environment looks, sounds and feels like is an effort we must constantly make to authentically create emotionally, socially and psychologically supportive environments away from home and the immediate family reality.

How will we know if we're successful in doing that? To start, we need to understand the difference between contextualizing things as "environmental conditions" and contextualizing them as "natural conditions". Natural conditions are traits that can't be changed about the individual. Cognitive capacity is an example. We need to know what it is, but we can't do a lot to change it. Environmental conditions are entirely different. We have total control over the environments we expect kids in school to successfully function within, so it stands to reason that we focus our support efforts through that medium.

Virtually everything the child is exposed to in the course of a typical day can be contextualized as part of the environment. People are part of the environment, the physical arrangement of the room, type of furniture, UDL enhancements, digital connectivity, the other kids and paraprofessional staff are all part of the environment. The way we establish a timetable or schedule is part of the environment. We control every aspect of the learning environments we expect kids to function within.

Once we establish environmental conditions that we believe will prove effective, it's crucial to also apply checks and balances judging the appropriateness and effectiveness of these controllable elements. The hypervigilant kids that arrive at school from at-risk environments are some of our biggest allies in vetting how well we've set up what we believe to be supportive environments. These are the "symptom bearers".

Symptom bearers in your classroom are often understood to be the "trouble-makers", but that would be an unfair judgement. It's highly probable that they actually are those that have learned how to skillfully assess the disposition and feelings of the people within their environment. They have learned how to perceive subtle facial expressions, bodily positions, tones of voice and reactions to their behavior. They are atypically intuitive because they have had to be to remain safe, albeit anxious at home. They extend these skills to other environments they encounter. As a horse person, I equate this to something I often speak about to colleagues.

I once owned a young horse that was particularly skittish to begin a ride. I would explain to new riders that once they mounted the saddle, he would automatically prance around a bit in a little dance particular to him among our horses. We would advise these riders that when he does this, give him lots of reign, and flare your feet in the stirrups and everything would be fine. Within seconds, nearly every rider ended up getting bucked off because they did the opposite of what we advised; they pulled the reigns and squeezed their legs. Off they went. Once he got this ritual out of his system, he was an excellent horse to ride, he just seemed to need to let the rider know who's boss. He could sense their anxiety through the saddle and was letting them know that he knew more about the person on his back than they knew about him. Horses are intuitive.

Kids from at-risk environments are also intuitive because they've had to be. We need to respect this and instead of vilifying them, respect their skills and leverage their feedback as a tool to measure how well we're doing setting up socially and emotionally supportive environments in schools.

Think of your "symptom bearer" students as litmus tests for how effective your classroom or school environment actually is. Their reaction to the subtleties of the environment will be a very powerful lag indicator of how close you've been able to engineer it in ways that work for that student, and likely all the others that aren't so intuitive.

Citations:

1. Health, S. B. (2023). Identified Patient | Sequoia Behavioral Health. Sequoiabehavioralhealth.org; Sequoia Behavioral Health. https://www.sequoiabehavioralhealth.org/blogs/scapegoating-the-identified-patient

2. Harvard University. (2013). Take the ACE Quiz – And Learn What It Does and Doesn’t Mean - Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University. https://developingchild.harvard.edu/media-coverage/take-the-ace-quiz-and-learn-what-it-does-and-doesnt-mean/nb

3. Positive Childhood Experiences (PCEs). (n.d.). Pinetree Institute. https://pinetreeinstitute.org/positive-childhood-experiences/

What's Your Truth?

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sat, 11 Nov 2023 09:02:00 +0000

"the truth is..." (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) by memory_collector

Those of us who work with kids from at-risk environments are challenged by the truths embedded within their trauma. How much we know about the conditions of their lives is dependent on many things, not the least of which are the protocols surrounding the appropriate disclosure of the always sensitive details. Who needs to know? Can those who perhaps want to know impactful details about the kids they work with handle the emotions surrounding the circumstances? Are there those who won't benefit from knowing these details but insist on not being kept out of the loop?

There appears to be a fairly aggressive desire to know as "much as we can" about the kids we work with, but what if we're focusing on the wrong truths? I'm the first person to assert that we need to know as much as we can about the "story behind the story" of the kids and families we serve, but when circumstances prevent us from knowing as much as we'd hope to, I think we can totally divine a simpler construct in support our most vulnerable clients. In the very simplest of terms, there's only one truth we absolutely need to implicitly know in order to do our best work with kids from at-risk environments... our own.

I have often been involved in difficult conversations regarding the "need to know." At times when it has been necessary to disclose confidential information about a child's personal circumstances, I will typically hear teachers and other school personnel make statements like, "If I had known more about this child, I would have changed the way I interacted with him," to which I typically ask two questions in reply... why and how?

There's one thing we implicitly need to know about kids surviving adverse childhood experiences; our personal truth in the way we feel about supporting kids no matter the type of environment they arrive from every day. Call it a philosophy, a perspective, or whatever you'd like, but the way we perceive our role as kare-givers (caring for kids from at-risk environments,) is the most important awareness we need to be clear about and one that we can never go wrong with if it emerges from the right perspective. The first part of this truth is that we can never, ever judge a child. I often find that this judgement, when it does happen, is grounded in incorrect assumptions about the child; that the behaviour they're communicating with is intentional or premeditated. It's not.

This inaccurate judgement often also manifests in damaging language (verbal and body) that gets communicated back toward the child. We act out what we're feeling, even when we don't realize we're doing it. When we feel that kids are intentional in being "bad," the tendency to take their perceived actions personally is heightened. Our best work cannot materialize when we believe kids are coming to school with deliberate intent to make our day, and their classmate's days as miserable as possible.

Kids know much more about who they're dealing with than we know about them. I often say kids are like horses; they pick up on our nuances and impressions toward them so much more skillfully than we can toward them just like a horse can feel his rider through the saddle better than the rider can feel the horse. This reality puts both the horse, and the child, at a distinct advantage with respect to the ways they respond to our actions, feelings, and words directed toward them. Kids know when we're not at ease dealing with them.

If all of us who work with kids could empathetically approach each of them with kindness and acceptance perhaps we can get by without the advantage of knowing about where they come from. We'd be expressing nothing toward them that necessarily needed to be reacted to. We would be tapping into what good solution-focused therapists know about effectively working with their clients; that you don't need to dwell on the problems to effectively set goals toward the solutions. We should harbor no animosity toward others for not disclosing details about kids we don't need to know. We could simply feel what we should feel about our role as educators; privileged and humbled to have the opportunity to support them from wherever they arrive each and every day. Defaulting to that presents very good odds that we'll build the trust and comfort necessary for kids arriving from at-risk environments not to be at risk within our classroom environments too.

My Fathers

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 06 Feb 2023 06:48:00 +0000

"F.A.T.H.E.R." (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) by timothymeaney

January 25 was the one-year anniversary of my father-in-law's passing. Krishan Syal was a good man and one of my fathers. I miss him profoundly. I wrote this for him after he died. If I could, I would like to talk to him about what I'm going to write here. We had so many conversations about important things like this. Kris was one of the most authentic men I have had the privilege to know. He cared for me, respected me, and shared what he knew. He was a mentor and a friend. He was a father at a time when fatherhood is increasingly difficult to define. We need a new definition of what it means to be a father in the world today.

I'm reading "Of Boys And Men" by Richard V. Reeves. The book is an exploration of why the modern male is struggling, why it matters, and what we can do about that. The book addresses many elements of the male experience, and fatherhood is a prominent theme. A quote from the book stuck out for me,

A man who is integrated into a community through a role in a family, spanning generations into the past and future, will be more consistently and durably tied to the social order than a man responding chiefly to a charismatic leader, a demagogue, or a grandiose ideaology of patriotism."
- George Gilder, 1973

When I read the words "charismatic leader," "demagogue" and "grandiose ideology," I don't need to think very hard to provide many contemporary examples of each one of these types of men. These are men who are lost in their perception of masculinity. They believe that to be strong, others must be weak. They possess insecurity and fear without knowing how to be humble and authentic. Locked in a zeitgeist of days gone by, they are confused about their place in a society that no longer fears them, and can no longer be controlled by them. They deny the true nature of their emotions masking them with anger and aggression. This is a diminished state of manhood that cannot be sustained. To say that our next evolutionary step forward for humanity depends on the formulation of a new definition of fatherhood is no exaggeration.

A segment of Herbert Vilakazi's opening address to the National Association of Child Care Workers 1991 Biennial Conference (http://tinyurl.com/yfxzdwn) in South Africa provides brilliant insight into how we need to think and act if we are to support today's children as our gifts to the future, and it frames how what fathers, (and mothers,) need to be,

"The problems of children and of youth, giving rise to child and youth care programs, can only begin to be solved in that society of humankind’s dream; a more collective-oriented society than at present, when the father of the child shall be every man as old as the child’s father... and the mother of the child shall be every woman as old as the child’s mother..."

I have had many fathers. Collectively, I received most of what I needed to be the best man I can be from them, but I didn't receive everything I needed from any one of them. These were men that had their own strengths and weaknesses, and I was only interested in their strengths. My point is it took a village to raise this child. Interestingly enough, it also took this child to raise my village; the community of influential men that saw me as worthy of their care and attention, and I will be forever thankful for that.

Being a father means many things, and being a man does too. If fatherhood by definition is similar to the definition of manhood as defined by so many, we're going to have more problems. There are qualities in caregivers that all children need to thrive. They need love. They need responsible care. They need to witness positive examples of fairness, resilience, work ethic, kindness, authenticity, vulnerability, and more. Sadly as I said before, these elements aren't necessarily evident in a world with far too many men displaying opposite traits. I don't know if those men who can't measure up for the young people in their lives can be adequately supported, but I think the effort is worth making. There is no logic in vilifying those inadequate providers of the positive traits mentioned above. Rather we should be looking at the stories behind these men's stories to find out what hurt them to the point where they may feel inadequate and quite likely unable to express that in ways that lead to reconciliatory change.

There is another trajectory worth exploring as well. We can be one of the many fathers as "old as the child's father." We can do many things to support children; our own, and others, but it's a remote possibility that any one of us can do everything needed. I believe that every man on earth has the capacity to be a great man, and by virtue of that, a great father. We need to talk about what a great man is, and what great men can do to raise the next generation of great men.

Read the Room...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 22 Nov 2022 07:00:00 +0000

Schools are filled with all kinds of rooms.

Classrooms, offices, gyms, libraries, music rooms, computer and science labs, and more. The latest to emerge, and potentially the greatest of them all, is what many are calling the "Support Room." But what is a support room?

That depends largely on who you ask.

I have heard many definitions of what a support room is, but I haven't heard many definitions of what one isn't. It appears that a support room by any other name is potentially referred to as the "Sensory Room, the Calming Room, the Body Break Room, the Self-Regulation Room, the Regulation Room, and a few more. I suppose it doesn't really matter what we call these rooms if they satisfy the general purpose they're intended for... to support the needs of students who are having trouble coping in a typical classroom.

A functional support room is simply a place in a school where kids can go to receive the added support required for any reason. In order to do this effectively, some conditions need to be established before any student actually goes to a support room. The last thing we want is the same school we always had, but now with a room full of expensive furniture, resources, and equipment added to it without the requisite thought required to make it an effective place where foundational learning relationships can be established. The environment of an effective support room starts with the rationale for it to exist in the first place, (to support the needs of students,) and extends from that base in several necessary directions. My view on how this needs to be structured is listed in rank order below; the three P's:

People. An effective support room MUST have the right kind of people operating them. There is no alternative. If you can't find the right people, or you can't effectively train people already within your organization, don't bother creating a support room.
Perspective. A support room CANNOT be another name for the "office," or any other place where challenging kids are sent to get them out of the classroom. I get it, the challenges kids present to teachers are increasingly difficult to accept and deal with, however, the manner in which we support our most vulnerable students is the measure of how effective we are as caring teachers and others who work in schools.
Plan. Fail to plan, plan to fail... an effective support room NEEDS a system, a process, and a philosophy if it's going to actually do what is intended. The system should be based on sound research, solid pedagogy, and the principles of kindness and care that all who work with kids are governed by.

