Social Media and the “Double-Edged” Sword of Damocles

Survival Rests on Humility, Self-Control, and the Principles of Public Relations

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   Social Media is a fickle bitch.

   Right there, I may have lost you. . . but made my point.

   You see. . . if I offended you by swearing in print. . . or by assuming that social media is “female,” and my comment resurrected all sorts of angst regarding either your mother (and the first time you uttered a swearword), or gender biases and stereotypes. . .

    And you have now (a) stopped reading this Blog, and (b) scrolled to the bottom. . . ready to “rip off” a punishing comment or two. . .

   Then, I have made my point.

   My broader, and real point is that Social Media has both benefits, and the potential for significant, life-long losses. . . losses that might involve the Supreme Court, jeopardize a career, or permanently scar an adolescent’s life (or worse).

   We all need Social Media training.

   And to expand my points in a recent Blog,

What Super Bowl Commercials Teach Education About Media and Product Literacy

[CLICK HERE to READ]. . .

    This training needs to start with Media Psychology and Media Literacy, and include Public Relations.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Social Media and the Double-Edged Sword of Damocles

   Social Media, as in the title above, is the new “Double-Edged” Sword of Damocles for many people.

   History.com recounts the story in this way:

The famed “sword of Damocles” dates back to an ancient moral parable popularized by the Roman philosopher Cicero in his 45 B.C. book “Tusculan Disputations.” Cicero’s version of the tale centers on Dionysius II, a tyrannical king who once ruled over the Sicilian city of Syracuse during the fourth and fifth centuries B.C.

 

Though rich and powerful, Dionysius was supremely unhappy. His iron-fisted rule had made him many enemies, and he was tormented by fears of assassination—so much so that he slept in a bedchamber surrounded by a moat and only trusted his daughters to shave his beard with a razor.

 

As Cicero tells it, the king’s dissatisfaction came to a head one day after a court flatterer named Damocles showered him with compliments and remarked how blissful his life must be. “Since this life delights you,” an annoyed Dionysius replied, “do you wish to taste it yourself and make a trial of my good fortune?” When Damocles agreed, Dionysius seated him on a golden couch and ordered a host of servants to wait on him. He was treated to succulent cuts of meat and lavished with scented perfumes and ointments.

 

Damocles couldn’t believe his luck, but just as he was starting to enjoy the life of a king, he noticed that Dionysius had also hung a razor-sharp sword from the ceiling. It was positioned over Damocles’ head, suspended only by a single strand of horsehair. From then on, the courtier’s fear for his life made it impossible for him to savor the opulence of the feast or enjoy the servants. After casting several nervous glances at the blade dangling above him, he asked to be excused, saying he no longer wished to be so fortunate.

 

For Cicero, the tale of Dionysius and Damocles represented the idea that those in power always labor under the specter of anxiety and death, and that “there can be no happiness for one who is under constant apprehensions.”

 

The parable later became a common motif in medieval literature, and the phrase “sword of Damocles” is now commonly used as a catchall term to describe a looming danger. Likewise, the saying “hanging by a thread” has become shorthand for a fraught or precarious situation.

 

One of its more famous uses came in 1961 during the Cold War, when President John F. Kennedy gave a speech before the United Nations in which he said that “Every man, woman and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable of being cut at any moment by accident or miscalculation or by madness.”

   While we could discuss how Kennedy’s fear is even more present today, the point of today’s Blog—once again—is that Social Media’s power to enhance or destroy hangs above each of us who use it.

   The power is “double-edged,” and. . . to a large extent. . . we hold the “keys” to the power.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Social Media I: Think Before You Act, and then, Think Again

   Over the past month, a colleague of mine has experienced a self-inflicted international (yes, I said “international”) public relations catastrophe.

   It began when she complained to the leadership of a large national service-provider about a few employees who were “breaking” minor, innocuous rules that had no personal effect on her or any other customers... all to receive compensation for either her “attentiveness” or her “inconvenience.”

   The problem is that she then went onto Social Media to publicize her actions and to gloat about receiving “compensation” that turned out to be “pennies on the dollar.”

   And how did I find out about this situation?

   I never saw her original Social Media post. Instead, I saw a post of hers on another Social Media channel where she (a) said she was going through a “hard time,” (b) asked for people’s prayers, and (c) said it did not matter what the “hard time” was about.

   So what did I do?. . . as, naturally, inquiring minds “want to know”. . .

   I googled her name, and up popped multiple stories—with professional pictures of her—describing the “social media offense” she had reported. . . as noted above.

   Since then, my colleague has become an international villain on the trade websites and in the related blogs, Facebook, and other social media platforms of the industry-employees that she “turned in”. . .

. . . and she has been vilified for the pettiness of her complaint to “corporate,” and ripped apart for gloating about the “personal phone call” that she received from “corporate” when awarded “her compensation.”

   “But, there’s more” (as Marisa Tomei exclaimed from the witness stand in My Cousin Vinny). . .

   Employees from the company that my colleague complained to. . . from across the country. . . and those who were just appalled at what she did. . . from across the world. . . decided to take action.

  (It seems the professional she complained about may have lost his job.)

   They went into my colleague’s Amazon store and trashed her reputation, products, and customer service ratings. . . resulting in Amazon closing the store for a period of time.

   They went onto my colleague’s Facebook, LinkedIn, and other social media platforms. . . and did the same thing. . . resulting in her closing those accounts, and changing her name so that she could “safely’ reopen them.

   And one person even created a real website using my colleague’s name in the URL to catalog the “original sin,” and the international media blitz that continues to this day.

   And my colleague. . . responded to the posts by “doubling down” and defending her original complaint to “Corporate,” and then threatening those negatively posting about her with FBI surveillance and possible legal action.

_ _ _ _ _

   I could not make this up if I tried.

   Here are the first social media take-aways. . . take aways that we all need to learn from, that we need to teach our children, and that we—who are educators—need to make sure are part of the media literacy training in our schools:

   Relative to Social Media posts:

·       Take-Away #1. Think before you post, and then Think again. 

·       Take-Away #2. Once you have posted virtually, you virtually have no control over your post’s interpretation or how others’ respond. 

·       Take-Away #3. You can’t win a virtual argument; you can only force it underground. . . and it surely will resurface—but not the way you want. 

·       Take-Away #4. Nothing is private any more. You can ask for privacy, but if someone wants to know “Why?”, there are 5 million Google hits that will inform them. 

·       Take-Away #5. One social media mistake could affect you for the rest of your life.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Social Media II: Let Your Ego do the Walking, and Your Humility do the Talking

   Unfortunately, my colleague broke any number of “rules” of public relations (and common sense) in handling this catastrophe (never mind the original social media mis-step).

   Instead of being humble, and publicly admitting her mistake in a gracious and heart-felt way, she took the “Trumpian” approach of doubling down and meeting “fire with fire.”

   Critically, she had nothing to lose by letting her ego “stand down,” and everything to lose (which, in essence, she has) by seeing herself as “the victim,” and letting her blind stubbornness “stand firm.”

_ _ _ _ _

   Beyond my colleague, school districts and their leaders are constantly in “the public eye.”

   Whether it is at a School Board meeting, posting on a school or district Facebook page, responding to a single parent’s e-mail (that is then shared with parents across the school or community), educators are public agents, and they must recognize their unwitting “public relations” position—for good or for bad.

   According to the Salient Public Relations firm, when facing a public relations catastrophe, the following key steps (edited) should be considered before a public response:

·        Understand Your PR Failures: To prevent damage to your reputation and/or your organization’s public standing or perception, it is crucial to understand the causes and consequences of your public relations failure.

Some common causes include (a) inadequate or inappropriate communications; (b) making policy or procedure decisions or actions without having all of the facts or conferring with your constituencies; (c) mismanaging political, social, or cultural language or contexts; and (d) demonstrating high levels of inconsistency, favoritism, inequity, or bias.

_ _ _ _ _

 

·        Crisis Management Plan: Convene a trusted and expert team (including outside consultants and/or legal counsel, if needed) as soon as possible, and create a crisis management plan.

This plan should outline how to respond swiftly and effectively when a crisis occurs. It includes assessing the situation, preparing stakeholders, creating a response team, and drafting a press release.

_ _ _ _ _

 

·        Clear Communication: Prioritize clear communication with stakeholders, your different publics, and/or the individual(s) who were harmed. Transparency is essential during a crisis.

Keep customers/constituents, employees/staff, investors/Board of Directors, and the public informed about the situation and any corrective actions being taken.

_ _ _ _ _

 

·        Sincere Apologies: If necessary, issue prompt and genuine apologies. Acknowledge mistakes, take responsibility, and express remorse. A sincere apology can go a long way in rebuilding trust.

_ _ _ _ _

 

·        Corrective Actions: Implement corrective actions to address the root cause of the crisis. Learn from the situation and use it as a learning opportunity. Show determination to right the wrongs.

_ _ _ _ _ 

   Remember, prevention is key. Avoid over-promising and always strive to over-deliver. Be authentic, and given people opportunities to respect you and the organization that you represent.  

   Additionally, never ignore a crisis, as that communicates indifference or disrespect. Instead, focus on correcting the situation and demonstrating empathy. Give the process time, and don’t over-communicate or get in your own way. 