I've said for years following the move to inclusive school environments in mainstream education some years ago that, primarily, we've gotten it right. Kids of all shapes and sizes, so to speak, have been successfully integrated into community schools throughout North America... except one. If you asked anyone who works in a school if they could have only one support person including an administrator, curriculum expert, educational assistant, librarian, etc. to make their day with students less anxiety-inducing and stressful, who would they be? I believe most school personnel would say "give me someone who can effectively deal with challenging behaviour." Given a truth serum in their water bottle, this is what folks would tell us. We have successfully integrated kids with challenging physical, cognitive, social-emotional, and mental concerns across the board, but kids who present with very complex challenging behaviour have not been successfully integrated.

Ask a teacher what they would do when a new student arrives in their class who is experiencing reading difficulties, and you'll hear dozens of potential remedial supports that could potentially be applied immediately. Ask a teacher what they would do with a different new student who tells them to f@%k off constantly while punching them in the belly and throwing things around the room while refusing to do any school work; you'll hear nothing but crickets.

This is a large problem. These kids deserve to be served with the same requisite degree of care that all others do, but I know it's very, very hard to do that, and it's very, very hard to find people who know how, let alone want to. I like to reference the "wingnut analogy" here. Those who work in support rooms need to be wingnuts as opposed to lock nuts. They don't need any special tools to function, and can be easily loosened or tightened when required; they are flexible and versatile. This is the people part.

An effective support room must project through a philosophical lens that perceives all kids as capable and teachable. It acts as a reflection as opposed to the mirror. It projects an image back at kids that frames them as worthy, smart, valued and cared for. It is free of judgement, accepts kids unconditionally, and works tirelessly to serve them. This is the perspective part.

A support room is an effective tool to help kids regulate and thrive at school. It may be the only place that's possible for some kids, and that's fine, as long as there's a provision to directly teach kids how to be regulated and eventually return to the typical classroom. Social-emotional, mental, academic, and basic human needs are all addressable in a high-functioning support room if we decide that's what we're going to do, but there should always be an element of direct instruction targeting classroom thriving skills. This is the planning part.

Support rooms will ultimately work in schools when all staff are supportive of the people, and perspective, and plan for their version of the room. Buy-in is critical. Kids need to experience the consistent application of support to be convinced that we are serious and sincere about helping them thrive at school. Relationships are built in contexts of mutual trust and cooperation toward common goals. Relationships are easy in effective support rooms.

The "Looking Glass" Classroom

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Fri, 21 Oct 2022 06:26:00 +0000

"Alice through the Looking Glass - Guild" (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) by stuartcreasey

“If I had a world of my own, everything would be nonsense. Nothing would be what it is, because everything would be what it isn't. And contrary wise, what is, it wouldn't be. And what it wouldn't be, it would. You see?”
― Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland / Through the Looking-Glass

The Looking Glass, as it were, is a curious metaphor to explain a young child's perception of the realities of school. Traditionally, the school has been a tool of social engineering, a place to stratify kids according to ability and how well they fit the construct of school, an institution that varied little from one to another. The school was a place that attempted to homogenize its subjects according to a rigid set of educational and social norms that suited many, but not all. Have schools changed much in this regard? One would surely hope, but I'm saddened to say that I do still occasionally observe the opposite.

I observe teachers working hard, and probably well-intended, to figure out how to mold the individual child to conform to the 'shape' of the classroom as opposed to altering the classroom to fit the child. The classroom in this sense represents an image through the looking glass that kids don't and quite possibly cannot comprehend. No matter what the environment of the classroom looks, sounds, and feels like, rest assured it will be very new to kids entering grade school for the first time. The most important formative years they will experience in life will have already occurred at home, and that is not necessarily to say in the most advantageous and purposeful of ways. Kids who may not necessarily have had stories read to them, experienced rich early learning opportunities, or been exposed to environments that stoked their curiosity will feel very foreign in an early learning classroom. There isn't much we can do to positively impact the preschool realities of our youngest students, but knowing that some of them will be arriving in our schools without the privileged preparation that others would have experienced from birth to age five, we need to accept that the looking glass classroom will be a difficult place for them to feel safe and purposeful. Lamenting the reality of this does nothing to help us more clearly perceive the possibility we see for kids on the other side of the looking glass. We only see the reflection.

Instead of frustratingly and confrontationally trying to coerce kids' acceptance of rigid learning environments in unproductive ways, perhaps it would be a better plan to stretch their perceptions by altering the learning environment to suit their needs. There is much research around instructional design and the brain-body-environment connection. In this article from Edutopia, for example, a question is pondered,

…designing a space is not decorating. Instead, it should impact learning and have a purpose. Teachers often re-create the same classroom year after year without assessing whether their design guides students’ learning. Websites such as Pinterest give teachers ideas for decorating a room, but do these ideas support student learning?

We can't control how prepared our students will be for the unfamiliar context of our classrooms, and we can't change who they are and what they've experienced prior to arriving, but we have complete unilateral control over the ways in which our classrooms can accommodate them. We control the schedule, the people, the physical layout, the lighting, the sounds, the learning activities, and every other element of our instructional spaces. We are the architects of our own learning environments.

“I know who I WAS when I got up this morning, but I think I must have been changed several times since then”
― Lewis Carroll, Alice's Adventures in Wonderland and Through the Looking Glass

Teachers who understand that it is they who must change and adapt to accommodate their students are the ones that will ultimately feel less stress and anxiety about the progress of their students. The effort they make to stand with kids on the same side of the looking glass gazing collaboratively and empathetically at the possibilities on the other side is the key to unlocking the hope and learning potential that they all possess.

Ableism... What Teachers Say and Think Matter

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 14 Feb 2022 03:57:00 +0000

Ableism - NCCJ. (n.d.). Www.nccj.org. https://www.nccj.org/ableism

a·ble·ism

/ˈābəˌlizəm/

noun

discrimination in favor of able-bodied people.

There are few, if any, topics in education that impact our ability to serve students in optimized, effective, and appropriate ways than that of ableism. Ableism is the intentional or unintentional discrimination or oppression of individuals with disabilities. (Ableism - NCCJ, n.d.)

Reading the definition of ableism above elicits thoughts of "why would anyone involved teaching discriminate or oppress already marginalized students?" It's a harsh definition describing an illogical occurrence, but nonetheless, one that happens quite routinely if we're being honest with ourselves.

(whatisableism)

We typically address students in K-12 education from a medical model perspective. We're focused on what they don't know, don't understand and can't do as opposed to the what they do know, understand and can do. Changing the lens to the latter perspective making it the norm would revolutionize teaching and learning, literally. This shift to the social model in our schools would enable students and those who support them to focus on their assets and particular, specific learning stories. We all have a learning story, and it's much like our fingerprint; no two learning stories are the same. From disabilitynottinghamshire.org,

The Social Model vs The Medical Model of Disability

Social model of disability
The social model of disability says that disability is caused by the way society is organised, rather than by a person’s impairment or difference. It looks at ways of removing barriers that restrict life choices for disabled people. When barriers are removed, disabled people can be independent and equal in society, with choice and control over their own lives.

Disabled people developed the social model of disability because the traditional medical model did not explain their personal experience of disability or help to develop more inclusive ways of living.

Medical model of disability
The medical model of disability says people are disabled by their impairments or differences.

Under the medical model, these impairments or differences should be ‘fixed’ or changed by medical and other treatments, even when the impairment or difference does not cause pain or illness.

The medical model looks at what is ‘wrong’ with the person and not what the person needs. It creates low expectations and leads to people losing independence, choice and control in their own lives.
(Disability Nottinghamshire)

My good friend and colleague, Larry Hartel and I have had many conversations about empathy in education. It would seem to me that an empathic perspective gives us a unique and clear lens to look through someone else's eyes into the surrounding environment to realize the barriers and challenges it presents to that person. In answering the question of where empathy fits into the teaching and learning process, he once said.

Why Empathy?
Good question. Undoubtedly there are those who believe a successful inclusive school is one that tries to accommodate kids who don't really fit the mold of a 'regular' classroom. Perhaps they would view inclusion as a set of strategies enabling the rest of us to tolerate their presence in our classrooms. They may even go so far as to say they accept these kids. At Glendale (his school at the time) we're not those people. Tolerating kids who are different isn't good enough for us. As we design a cultural shift toward full and ubiquitous inclusion at Glendale School, we're not even comfortable saying we've accepted the kids who are different from the rest. For our school to be truly "inclusive," it must be one that celebrates difference.

We are on a journey to learn how to celebrate the diversity of students we encounter within our school as a cultural reality worthy of celebration; to glare at strengths while only glancing at weakness. To do so, we must understand that inclusion isn't simply a set of strategies, but rather a reality in the world that schools should be reflecting and influencing. The world is a wonderfully diverse place. We have to reflect this if we are to create authentic and optimized learning environments for ALL students.

Glare at strengths, glance at weakness... is a remarkable mantra to adopt and uphold. It draws our minds toward a realisation of assets as opposed to deficits, and it primes our effort to leverage those strengths in the least restrictive learning environment possible. We can't magically change students into what we or anyone else may wish for them to be, but we can change the environment we teach and learn within. We we have near complete control over our learning environments. The way we structure learning spaces to mitigate and remove barriers can go a long way toward enabling those strengths we should be glaring at in our students.

The language we choose to use within our learning environments is also critical to successfully enabling kids and their learning assets. From verywellmind.com, Ariane Resnick states that,

If you're someone who makes a point to be conscientious in your communication, it may be shocking to realize that you're unknowingly using ableist language. This isn't something that's your fault. Instead, these are words that we're so used to hearing and seeing previous generations use that it's natural for us to pick them up.

Because the words we use that reference disabilities are usually negative and are never meant as compliments, they can be harmful to people with disabilities. We'd be less harmful if we stopped using them, which is a great motivation to change how we talk and communicate with others. (Resnick)

She goes on to say that ableist language fits into two categories: words or phrases based on physical disabilities and words or phrases based on neurodivergence. Ableist language that we use about physical disabilities means that the words may have some type of reference to a real physical disability. A physical disability can either affect the whole body or a part of the body. Ableist terminology can be rooted in how different brains work. This type may be used to describe people who are neurodivergent. (Resnick)

When we use words or references like 'ADD' to describe a lack of focus on something and we're not actually clinically challenged in our ability to pay attention, this creates a negative connotation and stigma for others who are legitimately diagnosed with ADD. Words like 'crazy' or 'psycho' create a similar issue, as do phrases like 'the blind leading the blind' or 'falling on deaf ears.' When teachers and others who work with kids in schools say things like "he doesn't know anything" or "he can't function in my classroom," ableism rears its ugly head again in the deficit-based, medical model perspective. It's vitally important that we check our language, but it's also extremely important to check our perspective toward the relative abilities of our students. We need to glance at deficits, and glare at assets. I can't think of a situation where massive learning gains were made by dwelling on the things a student doesn't know, can't understand, or is unable to do.

When we're working with kids doing the best they can, we have to remain ever-mindful of the things we can control as we guide them toward optimized learning. We can control what we say, what we perceive, and how we manipulate the learning environment to accommodate and support them.

References:

Ableism - NCCJ. (n.d.). Www.nccj.org. https://www.nccj.org/ableism
Resnick, Ariane. “Types of Ableist Language and What to Say Instead.” Verywell Mind, 5 Dec. 2021, www.verywellmind.com/types-of-ableist-language-and-what-to-say-instead-Accessed 13 Feb. 2022.
Disability Nottinghamshire. “Social Model vs Medical Model of Disability - Disabilitynottinghamshire.org.uk.” Disabilitynottinghamshire.org.uk, 2014, www.disabilitynottinghamshire.org.uk/index.php/about/social-model-vs-medical-model-of-disability/.
What Is Ableism. “What Is Ableism? — Tips for Journalists.” What Is Ableism, whatisableism.tumblr.com/tips. Accessed 13 Feb. 2022.

Everyone Here Has Been Broken

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Fri, 11 Feb 2022 03:54:00 +0000

"Everyone here has been broken" (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) by howard.hall

If we could understand the nuances of empathy, often the missing link in ignorance and conflict, the world would truly be a better place for all.

We talk about personal space all the time. We commonly understand that invading one's personal space is a not-so-good thing to do. As with many things we say because we've always said them, I'm not sure we really understand what we're asking of ourselves when we commit to giving each other our 'space.' Perhaps we don't even understand what we're asking ourselves not to do.

How well do we understand what we're referring to as our "space?" I'm not sure.

A thought experiment...

Let's say that in the context of human interactions we can identify C waves (connoting cognitive interactions,) E waves, (connoting emotional interactions,) and P waves, (connoting physical interactions.) To simplify cognitive waves can be described as any form of understanding, while E and P waves are variables that affect our ability to understand. In other words, how we feel about our learning, and the environment we learn within, are pivotal elements that determine largely how well we actually learn in the cognitive domain. Since Descartes we've generally accepted that C waves were the independent variable, but what if in fact E and P waves create authentic constraints; challenges to our ability to comprehend and fully understand the phenomenological realities, our environments, and the people we encounter within them?

Perhaps instead of telling ourselves we should avoid getting in others' personal spaces, we should be committing to absolutely getting in the personal spaces of others.

More so than ever in our currently troubled world, it's vitally important that we are afforded the right to exist in emotionally and physically safe environments. In context, I will say that emotional safety means very simply that feelings are respected, acknowledged, and supported, and physical safety means that we aren't made to feel anxious about the environments we need to interact with. In order to engineer emotionally and physically safe environments of respect and understanding, we need to ground our perspective in a foundation of empathy.

Empathy is often confused with sympathy but the difference is very important to understand. From https://www.diffen.com

Empathy is the ability to experience the feelings of another person. It goes beyond sympathy, which is caring and understanding for the suffering of others. Both words are used similarly and often interchangeably (incorrectly so) but differ subtly in their emotional meaning.

Empathy is the key as it relates to the stories that every member of society carries around with them every day. The stories already written, the real-time story they're writing in the present, and the story they have yet to write in the future. As described by Steven van Bockern, the story already written is like a cultural tale (tail) that cannot be changed, cannot be cut off, but is always behind us and not necessary to lead us in any particular direction at all.

Steven Van Bockern as posted here,

The cultural perspective we all hold is shaped by our experiences as influenced by our birthplace, our family, our spirituality and the zeitgeist within which we were born; it’s the cultural reality lens we look through. Our cultural identity starts to form beginning the moment we’re conceived. Obvious physical characteristics and genetic traits define our culture in part from that second. After we’re born, the evolving cultural identity we form is largely influenced by our relationships and surroundings. Steve Van Bockern, coauthor of “Reclaiming Youth at Risk- Our Hope for the Future” refers to the influences of different cultural aspects as our cultural tail. I had the pleasure of attending a retreat with Steve on the Morley Indian Reservation west of Calgary in 2002. He explained that we can’t cut off our cultural tail; it’s always there, behind us affecting our perspective, but also that great things are possible in everyone’s future despite this tail that follows us.

Whether good, bad or indifferent, our cultural tail tells the story of where we’ve come from; who we are in terms of how our environments affect us, but it doesn’t have to predict where we’re headed. From a cultural perspective, in many ways we begin our lives rather innocently. Like clay to the sculptor, we start as unformed material yearning to be molded and shaped into a more tangible form; our growing cultural identity. Just as soon as we see the light of the world we begin forming perceptions and feelings about our culture and how we are different from, or similar to others. We are the sum total of what we think we are.

Steven went on to say in response to a question about what to do if your cultural tail is really, really bad. My colleague David Nicholson asked him, "do you just metaphorically cut it off?" Steven said no, you can't do that.

Steven elaborated that our cultural tails are metaphors. They are tails that follow us everywhere we go; they're always behind us waving back and forth, but also that this reality doesn't dictate the direction in which we're heading, that's up to us. I would elaborate further in saying that our cultural tails can also be described as cultural tales; the phenomenological realities of our past, the stories that have already been written. These are the things that have shaped and formed us through experience. They are the building blocks that helped us form our purpose (or lack thereof) in life, the degree to which we became resilient, or not, how we objectify things, and how much antifragility we were able to manifest as a result of the strains caused by them. We all have a story, a narrative representation of every experience, every feeling, every relationship, every success, and every disappointment we've ever experienced. It's our phenomenological reality, and we don't make enough effort to get to know each others. In order to be influential positive conspirators in the writing of other people's stories, we need to be empathic.

Empathy is often described as the ability to walk in the shoes of another, and this is precisely what needs to happen if we're to begin to understand each other's phenomenological narratives and begin making informed connections with how people think and feel so we can begin building positive connections with them. We need to know each others' stories if we intend to support learning first in the emotional and physical domains leading to success in the cognitive domain.

Unhappy, unmotivated, hurt, scared, and distracted people are prone to influencing others negatively by sharing their emotional and physical pain liberally. They will not learn effectively until these detractors are mitigated. People who are empathic, and elicit a display of empathy in others are those who understand this paradigm. Understanding the nuances of empathy (the alpha missing link in conflict and misunderstanding) makes us better, more effective communicators, and in turn, (one person and one problem at a time) the world a better place.

I would like to recommend reading The Science of Evil, by Simon Baron-Cohen. This book is an engaging perspective on empathy and the origins of cruelty. Don't let the title mislead you, however. By reaching into the extremes of evil from an analytical perspective, Baron-Cohen is able to present readers a very broad, but clear position on why empathy is critically important to humanity. He uncovers the science behind empathy providing us with much to mull as we navigate the complex people and systems we encounter every day. This book is important for anyone seeking a different and authentic path to more effective human interaction and a more hopeful influence on others. The author posits that we need to look through a more empathic lens in attempting to understand not how people feel, but rather why what they feel (or don't feel) makes them do the debilitating things they do. When we look through this altered lens we can stop blaming the person for the problem, but rather the influences of their phenomenology looking for other social and environmental factors that can erode their own state of empathy and the very damaging things they say and do as a result.

There is prevailing anxiety washing over us across society stemming from a perspective that there are only two ways to look at things, the right way, and the wrong way, and of course, subjectivity is the vessel of expression for what is deemed right, and wrong. It seems like polarity is omnipresent. Until the social-emotional (Ewaves) and physical needs (Pwaves) of people are addressed in effective ways, their cognitive needs (Cwaves) will remain unsatisfied, and their potential to see any different or altered perspective will never be actualized. That will continue to be a disastrous, dichotomous conflict eliciting reality.

Until we make the effort to walk a mile in the other person's shoes we eliminate any chance for a glimpse into the lives they have experienced outside of their emotions, their politics, their beliefs... their private logic. According to Alfred Adler, until we commit to asking ourselves how others would finish the statements...

"I am... the world is... other people are... therefore..."

...we simply will not be able to positively influence anyone who hates or hurts. The challenges they face and the detractors they battle on their personal learning journey will remain unknown, and the problems they cause through their actions, feelings, and words will likely get worse before they get better, if they even do at all. We all must learn how to accept what cannot be changed, and engage our efforts more toward what can be learned from each others' phenomenological narrative. The problematic ways that troubled people behave in the present will not evolve to more acceptable displays of behavior in the present if we don't, and certainly not looking ahead to what should be their hopeful futures.

I never knew anyone who became successful by dwelling on an unfortunate past. Alas, those among us who are reflective of our past, but always glaring toward the future appear to do alright. This is the essence of resilience. Knowledge and understanding is the key to learning how to accept what cannot be changed. When we can objectify what has already happened we can then put that behind us, forgive, and begin to be a person who others are not offended or hurt by.

Sounds too simple to be true? It isn't, and there is really only one reason behind that. It's grounded in the concept of hope. I don't mean hope as in wishful thinking, I mean hope as in action. We all need to understand the statement, if it is to be, it's up to me. In order for reprehensible behavior to change, a sense of personal responsibility is necessary; the will to do it. Personal responsibility is a key element in taking action toward change, and until any really offensive, hurtful person understands this, all bets are off.

I will take "if it is to be, it's up to me" a step further to say that if all of us adopt this simple mantra of personal responsibility, then we can actually collectively accept that if it is to be, it's up to we. In the domain of Relationships on the HOPE Wheel, this is where interdependency becomes so critical. We can help other people understand the error of their ways if we can understand the phenomenological context behind them, and we can seek the help of others in kind with respect to our own stories already written.

One strategic mindset in support of this realization is to try to give every person you encounter a proverbial 'A'. Rosamund Stone Zander and Ben Zander said it best in their book, "The Art of Possibility"...

When we give an A we can be open to a perspective different from our own. For after all, it is only to a person to whom you have granted an A that you will really listen, and it is in that rare instance when you have ears for another person that you can truly appreciate a fresh point of view.

In the measured context of our everyday lives, the grades we hand out often rise and fall with our moods and opinions. We may disagree with someone on one issue, lower their grade, and never quite hear what they have to say again. Each time the grade is altered, the new assessment, like a box, defines the limits of what is possible between us.

To me having "ears for another person" doesn't mean I have to accept what they've done, said, or felt. It means I have to listen to the person's story, and in doing so, their troubled world becomes my troubled world, however off-putting and difficult that may be, and the reflective possibilities this creates empower authentic conversations surrounding the story behind the story. My role is to listen, not judge. I can then take an empathetic stance and think rationally and critically about what led to the behaviour/s in question, but perhaps more importantly, about how to think the problem differently toward more desirable outcomes. Accepting the realities of a troubled person's world is very, very hard, but it allows us to understand the story behind their behavior story, and all the clues regarding why we see what we see in that person's actions and reactions become clearer. Both parties gain the ability to begin contextualizing the variables that led to the display of adverse, offensive, and hurtful behavior in the first place.

Only then is any sort of positive change even possible.

Hurt people, hurt people.

To understand behavior, we need to understand the story behind it, not the purpose in front of it.

Bring Your own Argument

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 18 May 2021 16:45:00 +0000

"Bring your own argument" (CC BY-SA 2.0) by quinn.anya

We have a pandemic problem with dialog.

People state opinions as absolute facts, and they argue facts emotionally as if they were opinions.

We need a new set of rules around dialog, a new paradigm.

Perhaps if both sides of a dialectic conversation where facts are questioned and opinions are conflicting were to step back from their side to critically analyze what is "right" about the other side's facts, and what of their opinions can be agreed upon, a newly articulated and stronger position could be assumed in the debate. It would also undoubtedly be one that would be more readily accepted by the "other side" owing to the fact that much of the newly assumed position would have originated there.

In my experience personally and professionally I have witnessed dialog turn completely toxic so many times owing to unsophisticated thinking regarding the other side. What, in nearly every case should have been a generative and collaborative discussion with a singular and purposeful agenda to "win" the issue as opposed to "win" the argument, turns into a complete deviation from that. The righteous agenda to discuss an issue purposefully with the intent to improve the reality of the issue being discussed is completely lost at that point.

We're living in a world that is advancing faster than our ability to keep up. We're forced to deal with complex problems revolving around evolution and progress a lot these days. Oftentimes when we come up with something brilliant, it appears to create a cascade of unforeseen challenges that we didn't anticipate. The inception of smart phones and how using them correlated with a sharp increase in mental health and social problems among users is a simple and obvious example.

As stated in the article, cell phones aren't necessarily bad, how we use them and choose to be affected by their use often is. Many will adopt a polarized, dichotomous perspective around issues like cell phone use. The line just keeps going infinitely in two opposite directions. As an alternative to polarized, emotional, stubborn arguments about whether the use of cell phones affect us negatively, or positively, perhaps it would be logical to bring both sides to the middle to discuss the issue purposefully to identify how cell phones can be used without affecting mental wellness in addition to the beneficial ways we're already using them.

The cell phone issue is an example of what I call progress blowback. Progress blowback is exasperated when issues become dichotomous and the opposite sides of the issue take a defensive stance defending their position as opposed to an offensive stance designed to fully understand and leverage what they can use from the other side to become aggressive on solving the issue instead of vilifying the opponent. Lately, we've seen this play out in massive ways within political arenas where the so-called right and left spend more time and effort defending ideology than solving issues of a greater good. It's toxic, unproductive, and dangerous.

There are many, many issues of society that should transcend debates of ideological polarity. They are just too important and too impactful to address dichotomously. Extreme partisan politics and groupthink is perpetuated when situational blindness to objective and logical realities occurs. These are issues of the greater good that do absolutely not require ideo-political debate; they are no-brainer issues based on what by now should be understood as the category of fundamental, automatic, more than basic human rights issues. Defeating poverty, universal access to education, clean water, clean air, ensuring a safe and non-discriminatory environment for all; these are issues of human viability that we desperately need our best thinking to positively impact. Leadership organizations that can’t objectively analyze issues to make logical decisions that are not inherently political are not the sort of leadership we need to evolve to a higher consciousness in society.