   Forgiveness, and the process of recuperating from a public relation catastrophe takes time, patience, and trust—in yourself and others. Time is a healing necessity. If you go too fast, the healing will not last.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Social Media III:  Intent Can be Misinterpreted, and Needs to be Carefully Clarified

   Personal (and professional) Story. . .

   I always share my Blogs across a variety of social media channels.

   Invariably. . . because “a picture is worth a thousand words”. . . I handpick a picture that (a) provocatively reflects the essence of the Blog, (b) immediately (I hope) attracts people to the post, and (c) helps give a lasting impression and memory to what people have read.

   A number of Blogs ago, I discussed how “Too many schools are teaching students to control their emotions the wrong way.”

   For that post, I chose a picture of an angry fifth-grade African-American sitting at her classroom desk girl with her fists clenched. . . glaring at the camera.

   I chose the picture consciously. . . after a great deal of thought and internal debate. . . weighing the potential stereotype of depicting an angry Black schoolgirl against using a “more neutral and safer picture.”

   Obviously, the picture I used won out.

   The response to the Blog. . . the words on the “paper”. . . were overwhelmingly positive. . . and the Blog was a “best seller.”

   But, I receive one scathing comment. . . that accused me of proliferating racial biases and made a number of unflattering statements. The comment ended with the individual posting a picture that s/he thought was more appropriate and “less offensive.”

   The comment could have gone viral. . . the Blog’s message could have been “lost in space”. . . and I knew I needed to respond. . . carefully and respectfully.

   I considered and took many of the actions outlined in the section immediately above. . . to avoid a public relations catastrophe.

   And, I posted the following response:

Dear Colleague,

 

I appreciate your comment. Know that my intent is never to offend, and I apologize if that was your reaction.

 
While your photo is great, those of us who post frequently usually take great care before posting their story-related pictures.

 

Indeed, if you follow my work, you know that I use many group shots of diverse students, and rotate the race and gender of my single-student photos.

In this case, I consciously chose this picture.... very carefully weighing the positives and negatives. I went ahead with this selection, actually, because of the reality that some DO stereotype Black schoolgirls. . . in many negative ways.

I wanted these people, especially those with implicit biases, to read the article to help them understand that lack of emotional control is not about gender or race, but the contexts of the emotionality, the lack of scientific emotional control instruction, and the reality that many educators (and others) don't necessarily understand the complexities of children's emotions and behaviors.

 
I hope you understand this explanation, even though you may disagree.

Best,

Howie

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   Sometimes it just seems that social media is just a “new toy” that we all need to “figure out.”

   But I keep trying to identify a similar innovation from the past that has the both the enormous upsides and devastating downsides of social media. . . all as fueled by the internet.

   I can’t come up with one.

   On the upside. . . social media is a way of connecting, communicating, learning, marketing, and teaching.

   On the downside. . . social media is responsible for some child and adolescent depression and other mental health issues, it has become (for some) an obsessive waste of time and an agent of distraction and procrastination, and it has created a generation of wanna-be “influencers” who live in a fantasy world of “likes” and “hits.”

   For those who believe that they are “in control” of their social media interactions, you only need to recognize that algorithms control what you see on social media, and that companies control the algorithms.

   To finish this Blog, I asked Microsoft Copilot, my computer’s AI-powered search assistant, “Who controls the algorithms on social media?” [I hope you get the irony here.]

   The response was the following: 

Social media algorithms are primarily controlled by the platforms themselves, but let’s dive deeper into this:

 

Platform Companies (like) Google and Facebook wield significant power over the information ecosystem. Their algorithms shape what content users see and interact with on their platforms.

 

These companies design and maintain the algorithms that determine the order of posts, recommendations, and personalized content.

_ _ _ _ _

 

Algorithm Development:

 

Coders and Engineers: Algorithms are created by teams of coders and engineers within these platform companies. They use machine learning techniques to develop and fine-tune the algorithms. This allows them to learn from user interactions and adapt over time.

 

Ranking Signals: Algorithms consider various ranking signals to prioritize content:

 

·       User Engagement: Likes, comments, shares, and clicks influence content visibility.

 

·      Relevance: Algorithms analyze the content’s relevance to individual users based on their past interactions.

 

·        Timeliness: Fresh content often gets priority.

 

·       Personalization: Algorithms tailor content to each user’s preferences.

_ _ _ _ _

Content Moderation Policies: Algorithms also enforce content moderation policies set by the platform companies. These policies dictate what content is allowed, flagged, or removed. Content moderation decisions can significantly impact users’ experiences.

 

In summary, social media algorithms are a blend of technology, data, and policy decisions. While the platforms control the algorithms, their impact extends to every user, shaping what appears in our feeds and influencing our online interactions.

_ _ _ _ _

   So let’s go full-circle.

   In order to control the algorithms that control social media that control users, users need to use self-control.

   And that means, to put this in Freudian terms, that our Super-Egos need to control our Ids in order to preserve our Egos.

   My colleague. . . with the public relations catastrophe. . . let her Id get in the way.

   She wanted to “show off” her “power” in being able to complain about a few service company employees who were “breaking” minor, innocuous rules that had no personal effect on her or any other customers.

   She triggered her “problem” by publicizing her actions and her receipt of a piddling amount of compensation for these actions.

   Her social media post resulted in a tumultuous negative international deluge of other people’s Ids. . . which has impacted my colleague both professionally and emotionally (the recent posts in her new-named social media accounts suggest she is traumatized).

   And yet, her Id doubled-down. . . as it continues to “win” over her Super-Ego and common sense.

   Once again:

   In order to control the algorithms that control social media that control users, users need to use self-control.

   For my educator-colleagues:

   We need to (continue to) teach these lessons to our children and adolescents as often as possible in effective, developmentally-sensitive ways.

_ _ _ _ _

   This Blog has discussed Social Media as the new “Sword of Damocles”  that hangs above us with the power to enhance or destroy each of us who uses it. We assert that the power of Social Media is “double-edged,” and. . . to a large extent. . . that our self-control, humility, common sense, and ability to honestly self-reflective are the “keys” to the power.

   The Blog tells the tale of a colleague who recently mis-used social media to complain to “Corporate” about a few service company employees who were “breaking” minor, innocuous rules that had no personal effect on her or any other customers.

   She triggered a social media catastrophe by publicizing her actions, including the piddling amount of compensation she received for her complaints. This triggered an international backlash debilitating her professional sales and reputation, and her personal and “social media” life.

   The Blog uses this cautionary tale to discuss how to self-control Social Media, and five social media take-aways that we all need to learn and to teach our children. We share what Public Relations firms suggest to moderate a public relations catastrophe. And, we give a personal example of how to respond when negative comments are posted on a social media post.

   The social media Sword of Damocles has fallen on far too many users.

_ _ _ _

   We hope that this Blog has been both relevant and helpful to you. . . personally and professionally.

   As we enter the “last phase” of the school year, we remind you that:

“The Beginning of the Next School Year begins in April” (that is, NOW).

   Right now is the best time to analyze and summarize the student, staff, and school “lessons” you have learned during this past year, and apply them to a successful beginning of the next school year.

   We have a systematic process that has helped thousands of schools to organize themselves for the most successful “first day of school” that they ever have experienced.

   If you would like to learn more, e-mail or call me to set up a free one-hour team discussion of what this might look like in your school or district.

   Meanwhile. . . thanks for reading my Blog.

Best,

Howie

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Laundromats, Lawyers, Learning Loss, and Life: An Autobiographical Day in Education

Dear Colleagues,

 [CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Introduction

   I am told that I am a “fixer”. . . and I suppose that is true.

   On a professional level, I try to “fix” things. . . a chronically-broken district. . . a dysfunctional school... a student who is out of control.

   On a personal level, it’s the same thing. I try to analyze and problem-solve challenging situations. . . I look for solutions. . . and I try to “make things better.”

   But, sometimes. . . both professionally and personally, you “make things better,” but you do not fully solve or resolve the underlying challenge.

   And sometimes, there just aren’t any permanent solutions, and you need to “keep on keeping on.”

   Maybe that’s why that great meta-baseball philosopher Yogi Berra said:

“When you come to a fork in the road, take it.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

My Educational Day

   For today’s Blog, I hope you will indulge me as I just “describe my educational day” with some personal and professional reflections that I hope will resonate—at some level—with you.

   I woke up this morning in my hotel on Day 9 of a 16-day business road trip to three cities.

   While today is a “work day,” the school that I was supposed to consult with told me yesterday that they “really didn’t have anything substantial for me to do.”

   Now. . . that’s usually (and it is here) a diagnostic statement.

   Indeed. . . having worked with this school for over four years. . . there are hundreds of things that I could be doing to “move them to the next level of excellence.”

   But regardless. . . I know if I pushed the point above, or showed up anyways—this would cause more harm than good.

   And so, I will spend today focusing on (a) laundry, (b) phone calls, and (c) preparing to deliver a workshop on “Social, Emotional, and Behavioral Tier II Interventions” for another district this afternoon.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

How Laundromats Provide Insight into Some Students’ Worlds

   When I work in this north-central area of the country, I stay in a small city of about 33,000 residents.

   And because “I am on Day 9 of a 16-day business road trip,” there is laundry to do.