It doesn't matter where the good, impactful, and purposeful idea comes from. Leaders who understand this are the sort we need throughout the world to represent effective, creative management of critical issues affecting all humanity and the beautiful planet we share.

Get out of the box!

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 01 Mar 2021 05:56:00 +0000

I read "Leadership and Self-Deception, Getting Outside of the Box" several years ago in graduate school and was delighted at the premise it supposed. An editorial note for the book states,

The "disease" of self-deception (acting in ways contrary to what one knows is right) underlies all leadership problems in today's organizations, according to the premise of this work. However well-intentioned they may be, leaders who deceive themselves always end up undermining their own performance. This straightforward book explains how leaders can discover their own self-deceptions and learn how to escape destructive patterns. The authors demonstrate that breaking out of these patterns leads to improved teamwork, commitment, trust, communication, motivation, and leadership.

When I read the book, my mind went to the idea of relativism. Relativism can indicate that anything is righteous and good, as long as we simply say so after creating some form of rationalization for believing so. As a form of existentialism, a relativistic perspective in leadership often translates as the leader making decisions based on a compromised set of values and beliefs. Leadership relativism is particularly damaging simply because leaders lead... and those who follow will undoubtedly be affected by all decisions of the leader; good or bad. Existentialism is the opponent of an organization's values-driven decision-making paradigm.

ex·is·ten·tial·ism

noun

a philosophical theory or approach which emphasizes the existence of the individual person as a free and responsible agent determining their own development through acts of the will.
Definitions from Oxford Languages

The existential principle that people should have unilateral control over their choices and actions has become a troubling contemporary issue in society. On the surface, the belief that society should not restrict an individual's life or actions owing to the tenet that these restrictions inhibit free will and the development of that person's potential can be perceived as a positive concept. Who wouldn't want to have total control over the feelings, actions, and words one chooses to share with the world?

However, herein lies the problem.

Let's start with feelings, and I'll include perceptions, beliefs, values, principles, etc. for the sake of the point. There is no ethical way to control and restrict what people think and feel. Fair enough. I'm quite certain that the vast majority of human beings wouldn't want to try. When one's feelings turn into words and then actions, this is when it starts to get rather dodgy.

In a free, and democratic society, citizens are afforded the right to think whatever they want without much fanfare. They're entitled to the privilege of their own private logic. According to Adler, private logic is the condition in our minds where we form perceptions of ourselves, other people, the world around us, and then ultimately the sum of these perceptions forms our generalized attitude toward our own individual existence, where we fit into things, or not. Juxtaposed with private logic, according to Adler is the principle of common sense. From betterhelp.com, Understanding The Basic Principles Of Classical Adlerian Psychology by Jacqueline Samaroo

One other principle to psychology which Adler laid out is that of private logic as opposed to common sense. Private logic is how the individual rationalizes his lifestyle - it is their interpretation of reality and their place in it. Private logic influences the individual to focus on themselves and on attaining personal security and superiority.
Common sense is an attribute of the community. It is consensual and serves the good of the entire community. One aim of therapy based on Adlerian psychology is to help the individual adopt more of a common-sense approach to how they relate to others instead of one which is self-centered.

Alas, if existentialism is your thing, you run the risk of deviating from common sense as defined by the group, whatever that group may be defined as, but in this case, I'll just replace the word group with society. In a democratic society, there are rules and restrictions designed to keep us safe, purposeful, and productive in the common good. So what if my existentialist friend's private logic doesn't fit the construct of the common good, and his feelings become words and actions that contradict it?

Words and actions have consequences. Existentialism, and its political cousin, neoliberalism, are perspectives that often deviate from the common good. I don't believe that the presence of so-called free will in contemporary society was ever meant to contravene the principle of the common good. If you believe as I do that everyone has a leadership role to play, no matter whether an official title or position is held, then we're sliding down a very slippery slope with our collective self-deceptions about the not-so-common-good things that are happening lately in alarming frequency.

All too often, we see leaders across the spectrum of government, the corporate giants, and other organizations, big and small, taking a relativist approach to their leadership as a result of their personal self-deception. We see leaders in all shapes and sizes resigning to their self-deceptions. Ironically, when individuals who don't even think of themselves as leaders act on their self-deceptions, they all too often become a de facto leader to others who may share their version of private logic. If enough like-minded followers gather, then we get a group, and they begin to feel the strength in numbers, which bolsters their relativist views. Teachers, as leaders, need to be ever-mindful of their private logic and how it impacts the young minds they have so much influence over.

I believe society needs to revisit the idea behind the common good. We have mechanisms in society to act as checks and balances on behalf of the common good: laws, rules, guidelines, and ways to enforce them. I'm of the opinion we're just not taking the steps to uphold our checks and balances as quickly or as often as we should.

I also believe that the common good is mostly a derivative of common sense. Perhaps it's time for every one of us to reflect on our role as a leader by finishing the following four statements.

I am...,

The world is...,

Other people are...,

Therefore...

I don't know if doing so will prevent the radical, existentialist, relativist thinking of some, but that's why we have those checks and balances. I do believe, however, that the moderates who have been influenced by the vocal minority of radical thinking relativists may give their words and actions a second thought. That's my hopeful perspective.

I have to believe that the vast majority of people in the world, albeit entitled to think whatever they want, also understand that there are some thoughts and feelings we just don't act on.

As my friend, Paul, and I were commenting via Twitter recently,

Believing that most people are mostly good most of the time has always been the outlook that helps me walk out the door and into the world every day.

— Shamlet (@Shamlet) February 21, 2021

You won't be disappointed if you pick up the new edition (2018) of Leadership and Self Deception- Getting Out of the Box. We need folks to be thinking differently during these stressful times we're living in, and we need everyone to give some thought regarding how their private logic is contributing to the common, or not-so-common good.

HumanKIND... Mental Health Awareness Day Every Day

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Fri, 29 Jan 2021 02:56:00 +0000

"stigma" (CC BY-ND 2.0) by Leonard J Matthews

Let's be honest, mental health is a market. It drives an industry. There is big money in mental health. Thousands of people leverage their position within the market by providing a service designed to help people. They possess skills, they have the training, and they have experience and that's all great. We need many more of these mental health professionals, and there should be funding to support less advantaged people's access to them. However...

There are real things that can be done every day by all of us to support our own, and each other's mental health. We don't need large corporate sponsors or big publicity t-shirt days to empower empathy, understanding, and unconditional care for each other. The moral and righteous path to improved mental health in our society is for people to be kinds to themselves, and each other EVERY DAY. We don't need a program, a campaign, a hashtag, or anything else other than the will to be human and cohabitate the planet peacefully doing our best to enjoy every moment we're blessed to have on this earth.

It's cliche, (most things that have been completely true for a really long time are,) but we must once and for all learn how to go really hard on issues, solving problems, and creating better futures, and really, really soft on the people we share our life-spaces with. A more important reality doesn't exist. We need an empathy reboot.

HumanKIND depends on it.

Michael Josefowicz @toughloveforx - A Legend Passes Far Too Soon

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Fri, 22 Jan 2021 06:34:00 +0000

The image above is a snapshot of my first Twitter DM interaction with Mr. Michael Josefowicz. Michael reached out to me in response to a post I had written here at KARE Givers in January 2010 entitled "Why Is It Always About The Funding?", one that he had already commented on in the comment stream. He joined Twitter in April 2009, and I joined shortly after in June of the same year. If memory serves, our first encounter in the Twittersphere began at the original #ecosys chat and would turn into a lasting friendship that I could never have anticipated. I wish I could tell him one more time how grateful I am for that. My dear friend and confidant passed away suddenly just a couple of days ago.

Our first match of "Twitter Tennis," as he liked to call it involved a deep dive into the issue of teacher preparation and professional development. At the time Michael's Twitter bio included something like "Retired Printer- now I want to blah blah about fixing high school." I can tell you he wasn't kidding. Michael had done some teaching at Parsons Design College in New York, and although he was without a shadow of a doubt, an exemplary publisher, I have always thought he missed his true calling. Michael was at his core an insightful and passionate teacher. His passion for sharing knowledge and insight with virtually anyone who would listen is legendary in social media circles and to anyone who knew him personally. I give him all the credit for providing me with more professional support to evolve my teaching than any other person or process I've encountered since becoming a teacher myself over 26 years ago.

It's interesting that after ten years of knowing him, he was circling back again to the issue of teacher professional development in a Facebook thread instigating yet another cohort of passionate others in a deep dialog about how to improve the manner in which teachers improve their professional practice through a new model of professional development. Michael quite literally never stopped thinking about the things he was passionate about, and he never stopped trying to engage with others who showed any sign at all of possibly sharing his passions.

My last interaction with Michael was on the day of his passing. I had stumbled across a piece he has asked me to write addressing the issue of boys at risk back in 2018. I had solicited his feedback on the original draft; you can check it out here. The interaction went like this:

Michael immediately forwarded the post to his network as he always did one way or another. He also never missed an opportunity to compliment me on my writing. I have shared everything I've written with him for the last ten years, and he always read it, and he always provided feedback. In his comments within the original Google Doc draft, he mentions his most recent work with Printernet Africa, a dream of his using print to "do well by doing good." He first started talking to me about the Printernet concept in 2010 along with the earliest iterations of nemetics using #ebdish and first posting about it at the Nemetics Instagram account. Since 2018 Michael has been testing his Nemetic theories on the ground in Africa with a dedicated cohort of local people in small villages publishing newsletters of local interest highlighting traditional languages and the English translation. Most recently he has been working with the same cohort to develop course work in project management that creates a revenue stream in support of their Printernet effort. As evidenced by his comment on the draft referred to above, (see below,) it is deeply satisfying to know that Michael was feeling a sense of progress and success in the Printernet project.

The point is that PrinterNet Foundation ( yeh I finally did it ) does not give charity. We make investments and the return on investment is measured in the growth of social capital in the village.

I could go on forever about Michael's insatiable passion for projects designed to improve systems, help people, analyze communication and interaction, and many other things he was brilliant at, but that's for the long now. Over time the countless people he inspired quite literally around the globe will continue his legacy work through the Printernet, the Nemetics Institue for Participatory Action Research, and as an extension of every conversation, he incited with them to do things better, faster, or cheaper. For now, I just want to honor Michael Josefowicz, the man.

Michael was a masterful conversationalist and a very intelligent man as all who knew him would attest, but he was also remarkably kind, compassionate, empathetic, supportive, and loyal. Michael knew I thought of him as a father figure. I looked to him for support in my professional work, and he had a way of drawing out the best in me that ended up with me feeling better about what I was doing, even when he had something critical to offer. He was a natural leader in this regard. Even when he disagreed with me, after talking to him I always felt like I'd just received a warm hug. Make no mistake, Michael could talk, but I can't remember one instance when I felt he was aggressive or intrusive with his words.

Even though ours began as a professional, collegial relationship, over time and catching me completely off guard, Michael found a way to break through my personal shell. He was a very perceptive man, and I suppose he must have devined based on the content of my writing that it was very personal for me. He began gently asking questions about my personal life and upbringing, and I shared things with him that I have never spoken to anyone else about. In this sense, he was more than a father figure, but also an elder with exceptional listening skills. He responded in ways that always seemed to afford me a slightly different perspective. He was there to listen when my son was diagnosed as a diabetic; when I needed to talk about my own troubled youth; when things weren't going so well at school, and he always asked how my wife, Bina, and the kids were doing. He would ask how Wyatt's bike racing was going; how Avery's dance exams turned out; how skiing or lacrosse was... he never missed an opportunity to show sincere interest, and he'd follow up with a compliment about how impressed he was with all of the things my family does. Michael was the most authentic person I have ever had the privilege of calling a friend.

He would also tell me about his wonderful family. He was a dedicated and loving family man and shared so many great things his children and grandchildren were doing. If you know him, you'll know that Michael's granddaughter is the one responsible for much of the theoretical modeling of Nemetics as displayed in her pipe cleaner models. You'll know that Michael took great pleasure in the simple things. He loved his dear wife's cooking, his coffee, and he enjoyed his cigarettes. He often spoke of his beloved Brooklyn and the walks he'd take through the neighborhood, and I deeply regret running out of time to take him up on his offer to show me all the good spots there while visiting in New York. Michael also has a completely remarkable story behind the story of how he became the guy I've always thought of as the American Dreamer, but that's for another time. I told him on several occasions that his story needs to be told, and that I'd be honored to write it. I need to do that. As MJ would say, "time is the deep fundamental, and things will happen when they're supposed to happen."

Alas, it would be impossible for me to fully explain how profoundly my life has been affected by Michael Josefowicz. I too have a story behind my story, one that Michael knew a great deal about. He walked with me through the muck of my life, never judging, just listening. He has a way of making me believe in myself; something very hard for me. He saw me differently, with his heart and in a way that always left me feeling better and more confident. It is because of Michael's encouragement that I have continued writing about those things that put gas in my tank. It is also because of Michael that I have met dozens of other passionate individuals from his vast network of people with diverse backgrounds, a most interesting and rewarding privilege for me.

Michael was a humble, caring, kind, and intelligent human being. I fear I will not meet another like him. I feel responsible to live in his image and carry on the profound work he was doing. He inspired me to be a better person, father, husband, and teacher, and I feel an incredible sense of commitment to support others in the selfless and dedicated manner that he never failed to.

Michael, I miss you terribly. I have found myself several times in the last couple of days feeling the urge to message you so I could get that warm hug feeling; that boost of confidence you always were able to provide. Yout took the time to know me; to really know me, and you liked what you saw and I can't thank you enough for that. You were my inner circle of one. I didn't need anybody else.

I want to offer my deepest condolences to Michael's family, all of his friends around the world, and the countless others he was able to "make things suck a little less" for. I am eternally grateful for the people you brought into my professional and personal life, and I will do my best to stay connected to them. I will be asking myself regularly "what would Michael say?" and I know that you will find a way to answer me.

Thank you, my dearest, closest, and wisest friend.

May you rest in peace, Michael Josefowicz.

Cultural Tails (Tales) - The Story Everyone Tells

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 14 Apr 2020 19:33:00 +0000

de·us ex ma·chi·na

/ˌdāəs ˌeks ˈmäkənə,ˌdāəs ˌeks ˈmäakənə/

noun
an unexpected power or event saving a seemingly hopeless situation, especially as a contrived plot device in a play or novel.

Our lives are a series of stories that evolve in quantum ways every second as we are affected by the realities in our environments and the decisions we make surrounding them. Much of what goes on around us is beyond our control. From the Stanford Encyclopedia of Psychology, it's phenomenological in the sense that,
the discipline of phenomenology may be defined initially as the study of structures of experience, or consciousness. Literally, phenomenology is the study of “phenomena”: appearances of things, or things as they appear in our experience, or the ways we experience things, thus the meanings things have in our experience. Phenomenology studies conscious experience as experienced from the subjective or first person point of view.
How capably we are able to engineer our own stories depends on our ability to accept that the phenomena that surround us is essentially beyond our control. Sometimes, as in literature or theatre, a deus ex machina is helpful in resolving the seemingly hopeless life situations that are ultimately beyond our control, but not beyond our personal influence and ability to internalize and accept. Partly as a response to what I wrote recently about how the path of teaching chose me, and also just because it's front of mind, this resolve is what I want to talk about today.

Essential to the stories of our lives, recognizing deus ex manchina that have unexpected power to resolve a sense of hopelessness, or what Victor Frankl would characterize as a lack of purpose, is critical to our resilience and happiness. Viktor Frankl's (1946) Man's Search for Meaning chronicles his experiences as a concentration camp inmate and describes his psychotherapeutic method of finding a reason to live. According to Frankl, the book intends to answer the question "how was everyday life in a concentration camp reflected in the mind of the average prisoner?" He observed that prisoners who found something to do every day appeared less vulnerable to the guards, and subsequently were judged as useful in one way or another; not as expendable. I simply cannot even imagine the horror of that reality, but nonetheless, it was documented by Frankl, (perhaps that was his purpose in attempting to make any sense of the horror,) and it makes sense to me.

I took away from this book the notion that without purpose, there is nothing. I think I already knew this on some level, but not to the point where I was considering the concept as part of my minute-by-minute navigation of daily challenges. I have come to realize implicitly that purpose needs to be at the core of everything I do. Purpose is a deus ex machina that resolves nearly all hopeless situations in life. It's a very critical one and we may need help finding it sometimes, but we have to have it. Hope is an action word.

Resilience is also a deus ex machina that positively influences the hopeless realities of our life stories; the ability to bounce back from adversity and keep moving toward a purpose. Nasim Taleb argues that emerging stronger and more capable of handling seemingly hopeless situations is beyond resilience, something he refers to as being antifragile. From Wikipedia,
Some things benefit from shocks; they thrive and grow when exposed to volatility, randomness, disorder, and stressors and love adventure, risk, and uncertainty. Yet, in spite of the ubiquity of the phenomenon, there is no word for the exact opposite of fragile. According to Taleb, the opposite of fragile is antifragile. Antifragility is beyond resilience or robustness. The resilient resists shocks and stays the same; the antifragile gets better". The phenomenon is well studied in medicine, where for example Wolff's law describes how bones grow stronger due to external load. Hormesis is an example of mild antifragility, where the stressor is a poisonous substance and the antifragile becomes better overall from a small dose of the stressor. This is different from robustness or resilience in that the antifragile system improves with, not withstands, stressors, where the stressors are neither too large or small. The larger point, according to Taleb, is that depriving systems of vital stressors is not necessarily a good thing and can be downright harmful.

Objectifying stress is an interesting concept. I have always wondered as a person that experiences a lot of it, what if stress could be characterized as having a purpose? Antifragility might be that, and certainly if so I woule deem it as another deus ex machina that has the potential to resolve hopeless situations in the stories of our lives.

I think the most difficult to employ deus ex machina we have at our disposal is forgiveness. I have manifested much hatred and anger within the story of my life. Boiling that down, however, what others have perceived as my hatred and anger tin my heart were in reality very complicated versions of disappointment and emotional damage. I am inherently sensitive; I get hurt easily. That is ultimately very difficult to display in a way that preserves a sense of safety though, so like it does in the infinite narrative of billions of people everyday, emotional strain often looks a lot like hatred and anger for me. I'm trying to curb that.

There is only one way to combat hurt, and that's through forgiveness. My friend Michael Josefowicz says that "forgive is the most important and hardest thing to do." I completely agree.

The last deus ex machina I'll talk about is objectification, and it goes hand in hand with forgiveness, Objectification of phenomena, metaphorically putting things in boxes and moving on is critically empowering. The best way I can describe objectification as a valuable and effective dues ex machina is borrowed from Steven Van Bockern as posted here,

The cultural perspective we all hold is shaped by our experiences as influenced by our birthplace, our family, our spirituality and the zeitgeist within which we were born; it’s the cultural reality lens we look through. Our cultural identity starts to form beginning the moment we’re conceived. Obvious physical characteristics and genetic traits define our culture in part from that second. After we’re born, the evolving cultural identity we form is largely influenced by our relationships and surroundings. Steve Van Bockern, coauthor of “Reclaiming Youth at Risk- Our Hope for the Future” refers to the influences of different cultural aspects as our cultural tail. I had the pleasure of attending a retreat with Steve on the Morley Indian Reservation west of Calgary in 2002. He explained that we can’t cut off our cultural tail; it’s always there, behind us affecting our perspective, but also that great things are possible in everyone’s future despite this tail that follows us.

Whether good, bad or indifferent, our cultural tail tells the story of where we’ve come from; who we are in terms of how our environments affect us, but it doesn’t have to predict where we’re headed. From a cultural perspective, in many ways we begin our lives rather innocently. Like clay to the sculptor, we start as unformed material yearning to be molded and shaped into a more tangible form; our growing cultural identity. Just as soon as we see the light of the world we begin forming perceptions and feelings about our culture and how we are different from, or similar to others. We are the sum total of what we think we are.

Steven elaborated that our cultural tails are metaphors. They are tails that follow us everywhere we go; they're always behind us waving back and forth, but also that this reality doesn't dictate the direction in which we're heading, that's up to us. I would elaborate further in saying that our cultural tails can also be described as cultural tales; the phenomenological realities of our past, the stories that have already been written. These are the things that have shaped and formed us through experience. They are the building blocks that helped us form our purpose in life, the degree to which we became resilient, or not, how we objectify things, and how much antifragility we were able to manifest as a result of the strains caused by them.

The last thing is forgiveness.

In my life, as ridiculously hard as it has been, and continues to be, I have tried to forgive. I remember the exact day many years ago. I was 26 years old, and my dad had done something that to me was very hurtful, but as usual, this state of mind and emotion was emerging from the depths of my being as intense anger toward him. I was blowing up to my mom trying to reconcile what had happened when she said something that changed the trajectory of my life. She asked me when I was going to let go of all the anger I was carrying around directed at my father. She implied that if she could do that after everything that happened, why couldn't I, and she told me that the anger I was feeling, (aka hurt,) wasn't serving any purpose as it applied to my father, but it was destroying me.

She was right.

I told her after a lot of thinking that I should call him and apologize, and honestly, I don't even know what I apologized for, it just seemed like the right thing to do, and as I think about it now I was most likely simply trying to apologize for my hatred for my own sake because here's the thing about cultural tails...

Everyone has one.

I have used the words story behind the story most often to describe this, but the reality is my parents were people before I was born and they both had their own cultural tails to reconcile, and they may or may not have been able to do that to the degree I would have hoped in order for them to entirely give me what I needed from them growing up. Realizing this was the most empowering realization I've ever had.

In order to forgive my parents for what were some very challenging phenomenological circumstances growing up, I had to objectify things; realize that they too lived their own phenomenological realities growing up that didn't entirely prepare them for being my parents. In order to forgive them for that which was beyond their control, I had to find purpose in why I lived through my childhood, divine what it was supposed to teach me, realize how it made me resilient and less permeable to stress, even though some would argue with me about my degree of antifragility, (said with tongue firmly planted in cheek.) I still process all of this continuously, it's a recurring awareness that infiltrates my dreams at night and my thoughts during the day, but I'm happy about that because figuring it out is part of my purpose, and it's what has allowed me the opportunity to listen to and help others going through a similar process. I've been able to help many, many people see things through a different lens simply by sharing my perspective toward all of this with them.

This is my story, the one that I'm continuing to write, and the one I'm using to help others write theirs.

We still have our issues, but I'm happy to say I have a relationship with both my mom and dad. I have learned to accept them as they are, and I love them. I don't hold their phenomenological experiences against them, and I will support them any time they call needing anything from me. I still hate so many things that happened, and I can't make them disappear, but they are now the tail that follows me without determining where I should be going.

The making of a teacher...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Tue, 14 Apr 2020 00:39:00 +0000

During the COVID19 crisis I've been doing a lot of thinking and reflecting... the gift of time has been nice if I'm being honest; a silver lining if you will amidst the chaos of what's happening right now. I'm one of those who have continued to go to school every day just for myself to keep that routine present in my life and so not to go stir crazy at home. Spring break has me at home today though, and for the rest of the week so I've become reacquainted with KARE Givers, (I hadn't written anything at this blog before last week since summer of 2016,) and some other things that I haven't done in a long time. I even participated in a Twitter chat last evening, something I haven't done in 8 or 9 years. It's been at least that long since this post has been sitting in my list of drafts.

I first told this story in front of an audience in 2006 to about one hundred teachers at the Central Alberta Teacher's Convention. A few years later I used it twice as an opening to a couple of lectures I gave at the University of Alberta. Later again I used this story as a narrative to open workshop sessions for the Alberta Teacher's Association Corps of Professional Instructors during professional development sessions I wrote and offered as an instructor.

In every case the theme of my presentation, lecture, and workshop was resiliency. The topic of resiliency is largely what KARE Givers is all about in one form or another, most of the posts within this blog have some reference to resiliency as a construct.

Probably as a result of all the thinking I've been doing about life and teaching, I've been brought back to my core and I'm finding myself looking for ground as I introspectively reflect on what brought me to this place in life where I feel like in some ways I know what I'm doing, but perhaps in others, I'm still trying to figure it out. At any rate here is where I am, and I guess I just feel like finally writing this narrative down. Maybe it will help me understand better where I need to go from here.