   The laundromat that I frequent here is clean, well-lit, and “working class.”

   During the day, the Caretaker is a nice woman who always helps me load my “Laundry Card” with the money I need to wash and dry my clothes. In the late afternoon, a High School student takes over. . . learning the important “life” lessons of hard work and how to earn money.

   Today—at around 11 AM—the laundromat had its usual wide variety of clients.

   Because their conversations exceed the muffled din of the washers and the whirling spin of the dryers, it’s not hard to hear about their backgrounds and life events.

   And, given this, it’s hard to not “be a school psychologist” even here. . . in a setting that is so relevant to a real school.

   Among my “clinical” observations today:

·       There was the young mother with a precocious three-year-old who was having a ball enthusiastically exploring every inch of the laundromat. . . much to her mother’s chagrin.

In response, the mother spent her hour at the laundromat conversationally swearing, berating, threatening, and eventually screaming at her child. I assure you, there was a swear-word embedded in every sentence that was spoken to her daughter.

Toward the end of the mother’s “living hell,” she asked the child why she would not listen to her.

I am not judging the mother, but I wondered (a) how these interactions would affect this child’s self-concept; and (b) how she would socially interact with her peers during her first weeks at school (and beyond).

_ _ _ _ _

·       I observed a homeless family of four living out of their car, doing three weeks of laundry, in readiness for “the next stop.” With the “father” and “mother” were two obvious school-aged girls. . . about six and ten. . . who continually tried to get the father’s attention as he shooed them away, remaining transfixed to the videos he was watching on his cell phone.

The mother watched this knowingly, but her look of fear suggested that she would not confront the father’s behavior. . . much less say a word about it. 

With the older daughter appearing to protect the younger one, I wondered (a) when was the last time either daughter was enrolled—for a consistent period of time—in school; (b) what were they learning about adult relationships and fixed gender roles from their parents; and (c) how any school would address their “academic skills gaps” at their advancing ages?

_ _ _ _ _

·       Finally, there was an older woman with a younger woman who evidently was her daughter. The daughter clearly had some cognitive challenges, and she tried to help with the laundry as best as she could.

She seemed to need a lot of direction and supervision, and stared at the game show on the TV in the corner, laughing and giggling. 

I wondered what type of transition services she received on her IEP before she graduated from high school or “aged-out” of the special education system, and whether there were vocational assessment and placement options for her in the community.

_ _ _ _ _

   While I know we constantly reflect on our students’ out-of-school lives, we still only get a brief snapshot of those lives. We do not see all of the complexities of these lives (not that we expect to), and we certainly do not see the historical complexities.

   As much as we recognize our students’ academic and social-emotional gaps. . . and try to partner with them toward solutions. . . sometimes we and they are just doing the best that we (they) can.

   Regardless of curricular and behavioral standards, state proficiency tests, and the pressure on educators to “be successful,” I sometimes wish that the politicians in Washington, D.C. or our State Education Commissioners would “spend a day in the laundromat.”

   Maybe that would change some perspectives. . . if not, policies.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

On the Phone: My Work as an Expert Witness

   I am currently involved in four different special education Due Process or Federal Court cases for clients across the country.

   In two cases, I am supporting the school districts, and in two cases, I am supporting the students (and their families).

   I take cases based on their merits.

   Before accepting a case, I read the litigation filed, research the litigants involved, review any media and social media coverage regarding the case, and interview (as they interview me) the lawyers who want my services.

   Over the past year, many of my cases have involved students with autism. Today, I had a conference call that involved a student with this disability. It reminded me of some recent, past cases.

·       One case involved a student with autism who exhibited significantly dangerous behavior toward adults and peers. Despite a Functional Behavioral Assessment (FBA) that suggested that some of this behavior was motivated (and not a function of his disability), it was impossible to determine— as the behavior was occurring—whether the behavior was motivated and intended, or disability-related.

Regardless, at times, the behavior was so dangerous that the student needed to be restrained or placed in a small isolation room without doors.

On one occasion, the student tried to force his way out of the room. . . and the paraprofessional attempted to physically prevent his “escape.” When the student then physically attacked the paraprofessional, he was moved physically back into the room.

This incident was videotaped.

While the school district saw the paraprofessional’s physical contact as consistent with his CPI training, the parent saw the contact as physical abuse.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Another case involved a student with autism and cognitive impairments who had been out of school for over a year.

While the parents and school district agreed on the last school placement, the private day school involved required the student to have a one-on-one assistant because of her intermittent acting out and aggressive behavior.

When it could not find an appropriate assistant (and refused to accept one from the public school district), the student was returned home.