The boy's father was raised in an abusive family and suffered a great deal of hurt growing up. Sadly, but predicatably, he rebelled in his youth as a result of the pain he felt from pervasive mental and physical abuse. Nobody asked a lot of questions in rural southern Saskatchewan in the 1950’s. He began drinking alcohol and became an alcoholic at a very young age to the point where a 26 ounce bottle of rum wasn’t enough for him to feel drunk. He met the girl who was to be his wife at 27 years of age after a long period of adolescent and early adult self-destruction.

The couple eventually had three children; the young man I am telling you about was the first born, followed by a younger sister and brother. As the oldest, he saw many things that a young boy should not have to see, and he tried to protect his brother and sister as much as he could from the fear he felt every day. Drunken abuse of his mother left him with chattering teeth and a constant sense of hyper-vigilance for the safety of his mom. There were other women brought to the house, and also many friends to “party” with on any given day of the week. The young boy’s mom did the best she could to shelter him and his siblings from the violence, but it wasn’t easy. Sometimes she feared for her life and the lives of the children. Death threats happened occasionally.

Meanwhile as the boy grew, he was surrounded in a small town by a lot of people who may have known to some degree what was going on, but didn't feel it was their place to intervene. He and his siblings were involved in community sports, attended school regularly and did fairly well, all things considered. He felt like his mom was trying to maintain some sense of normalcy and routine for him and his siblings, but he also knew that something wasn't right. He remembered occasions when he felt calm and happy as isolated events that were pleasant to think about.

As time marched on, however, the boy became more depressingly aware of his parents as people with problems before he was born. It was a horrifying reality to realize. The problems they presented with existed long before he was ever born, but somehow he still felt guility and responsible for that. One day the topic of divorce came up at the dinner table. The boy sat listening for some time, and then he just started sobbing uncontrollably. He remembers this now as his first bonafied anxiety attack, but he didn't recognize that at the time, he was maybe 9 years old. It was also the first time he remembers having to objectify his parents. All of a sudden he saw them as people with their own problems as opposed to his subjective perception of them as his parents, the people who loved him and took care of him, no matter what that may have looked like. It’s a remarkable gift that young kids have in their ability to see their parents in only the most glowing image; they are sheltered by this phenomena in their early years.

Coming to the realization that his dad, and maybe even his mom were not healthy and often didn't act like what he believed parents should was very hard on the boy.

His grades began to slide and his behavior became a problem for the teachers at school. Office referrals and lost privileges became a weekly regularity. School personnel were perplexed about why his disposition had changed. The potential of this boy was in jeopardy, there was no doubt about it. Without an external source of support, he was going to fall through the cracks, and the cracks were getting wider every minute…

Flash forward to junior high school… the boy’s luck was about to slowly improve.
Som key teachers took the time to notice some things about the boy that others didn’t. He was smart, he was tough, and he was sensitive. They saw strengths in him that made them believe he had a chance to become something. They didn't let him get away with anything, and they took the time to build a trusting relationship with him, find out what was going on at home, and without passing judgment, began focusing on those strengths without allowing him any excuse for failure.

They were the beginning of what was to become a network of teachers who passed on the knowledge to each other year after year until they got him through high school. There were a few coaches along the way too who saw something in him that he didn’t even know he had, but it was primarily the teachers who got the job done. These remarkably dedicated individuals saw the potential in him and instead of passing him along blindly, they took the time to build him, to construct a person who eventually gained the skills to overcome his troubled upbringing and become something.

They did this by holding him accountable while also displaying a deep sense of regard and care. The junior high school English teacher who sent a poem he wrote to a Toronto publisher without him knowing she did that, and not showing him until it had been published in an anthology, the high school English teacher who encouraged him to go to journalism school in Ottawa, or the high school Social Studies teacher who told him his idea to solve the world's overpopulation challenges was brilliant... these people likely have no idea what they did for him every day just by their suggestion that he was capable. They held up an alternate mirror for him to gaze into to see possibility and hope.

They fostered the resiliency that was already present in him, but needed coaxing. They had faith in his abilities and exploited them by providing that proverbial alternate mirror for him to look into and see what he could become. They became his mentors, his extended family. They ensured that caring connections were maintained once he left their classroom. They were optimistic and spoke positively about his future. They “drew a circle that took him in.”

After a couple of hard years in the labor force working on oil rigs, this young man went to university and became a teacher, something that in his wildest dreams he never thought about becoming. The decision to do that came after an emotional conversation with his mom about how unhappy he was as a roughneck. She gave him a brilliant piece of advice that day, "find something you love to do and then find a way to make a living doing it." After much soul searching he came to the conclusion that although he didn't know if he'd love teaching, he know he loved some of his teachers, and if he could do for troubled kids what they did for him, then that would surely be something.

All these years later as he works today with the young people in his charge, he is ever aware of the possibility that kids from high risk environments may be sitting in the desks in front of him. He remembers what it was like to have at least one adult see something in him that others were blind to. He remembers to look for that something in all the kids he teaches, but especially those in crisis. He strives to be aware of the dangers that are inherent in these kid’s environments, and he looks for opportunities. He knows implicity that he must learn the story behind every kid's story if he is to even begin supporting the story that has yet to be written.

He is acutely aware that their futures may depend on it.

I think it's important to be aware that this narrative evolved over a period of time that lasted from birth to the end of university, but the story continues to be written. The details have been spared for the most part, but suffice to say that if ACES (adverse childhood experiences) had been part of the research vernacular back then, I would have blown the metrics out of the water with the number of them I experienced before my 18th birthday. To that I say whatever, I'm more of a disciple of how positive childhood experiences can buffer kids and nurture resilience within them.

At a time when kids are dealing with yet another unanticipated and horrifying reality of life on earth, teachers all over the world, whether they like it or not need to understand that at any given point in time, whether online during the global pandemic or in-person following our return to school buildings and face to face interaction, a child might choose him or her to be the one who they trust with the story behind their story. To not be ready for that would be a morally reprehensible condition leaving a soul to continue searching for someone who is, and perhaps becoming one step closer to giving up looking.

Let's just be ready for when kids choose us to learn their stories so as not to take that risk.

It's the most important responsibility we have.

What is Failure?

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 13 Apr 2020 18:07:00 +0000

I don't believe in failure, only relative degrees of success.

Despite what some may say, learning is defined in more than one context. The lessons we learn come in many shapes and forms, and I'm not sure I understand failing them. I suppose in a quantitative context, if we establish a benchmark standard, then technically everything that falls below this is a failure. Let's explore failure in the context of how it's typically defined in education...

failure [ˈfeɪljə]

— n

1. the act or an instance of failing

2. a person or thing that is unsuccessful or disappointing

3. nonperformance of something required or expected

4. cessation of normal operation; breakdown

5. an insufficiency or shortage

6. a decline or loss, as in health or strength

7. the fact of not reaching the required standard in an examination, test, course, etc

8. the act or process of becoming bankrupt or the state of being bankrupt

failure. (n.d.). Collins English Dictionary - Complete & Unabridged 10th Edition. Retrieved January 04, 2013, from Dictionary.com website: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/failure

In education, failure is often defined by number seven above... The fact of not reaching the required standard in an examination, test, course, etc., so we set standards for students to aspire to, and everything below that is a failure... but what if we defined failure in a system's context...
From Wikipedia-

Systems thinking is the process of understanding how things, regarded as systems, influence one another within a whole... systems thinking has been defined as an approach to problem solving, by viewing "problems" as parts of an overall system, rather than reacting to specific part, outcomes or events and potentially contributing to further development of unintended consequences. Systems thinking is not one thing but a set of habits or practices within a framework that is based on the belief that the component parts of a system can best be understood in the context of relationships with each other and with other systems, rather than in isolation. Systems thinking focuses on cyclical rather than linear cause and effect.

I am so intrigued by this concept. What if we were to think of students as systems unto themselves with many components (variables) who could best be understood in the context of relationships with each other and with other systems, rather than in isolation? What if we just thought of failure in a system's context as the act or an instance of failing, the first definition above? Could we accept that failure doesn't have to have a negative connotation, nor does it have to be defended through some sort of rationalization... it would be just what it is- the act or instance of failing.

If we were to think of failure in this regard, it would be perceived as a breakdown in the system, affecting the students' overall ability to perform as expected. It would be assumed that some part of a relationship within the system (student) or in the way the student relates to another system (person, concept, teacher, content, schedule, organization, etc.) is malfunctioning, resulting in support required. Reflective analysis of how the system broke down would be the default reaction; action could be taken to restore the system's interactions to purposeful, functional states designed to mitigate the failure.

I framed a model of action research in a different post here. The five R's, so to speak, in this particular contextualization of effective research practice are: reflect, retool, recalibrate, and reframe. I assert that assessing relative degrees of success students experience should be based on a similar heuristic for progress that is accommodating to "failure" as a necessary element of learning "success."

In a systems thinking model of assessment, reflection is looking back to empower learning forward. It's learning from mistakes by being honest about our process and willing to take a critical perspective. Re-tooling is the natural selection process in systems thinking; the ability, after reflection, to recognize that something isn't working, and make new tools available to recalibrate changes to systems that need to be changed. Re-framing describes the process of creating an adjusted perception and context for systems, the new responsive process that reflection and retooling enable. Re-focusing is the product of distributed leadership within the group/s otherwise known as the systems supporting the student; a willingness from all sides (systems, including the student) to embrace and value the new or adjusted systemic direction.

My five R's of systems thinking, (reflect, retool, recalibrate, reframe, refocus,) as in an action research context are responsive strategies that allow us to function as assessment researchers understanding that all is not lost if the organic nature of teaching and learning causes (as it nearly always does) a deviation from what may be considered the desired plan for student achievement. These deviations (mistakes, failures, lagging skills, unresolved problems, misunderstandings, etc) are necessary aspects of learning, after all; if they weren't, nobody would ever learn how to ride a bicycle.

As it happens, sometimes, in the midst of writing this, I literally stumbled upon a Twitter chat including my friend and fellow educator, Mark Sonneman. It was interesting and coincidental that what I'm talking about here in this blog can be very effectively applied in principle to the topic last night, going gradeless with teacher evaluations.

Assessing teacher growth, as it is with assessing student growth, is often and disturbingly aligned with the definition of failure #7 above, the fact of not reaching the required standard in an examination, test, course, etc, but also #3, non-performance of something desired or expected. Mark astutely pointed out that...

Because they place value on process instead of on people. Simple. It is about ticking off enough look-fors to be successful. It isn’t really about improvement; it is about accountability. Stressful for administrators and for teachers.
— Mark Sonnemann (@MarkSonnemann)

I couldn't agree more. I started my stream of thought during the chat with a comment about pre-teacher preparation programs and the indoctrination (or perhaps continuation following the K-12 modus operandi) of high-stakes evaluation measures, and began my participation in the chat with this...

I think we need to go further back to teacher prep in the pre-service context. Too much emphasis on what the "standard" is and not enough constructive practical experience 1/2
— Sean Grainger🚴🏻‍♂️ (@graingered)

2/2 We're churning out teachers who are bound only by standards as opposed to standards refined through authentic learned experiences from within an actual learning institution... a 9-week practicum isn't enough
— Sean Grainger🚴🏻‍♂️ (@graingered)

The bottom line is that if we are to become more purposeful in our practice and more effective in supporting student growth, the same model of applied action research I assert will work for students will also work for teachers with respect to their personal and professional growth and development. My last comment during the chat asserted that we should apply a research context to teacher professional growth using a baseline assessment, (current level of knowledge, skill, attitude,) of teacher performance and a set of desired outcomes (desired level of knowledge, skill, attitude,) of student performance, and align an action research context designed to bridge teacher performance to student growth. Alas, shouldn't the highest possible level of teacher performance be based on evidence of student growth as opposed to student performance judged against an arbitrarily established benchmark?

I intend to write more about the potential of a model where this is the case. Whether analyzing student performance or teacher performance, the same model can be used. Learning is fluid and a malleable process. The way we assess student and teacher performance should also be.

One of my best teachers...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sun, 12 Apr 2020 08:16:00 +0000

The United Church was built by two of my great-grandfathers
in my grandfather's "hometown" of Sovereign, SK

Some time ago I wrote this about my grandfather; one of my best teachers. On March 30, 2013, at 4:00 in the morning, exactly ten years to the day after my grandmother passed away, he died in Nepean, ON. I always reflect on his life and his passing at this time of year, but particularly this year, I've been thinking a lot lately about how he'd react and respond to the current state of the world amidst the global pandemic. It's interesting to also reflect on the fact that I am now the age of my grandfather when I was born. He lived through several humanity-threatening conditions in his days, and I wish I could talk to him about all that. Anyone who knows me really, really well will know that much of what I am as a person and a man came from him.

Born near Milestone Sask., in 1918, my grandfather moved to a farm near Sovereign, Sask., with his parents, eventually taking over the farm and marrying my grandmother, Emily in 1939. In addition to farming my grandfather also taught himself how to be an electrician and wired almost all of the homes in the immediate area around Sovereign. I actually have the Devry Institute distance education electrical manuals that he used to study for his electrical ticket way back in the 50's.

In his spare time, he worked as a mechanic, curled, coached a women's hockey team, dabbled in amateur theater, built two homes and even sold, installed and repaired the first televisions in the area. He was an active member of the Sovereign Masonic Lodge #192 and was a Life Member. In 1956 he took his family to Saskatoon, where he soon found permanent employment as a Control Room Operator and subsequently a System Dispatcher with Saskatchewan Power. The next 29 years saw him move from Saskatoon to Squaw Rapids, then Estevan and finally back to Saskatoon, where he eventually retired.
As I mentioned in the original post about my grandfather, he became a passionate student and user of the computer by which he vicariously travelled the world and met many more new online friends. In 2005, he moved to Ottawa, where he spent the last eight years in relative good health.

My grandfather had a reputation among his family and in his neighbourhood as a "Mr. Fix-it". It didn't matter what he put his hand to, he could return it to working condition, untangle it, clean it, fix it or just plain figure out how it worked. This gentle, hard-working man had an insatiable curiosity, truly believed in the Golden Rule and lived by the 10 Commandments. Ironically, he also hated museums and antiques. He said they reminded him of too many hard times, but those were the times of necessity and resourcefulness that taught him how to renew things and make them last.

My grandfather turned ninety-five years old this past January. I firmly believe that he made it that long because of the learner he was. When I wrote the post about my kids Skype-ing with their great-grampa, my grandfather was well into his ninety's, and still learning. He continued to be amazed and interested in so many things, right up to the time when the pain of asbestosis finally became too much for him. He worked in power plants for many years and had a great deal of exposure to asbestos before anyone knew just how harmful it was.

I have so many memories of what he taught me. At the time, I have to admit his teachings often felt more like lectures, especially in my teen years, but now I remember every single one of them as purposeful and sincere, whether I wanted to hear them at the time or not. I remember everything he told me and showed me, even more intently than usual, since he passed away.

When I speak with little kids, I remember to get down close to the ground so we can speak on their turf. My grandfather used to roll around on the living room floor with us, and often we'd play chess while lying on our bellies back at the old house in Saskatoon. He was always the one adult in the room who had a lot of time for the kids; he had a way of sharing his time that was very authentic and respectful. I've often wondered if he was like that in part owing to the fact that he barely had a childhood himself during the Great Depression when he took over the farm before he was in his mid-teens.

I've been waking up earlier lately. My grandfather took over many of the daily operations of the farm when he was a teenager after his father left to work building roads in the north. He never missed a sunrise, and the first thing he did was surmise what had to be done that day before it got too hot, or before the snow got too deep. Afternoons were for family... music, talking, playing games. In the old days, he played in a big band called the Sovereign Silvertons and was no stranger to the back country halls of central Saskatchewan. He taught himself how to play the clarinet and the saxophone, and never missed an opportunity to share his view about how music helped you feel better about things.

My grandfather was a respectful and humble man. He taught me it was right to return things cleaner and in better shape than when I borrowed them. He taught me that good deeds don't always go unnoticed, and quite often aren't reciprocated, but that you do them anyway. He taught me that if something was worth doing, it was worth doing well, and it usually didn't take much more time than doing it wrong anyway. Furthermore, he taught me that with careful analysis and a keen eye, just about anything can be figured out, taken apart, put back together and made useful again. Last summer, I brushed off the urge to buy a new lawn mower, and with $60 worth of new parts and some elbow grease, I rejuvenated that twenty-five-year-old Lawn Boy to cut grass for at least one more summer.

We miss you, Grandpa... really, really miss you. You have always been, and will remain, in our hearts as we live through you and what you've taught so many of us. As I confront life's most recent challenges and decisions, your words are echoing louder and more importantly than ever.

A Real Emergency in Education- Crisis As Opportunity...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Sat, 11 Apr 2020 21:54:00 +0000

Let's face it, to some people everything is an emergency.

A Chinese symbol for crisis is made up of two parts:

danger and opportunity…

Crisis as Opportunity (wéi ji)

Danger – originally pictured as a man on the edge of a precipice

Opportunity – a reminder of the seemingly small but important opportunity that can come out of danger

There is controversy surrounding the symbol above and its interpreted meaning, but that's for other people to worry about. For the sake of the point I'm making, I believe as interpreted, the idea behind the meaning of the symbol above is very important. How it's further interpreted in practice is exponentially more important.

One particular tale revolving around the symbol and its message goes like this...

A Taoist story tells of an old man who accidentally fell into the river rapids leading to a high and dangerous waterfall. Onlookers feared for his life. Miraculously, he came out alive and unharmed downstream at the bottom of the falls. People asked him how he managed to survive. "I accommodated myself to the water, not the water to me. Without thinking, I allowed myself to be shaped by it. Plunging into the swirl, I came out with the swirl. This is how I survived."

Emergencies are often what we make of them.

I can't tell you how many times I've had to address the emergent situation that someone dared to park in someone else's regular parking spot in our staff parking lot.

e·mer·gen·cy

/əˈmərjənsē/

noun

a serious, unexpected, and often dangerous situation requiring immediate action.

I have come to understand that based on the definition of emergency above, that there are no emergencies in education. Of course, there are serious issues and incidents we teachers need to deal with regularly, but I think it's all about context, really. Whether something is deemed an emergency in our schools depends more on our subjective perspective toward it as opposed to whether it's actually an emergency. When we have a plan in place to deal effectively with challenges, we should be able to turn them all into opportunities.

In any typical reality, there would be much to think about for teachers at this time of year. They'd be revisiting transition plans for their students, (perhaps one for themselves also,) reflecting on the learning that's taken place and what has yet to be covered, talking to kids about their goals and how well they've been met to this point and basically considering all those other things that have to be done before the end of June. It's a very busy time of year for all teachers, and some are overwhelmed by it on an annual basis.

This year is different. The global pandemic caused by COVID19 is most definitely an emergency across the globe affecting literally every populous on the face of the earth. Teachers and school personnel are now confronted with something that is actually an emergency, and it has been very interesting to witness how they're responding.

A colleague and I have been discussing what we've observed over the last month and despite generalized criticisms of the model, we agree that the Seven Stages of Grief (I split them into groups of 4 and 3,) offer an interesting heuristic model to analyze and help understand what has happened to teachers in the world of COVID19:

THE CURRENT REALITY...

SHOCK & DENIAL- Not surprising, teachers, like everyone else couldn't believe what just happened. The virus was spreading throughout the world, but for the most part "not in my back yard" seemed to be the order of the day, and then bam, schools were shut down and teachers were given the option to stay home, online school platforms were hastily created and then...
PAIN & GUILT- Pain and guilt set in. Three days after kids were told not to come to school and that online platforms would need to be established for them, this stage of the process was palpable at my school. Most staff members were still coming into the building for regular operational hours, only those that were sick in some form were told to stay home. There was a tangible degradation of our collective state of mind that day... things were definitely sinking in, and it wasn't a pleasant day.
ANGER & BARGAINING- In short order, the pain and guilt felt that the third day seemed to turn in a different, but related direction. People started to vent and say things like, "I'll never complain about having to come into school again once this is all over and we can just get through it."
“DEPRESSION”, REFLECTION, LONELINESS- Then teachers and school personnel began to make individual choices to work from home, some out of necessity related to their own compromised health, childcare challenges, etc. and some just because they're understandably afraid to leave the house given the intangible nature of much of the news (noise) surrounding the pandemic. It's just really hard to know which are the credible sources and who to trust and listen to regarding the threat.

THE EVOLVING REALITY...

THE UPWARD TURN- it didn't take long as teachers and paraprofessionals at my school began feeling more comfortable with the ways they were able to support kids from our school. Believe me, they have and continue to go way beyond what would be considered adequate in this regard. They are coming up with new ways to help keep kids and their parents connected to our school, a place where they feel safe and supported, and unfortunately at our low-income serving school, where they got fed every day, had school supplies provided for them, gained access to digital learning devices, etc. We're seeing the beginnings of their hope manifestation, I know this because the standing still stages of affective reflection and questioning above (stages 1-4) turned into tangible action... what HOPE is all about.
RECONSTRUCTION & WORKING THROUGH- Systems are being conceived daily, teachers are learning new ways of providing effective learning opportunities for kids at home. I'm seeing school personnel working overtime at my school to support each other, their students, their parents, but especially the kids who are at home alone because their parents still have to go to work, and those without food, school supplies, digital resources, etc. We have staff members delivering things kids need to their homes and leaving them on the curbside for pickup, making themselves available online so kids can check in with them throughout the day, patiently supporting parents who are struggling with how best to support the learning activities at home, etc. It has been inspiring in so many cases.
ACCEPTANCE & HOPE- Every day in an increasing degree of frequency I'm hearing school personnel at my school, whether from home, online, within the building or otherwise make statements that cause me to believe that we've collectively accepted what's happened, understood that it's beyond our control and begun to take action that displays hope for a reality that when this is all over we'll be more cohesive as a group, more connected to what's important in learning, and more grounded about our role as educators.

I believe that after this is all over our teachers, educational assistants, paraprofessionals, and parents will be drastically more skilled in knowing how to do things differently, and in some cases better, as they pertain to effective teaching and learning. Out of necessity is born possibility. Our purpose is very clear during these challenging times; we need to take care of our students and their families to the best of our collective capacity. Interestingly enough, there's another heuristic that helps make sense of this...

MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS

Projecting away from the stages of grief that our people have been going through, it appears to me that they've adopted a recalibrated focus on providing care based on Maslow's hierarchy of human needs. It would appear that our hope is being manifested through the purpose of making sure our students and their families have their needs met starting with the basics of food, safety, security, etc and extending all the way to the top of this model with facilitation of activities designed to help kids feel fulfilled and actualized.

PHYSIOLOGICAL- As I said, the staff at my school have been very active in making sure social supports are in place for our families ensuring kids and their families have food, shelter, etc and in some cases, they've been delivering food and other basic supplies needed themselves.
SAFETY- Staff members have been connecting through phone calls, virtual meetings, online platforms, video conferencing, etc to ensure kids feel safe and supported during the day, especially when they are fending for themselves because their parents have to continue going to work. They need kids to know that we have their backs.
BELONGING- Staff at my school have gone above and beyond to create online platforms that keep kids coming back to a place that is familiar in the sense that it's related to and aligned with my school's culture and ways of doing things. They've established bilateral forums for kids to communicate with each other and with their teachers, and they've done a tremendous amount of work supporting parents who are typically very new to online forms of learning support.
ESTEEM- Staff at my school have provided online opportunities for kids to achieve access and a sense of accomplishment by designing learning activities that they can successfully navigate at home in online contexts. They've been very careful not to overwhelm students and their families during this challenging time.
SELF-ACTUALIZATION- Staff at my school have been more than willing to acknowledge that kids need to be given latitude to create new ways of displaying their learning while abandoning out of necessity almost all forms of traditional lessons and school expectations. This has taken them out of their comfort zones to be sure, and that in and of itself has helped teachers become more self-actualized themselves honestly, and it's taught kids that there are always many ways of doing things and that creativity is the essence of getting things done during times when things are not as they typically are.

I also believe that all of us will look at "emergencies" in education differently once the pandemic is over. A car parked in our spot for a day is not a burning building, an emergency room alarm, a drowning swimmer off the pier, or a global pandemic.

We who work in schools are privileged every day to come to a safe and comforting building where people feel connected and effective learning takes place. If any part of that is perceived as an emergency, then shame on us.