The district lost the Due Process hearing on FAPE because (a) the IEP was based on inappropriate assessments, and (b) they could not produce and did not share the FBA with the Court or Parents, respectfully.

Most significant was the fact that the district never provided any social skills training, emotional control training, or other appropriate behavioral interventions to address the behavior that was the reason why the student needed the one-on-one support.

_ _ _ _ _

·       The third case involved a student who, before he was in kindergarten, allegedly hit his head and went to two different emergency rooms for treatment on two successive days. A few days later, because of a separate nasal and respiratory condition and infection, the lining around his brain became infected.

The parents sued the medical doctors alleging that a head injury misdiagnosis resulted in the brain inflammation. . . that resulted in a seizure, neurological losses, and the need for significant long-term educational and other physical therapy services and supports. 

When the student was two years old, her language development was significantly delayed, and she exhibited numerous “stereotypical” and asocial interactions. The child’s primary care physician expressed concerns about autism, but these concerns were never formally assessed and validated.

Despite this lack of validation, the legal case includes a claim that the emergency room staff never asked if the student had autism, and that this lack of information contributed to the misdiagnosis.

A later special education eligibility assessment concluded that the student was not autistic, but had a Communication/Speech disability.

_ _ _ _ _

   Students with, or suspected with, autism have increased exponentially during my career.

   From both assessment and intervention perspectives, schools need to have experienced, multi-disciplinary professionals involved in these complex and very individualistic cases. Moreover, these professionals may require outside consultations with other, related services, community-based professionals.

   All things being equal, and with no disrespect to other professions, school psychologists and speech pathologists need to be the “point guards” for any case involving a student with autism.

   While, for example, Applied Behavior Analysts (BCBAs) should be part of the team, it is critical to understand that the behavior demonstrated by many students with autism is biologically or neurologically-based, and that communication (or the lack thereof) is often a mediating variable.

   Because of this, it is likely that these students’ acting out and aggressive behavior is not functionally motivated by any of the reasons typically evaluated by a Functional Behavioral Assessment.

   Broader psychological, physiological/neurological, and communication-based root causes need to be considered at the outset. Hence, my recommendation that school psychologists and speech pathologists take the lead on these cases.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Learning Loss and the (Still) Post-Pandemic Blues

   There are some in education who remain obsessed with “catching up” our students who have experienced “learning losses” due to the pandemic. And while I want all of our students to maximize their academic and social-behavioral skills and progress, some of this obsession is just adding more unrealistic (mental health undermining) pressure to our collective plates.

   Over the past number of months, different articles in the national education press have noted that:

·       Fewer students are graduating from High School and enrolling in college—at one level or another; 

·       Many who go to college (a) over-estimate their skills and readiness; and (b) need to take remedial courses before they can enroll in credit-earning courses (hence, extending their graduation dates or their drop-out potential);

·       Many students are graduating from High School (some with the lowest GPAs possible), and they have not learned and mastered the basic functional skills (in many areas, including financial and media literacy) needed for “life success;”

·       Many students are not mastering the literacy skills that they need—by third grade—and these skill gaps (regardless of third grade retention or not) follow them through high school; and 

·       Many students are entering kindergarten without the academic and social-emotional readiness skills they need for success.

   At the end of today, I presented a workshop at one of my five-year School Climate Transformation Grant districts as part of an ongoing “Tier II Social, Emotional, Behavioral Intervention” series.

   Like many across the country in rural areas, this district serves fewer than 500 students from kindergarten through high school. At the elementary level, there is basically one teacher per grade level. At the secondary level, there are barely enough teachers (teaching Grades 6 through high school) to cover the state-required courses for graduation.

   There is one counselor for the two (elementary and secondary) buildings, the special education teachers are providing 125% of the services required by the students to succeed, the school psychologist is there two days per week, and the technology is passable. . . but questionable every day due to connectivity problems.

   The district is serving a large number of students with autism, developmental delays, behavioral challenges, and chronic attendance problems.

   And it is doing the best that it can.

   You see. . . it is not just about implementing effective practices here. . . science-based literacy, quality Tier I instruction, effective Tier II and III services, supports, and interventions.

   On some days, it is about survival.

   Survival for the students who come from and return to poverty-stricken and drug-impacted homes. . . with missing (and, at times, incarcerated) parents, and other completely dysfunctional factors.

   Survival for the teachers who—in addition to the circumstances above—also deal with their own lives and (mental) health needs, the impact of colleagues who take “mental health days” that inadvertently increase the pressure on other teachers when substitute teachers can’t be found, and can’t implement those “great Tier II behavioral interventions” because three kids are emotionally or behaviorally out of control.

_ _ _ _ _

   That’s how my day ended.

   Many of the things discussed above cannot be easily “fixed.”