Health - Opportunity - Privilege - Education

The Birds Keep Singing...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Wed, 08 Apr 2020 18:16:00 +0000

**This is a cross pollinated post from hopeallianceblog.ca, a new venture connected to my hopealliance.ca passion project. It's been a very long time since I posted to my beloved blog KARE Givers, and I have rediscovered many, many draft posts so it's time for me to get out of writing what I used to way too long ago. I'm feeling revitalized and rejuvenated... finally.

Hope without action is wishful thinking.

Hope without fear doesn't exist; that's called naivety.

Hope is the alpha. All fear, all resilience, all action is derived from hope, "the thing with feathers... that sings the tune without the words" as so beautifully described by Emily Dickinson in her poem entitled "Hope"...

As I sit at my desk in my office listening to the birds sing in the courtyard outside my window, I'm reminded of this beautiful poem and what it needs to teach us during this most fearful time.

This global pandemic is the storm creating fear that what we need to become true, beautiful and good in the world once again may not happen the way we intend it to.

Resilience is the tune without the words perched in our souls allowing us to keep going despite this fear.

The birds keep singing.

Their song is the action that can never stop at all in times of crisis and despair, because this is what turns hope from something we wish for, to something we can do.

Yesterday I wrote about the broad reality of this horrifying global pandemic. I appealed to people to boil the thing down to four simple elements... respect the science of this virus; understand what it can, and cannot do; nurture relationships of support to help get through this without feeling alone; and take responsibility for actions that support a quick end to the pandemic crisis.

Today I'm going to refer to a micro-reality; an action that resonated into other actions to do good. My message is that when added together, these seemingly small steps evolve into a manifestation of a broad reality like I referred to yesterday. Added together, small steps taken thoughtfully and carefully result in exponential good. When emulated over and over again, these steps become habituated and emerge as the longest most significant journeys of actionable hope.

My longtime friend and HOPE Alliance collaborator, Michael Josefowicz started singing a tune quite some time ago. Eventually his song had a name. He called it the Printernet. His tune goes something like this...

The Printernet combines the reach and knowledge of the Internet with the Power of Print. The beginnings of our global network of Independent Publishing Centers thrives in villages in Malawi, Burundi, Uganda, and Nigeria. The Printernet Network is driven by a passion for social justice, and local autonomy leading to sustainable community support and development.

Some time ago Michael created Printernet "nodes" in the villages mentioned above to create content of local interest along with the capacity to produce print media to distribute it, and web links included so the lcoal context when relevant to others, could have broad, easily replicable positive influence within other local contexts.

Who knew that during a global pandemic that this action would lead to doing well for local people speaking languages so lost and rare that Google can't even translate them.

Interns working as writers and publishers in remote African villages had already realized the value in printing daily newsletters in English and their traditional, culturally significant regional language... side by side along the fold of the newsletters. The newsletters support the effective teaching of the English language, and also maintain and preserve the local cultural language wich is vitally important to proliferate the wisdom of specific cultures that have thrived for thousands of years... and better yet, expose this timeless cultural wisdom to the rest of us.

Click on the image below to learn more about the origins of the hopeful action Michael named the "Printernet"...

Now, considering the broad reality of COVID19, the Printernet writers have adapted once again to produce newsletters being used to teach local people in their own language about how to be safe and manage the risks associated with COVID19.

Click on the image below to learn more about the power of the Printernet in times of crisis...

It would be an impossible task to estimate the value measured in hope that this action has produced. It will undeniably result in improved health for local villagers, opportunities to thrive moving forward, sharing of privileged information with people not used to privilege, and educated people who can now feel relatively confident about their actions to avoid getting sick.

Health - Opportunity - Privilege - Education

The music of one bird combined with another, and now a brand new tune is heard.

I Seem To Be A Verb...

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:50:00 +0000

"travel" (CC BY 2.0) by fdecomite

I have recently become more familiar with the life and times of Buckminster Fuller. When I think deeply about the spirit of inquiry, I find it useful to learn about those who personify it, and Buckminster, or "Bucky" as he was oft referred to, had to be a premium example.

In his 1970 book I Seem To Be a Verb, he wrote,

I live on Earth at present, and I don't know what I am. I know that I am not a category. I am not a thing—a noun. I seem to be a verb, an evolutionary process—an integral function of the universe. Buckminster Fuller

This quote reminded me of Robert Sylwester, another individual that beyond a shadow of a doubt for me, personifies the spirit of inquiry, I think mostly because of the Buckminster Fuller reference to "being a verb." Verbs connote actions, or movement. In another post here I explained that we (human beings) are in constant motion; traveling in simultaneous physical, psychological, emotional, and cognitive realms. Robert Sylwester characterizes this need to be in motion ...

The planning, regulation, and prediction of movements are the principal reasons for a brain. Plants are as biologically successful as animals, but they don’t have a brain. An organism that’s not going anywhere of its own volition doesn’t need a brain. It doesn’t even need to know where it is. What’s the point? Being an immobile plant does have its advantages however. Plants don’t have to get up every day and go to work because they’re already there.

On the other hand, if an organism has legs, wings, or fins, it needs a sensory system that will inform it about here and there, a make-up-its-mind system to determine whether here is better than there or there is better than here, and a motor system to get it to there if that’s the better choice – as it is, alas, when we have to go to work.

I think that learning can be described as movement; multiple journeys over a lifetime in the simultaneous physical, psychological, emotional and cognitive realms. I believe the process of inquiry provides us with opportunities to travel the most engaging pathways on these journeys, perhaps, fortunately, the ones less traveled by.

Buckminster Fuller and Robert Sylwester both present learning as a process that does not stand still. Young children certainly understand that learning doesn't stand still. They have a hard time standing still for any reason. Moving and evolving (aka learning) is a natural state for kids. In another post here I addressed the natural learning tendencies of preschool kids. Kids have massive learning potential in the first five years of life before educators even meet them in kindergarten. Kids are curious, inquisitive and unafraid for the most part to make learning mistakes. Play is learning for them in these formative years. Virtually everything they do at this stage of life teaches them something. It seems like Buckminster and Robert are on to something.

My friend Michael Josefowicz (@toughloveforx) is another inquiry addict that exemplifies the inquiry process. He is often heard using the term "groan ups" to describe adults who have lost the curious, inquisitive, and 'unafraid to make a mistake ' perspective that kids display in the preschool years. Those among us who have abandoned this innocent and effective kinetic learning perspective for more logical, sensible, and appropriate adult 'stand still' learning paradigms are disadvantaged in my opinion. They have lost their childlike perspective toward learning, and the magical world of questions without obvious and filtered answers becomes foreign, unsafe and anxiety-inducing. They don't want to travel there. This is rather sad, I think.

Those among us who have maintained a rather innocent, some may say unsophisticated inquiry perspective are privileged to travel to the magical world of questions without obvious and unfiltered answers whenever we want. And those among this lucky group who are doubly fortunate to work with kids as they journey to the same place find it easier and more natural to learn with, and teach kids. They are like open-minded travel agents of learning. They get to collaborate on the travel itinerary with their subjects, and go on the trip as well.

I think it's very important that we "groan ups" stay in touch with our childlike perspectives toward learning and teaching like Buckminster Fuller, Robert Sylwester and Michael Josefowicz have. Doing so provides perpetually clear pathways to unencumbered and open inquiry where mistakes and 'being wrong' set us off in new learning directions as opposed to dead ends. and where we can more effectively connect and relate to the little people who are already traveling there. They are the ones getting to work, as Sylwester says, using their brains to very naturally be the verbs that Fuller imagined himself to be.

Fair Isn't Equal; Equal Isn't Fair

noreply@blogger.com (Sean) — Mon, 04 Jul 2016 15:54:00 +0000

fair
adjective \ˈfer\

agreeing with what is thought to be right or acceptable
treating people in a way that does not favor some over others
not too harsh or critical

"Fair." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2016.

equal
adjective \ˈē-kwəl\

the same in number, amount, degree, rank, or quality
having the same mathematical value
not changing: the same for each person

"Equal." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2016.

If something is to be fair according to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary it has to be 'right' and 'acceptable,' and it has to avoid favoritism and overtly directed criticism.

If something is to be equal according to the Merriam-Webster online dictionary it has to be measured in 'sameness' and cannot change.

Seems pretty simple. What I'm thinking about a lot lately though, is the lack of simplicity in these definitions as they move from Merriam-Webster to practice in the world. In many cases, it appears that something can be perceived as very fair, but perhaps not very equal. It also appears that some things can be perceived as very equal, but not very fair.

Another word that inevitably enters the debate around fair vs. equal to make matters even more confusing is 'equity.'

equity
noun eq·ui·ty \ˈe-kwə-tē\

fairness or justice in the way people are treated

"Equity." Merriam-Webster.com. Merriam-Webster, n.d. Web. 18 Feb. 2016.

Equity reflects what we do. It's a noun. Equity is what results when we're able as individuals or groups to treat people fairly and in just ways. Because fair is not necessarily equal, I think that we can say that equity may contain elements of being equal, but being equal is not required to create equity.

When it comes to schools, few would argue that kids will thrive when allowed to learn in fair and just environments, especially if we're to accept that it would be very difficult to ensure that all schools were 'equal' in the way they operate on a daily basis.

At question is how we can ensure our schools are equitable when we know they can't be equal. There are many things about how schools operate that teachers and others who work in schools don't have a great deal of control over. On the other hand, though, teachers and others who work in schools have a great deal of control over the ways they interact with kids, how they support them, teach them and how much they care about them. They have a brilliant opportunity every day to care in conscious ways.

conscious caring

the act of deciding how to treat people in fair and just ways so things can be righteous and acceptable

The depth and sophistication of care for kids in schools depend largely on how 'conscious' we who work in them are about the ways that we deliver this care. In order to do this effectively and positively, we need to learn the stories behind our students' stories, what I call their "learning stories."

When we make the effort to learn about a student's history we gain a sense of "so that's why we see what we see..." or "it makes so much sense now..." in the present. This insight provides clues and intelligence regarding the child's present state of learning, but more importantly, how and why that state is evident. It takes the guessing away from the process of assessing kids, and it levels the playing field for them as a result of us ceasing to make assumptions about their present learning capacity that invariably could be very wrong without the background evidence. We make these assumptions in schools, and it's not good practice.

We make assumptions about variables like family background, capacity to learn, social dynamics, etc. and how they affect a child's ability to learn, often without investigating them thoroughly. We discriminate against kids at times because of these assumptions, and in doing so, restrict them from optimized learning. I've heard statements like "his brother was bad so I think I'm in trouble next year with that one." When such assumptions go mainstream we get stereotypes like "boys don't learn that way," or "girls don't learn that way," or "kids in this community will never achieve as high as the ones on the other side of town." These assumptions and stereotypes are barriers to maximum levels of learning for any student victimized by them, and any student can be victimized by them at any time if we aren't totally committed to preventing this from happening. This is why the 'EDUkare' imperative is so important. Any child at any time can be considered at risk of diminished learning potential if we make assumptions about how they learn (or not) and why (or why not) learning is occurring in the absence of evidence and data to support the perspective. Invariably then, without evidence, any child can be considered "at risk" when unsubstantiated assumptions are made about their learning story. These assumptions create a learning environment that is unstable and based on opinion as opposed to objectivity and fairness. This is the basis for the term EDUkare, "educating kids from at-risk environments, and EDUkare learning contexts can take many forms as long as the raison d'etre is optimized learning for every single student.

So I think the pathway to practicing fairness and equality as educators is to believe that all kids can learn no matter the variables and no matter the risk and to deliver pedagogy that celebrates equally every single one of the diverse learners we are privileged to teach. This conscious caring forms the framework perspective to support equitable teaching and learning. It helps us pursue the answers to how and why learning is or is not occurring. So here's the formula where 'E' is equality (the same and not changing for anyone, aka totally conscious levels of care for every child), 'F' is fairness (righteous pedagogy that does not discriminate) and 'Eq' is equity (a completely just and supportive learning environment for every individual learner.

E+F=Eq

— n
1.	the act or an instance of failing
2.	a person or thing that is unsuccessful or disappointing
3.	nonperformance of something required or expected
4.	cessation of normal operation; breakdown
5.	an insufficiency or shortage
6.	a decline or loss, as in health or strength
7.	the fact of not reaching the required standard in an examination, test, course, etc
8.	the act or process of becoming bankrupt or the state of being bankrupt