   And yet, they can be changed. But that necessitates a realistic, collective effort that involves not just educators. . . but so many others at the home, community, regional, state, and national levels.

   But more critically, that’s how the day ended for these teachers, support staff, and administrators.

   And yet. . . every morning, thousands of educators across this country wake up, take a deep breath, and optimistically approach the new day with a renewed commitment to their students and their craft.

   This is not about false positivism or model schools.

   These educators are realistic about what they do, and they are realistic about what they can do.

   And sometimes, this is what we need to acknowledge and celebrate.

_ _ _ _ _

   By the way, I left the laundromat with all of my socks, and they all matched. . . something else to celebrate!

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   This Blog described an autobiographical day in my educational life.

   I discussed and reflected on my psychoeducational observations in a laundromat, on a conference call as an Expert Witness in a court case involving a student with a disability (autism), and relative to the realities of many (rural) school districts that have barely enough staff to address the complex needs of their students.

   Most of these reflections did not include solutions on how to “fix” these challenges.

   Sometimes, we just need to reflect on the life circumstances that we find ourselves in. . . along with those of our students, colleagues, schools, and districts.

   Sometimes, we just need to celebrate the effort. . . and not the unattainable (for some students and staff) outcomes that are prescribed in the standards set by our state departments of education and our representatives in Washington, D.C.

_ _ _ _

A New Funding Opportunity

   When districts or schools are interested in implementing my work—especially when funding is dwindling or short, I often partner with them and help them write (often, five-year) federal grants from the U.S. Department of Education.

   To this end:

   A new $4 million grant program is coming up in a few months that focuses on moderate to large school districts with at least 25 elementary schools.

   As we can submit multiple grants from different districts, if you are interested in discussing this grant and a partnership with me, call (813-495-3318) or drop me an e-mail as soon as possible (howieknoff1@projectachieve.info).

   A separate five-year $4 million grant program will likely be announced a year from now. This program is open to districts of all sizes.

   If you are interested, once again, it is not too early to talk.

   BOTH grant programs focus on (a) school safety, climate, and discipline; (b) classroom relationships, behavior management, and engagement; and (c) teaching students interpersonal, conflict prevention and resolution, social problem-solving, and emotional awareness, control, communication, and coping skills and interactions.

   If we partner, I will write the bulk of the Grant proposal (at no cost), and guide you through its submission.

   Beyond these grants, if you are interested in my work for your school or educational setting, I am happy to provide a free consultation for you and your team to discuss needs, current status, goals, and possible approaches.

   Call me or drop me an e-mail, and let’s get started.

Best,

Howie

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

How Cognitive Biases Affect Student Perceptions and Educator Decisions

Making the Unconscious, Conscious and the Implicit, Explicit

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   Not to validate a long-standing stereotype, but as a school psychologist who tries to facilitate positive growth and change, I often think about how people form their attitudes and beliefs, and how these impact their perceptions and decisions.

   This typically occurs when I am consulting in a school. . . advocating for the most effective research-to-practice approaches for students, staff, school, and system success.

   Many times, there are many potentially successful ways to attain desired school or educational goals and outcomes. As this occurs, we weigh the strengths and limits of the most-viable ways and make a collaborative decision.

   During this process, we sometimes “agree to disagree” and, in the end, we accept the consensus decision. . . even though it may not be the one that was our favorite.

_ _ _ _ _

   At times, though, the “collaborative” process is not collaborative. Indeed, sometimes there are self-serving agendas, discussions that are not constructive, and decisions not based on objective information, research, facts, or fairness.

   This sometimes occurs because of implicit or unconscious biases, or explicit and conscious biases. When these biases interfere with or undermine sound decision-making, their presence and impact need to be identified, acknowledged, analyzed, and addressed.

   While I understand the personal, professional, and political challenges in this recommendation, let’s first spend some time understanding some of the most-prevalent biases and how they impact attitudes, beliefs, perceptions, and the decision-making process in educational settings.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

The “Offspring” of Cognitive Biases: Stereotypes, Prejudices, and Discrimination

[Acknowledgement: Numerous websites were consulted to complete the research for this Blog. The most useful (and used below) were: Simplypsychology.org; Verywellmind.com; and Health.ClevelandClinic.org.]

   Cognitive Biases are based on our experiences, interactions, beliefs, and lived events. They help us to process information quickly, they are contextual, and they range from accurate to inaccurate, and helpful to harmful.

   Cognitive Biases can impact our attitudes, beliefs, expectations, attributions, and interpretations, as well as what we think or believe, with whom we interact, and how we interact.

   As noted earlier, there are times when we are unaware of our cognitive biases as they are unconscious or implicit.

   Conversely, there are times when we are fully aware of our cognitive biases and how they are impacting our emotions, thoughts, behavior, and decisions.

   In a negative sense, cognitive biases can be implicitly or explicitly inaccurate, and they can lead us to misperceive information, events, and specific groups of people or individuals. These biases lead to irrational thoughts, judgements, decisions, and interactions.

_ _ _ _ _

   While there are different layers of agreement (and disagreement), cognitive biases overlap with stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination.

   Simplistically, Stereotypes are beliefs. Prejudices are attitudes. And, Discrimination is a behavior.

   The open source Principles of Social Psychology (University of Minnesota, 2015) clarifies:

The principles of social psychology, including the ABCs—affect, behavior, and cognition—apply to the study of stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination, and social psychologists have expended substantial research efforts studying these concepts.

 

The cognitive component in our perceptions of group members is the stereotype—the positive or negative beliefs that we hold about the characteristics of social groups. We may decide that “Italians are romantic,” that “old people are boring,” or that “college professors are nerds.” And we may use those beliefs to guide our actions toward people from those groups.

 

In addition to our stereotypes, we may also develop prejudice—an unjustifiable negative attitude toward an outgroup or toward the members of that outgroup. Prejudice can take the form of disliking, anger, fear, disgust, discomfort, and even hatred—affective states that can lead to (inappropriate) behavior.

 

(Indeed,) stereotypes and prejudices are problematic because they may create discrimination—unjustified negative behaviors toward members of outgroups based on their group membership.

_ _ _ _ _

   Expanding briefly, stereotypes and prejudices lead people to:

·       Assume that they have all of the information that they need—about a specific person or group, topic or subject matter, event or situation—thereby, stopping them from collecting all of the objective facts; 

·       Interpret any existing information in the direction of their bias—resulting in faulty opinions or conclusions; and 

·       Generalize these faulty opinions or conclusions from individual (e.g., a student from a specific racial group who is behaving badly) to a prescribed group (believing that all individuals from that racial group behave badly), and/or from a prescribed group (all of the students in Period 7 who are failing science) to an individual (who just moved into the district and was put into 7^th period science).

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Describing and Applying (to Education) Selected Cognitive Biases

    More than 180 different cognitive biases have been identified by psychologists and other behavioral scientists. Below, we describe eight important ones, applying them to school staff, students, and administrators in educational settings.

   The eight chosen cognitive biases are organized along a continuum from those that impact our decisions before we make them, as we make them, and after we make them.

   Cognitive Biases Before We Make a Decision:

·       The Halo Effect

·       The Anchoring Bias

   Cognitive Biases As We Make a Decision:

·       The Confirmation Bias

·       The False Consensus Effect

·       The Optimism Bias

      Cognitive Biases After We Make a Decision:

·       The Misinformation Bias

·       The Hindsight Bias

·       The Self-Serving Bias

   We recently discussed the broad area of Cognitive Biases on Education Talk Radio, hosted by Larry Jacobs. Our 35-minute interview is posted at the end of this Blog.

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 1. The Halo Effect

   A Halo Effect occurs when our initial overall or general impressions of a student, teacher, related services professional, administrator—or even school—positively or negatively affects our later impressions, interactions, or evaluations.

   For example, if we are put-off because our first impression of a school is that it is excessively dirty and run-down, we may then attend only to future information—relative to, for example, the students, staff, or administration—that re-confirms our bias.

   If our first interaction with a student is that s/he is loud, overly-dramatic, and “street-wise,” we may then interact with that student in an impatient, cold, and curt way—resulting in a negative reaction from the student that, as part of a vicious cycle, re-validates our initial bias.

   If our first impression of a candidate for a staff or administrative position is that they graduated from the “right” school, are attractive and well-dressed, and smile and make good eye contact, we may shorten the interview and ask only “softball” questions, give them the benefit of the doubt when they are unable to answer other questions, and rate them higher than other candidates who have actually more experience, but do not have the characteristics creating the positive bias.

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 2. The Anchoring Bias

   An Anchoring Bias occurs when people are influenced by the first piece of information that they hear, and that piece of information becomes the benchmark or “anchor” that all subsequent information is filtered through.

   For example, when staff are told that the administration wants to keep class sizes down to 18 or 20 students for the coming year (and the staff all applaud), that information becomes the benchmark for what eventually occurs. 

   If the anticipated state funding (which was the basis for the desired class size) does not materialize, and class sizes “explode” to 23 students, then staff are disappointed (or worse) and they may “take it out” on their administrators’ annual staff evaluation ratings.

   If the special educators in a school are told that—next year—the service delivery model will be modified to free them up for one day of consulting with their general education colleagues each week, then that becomes the “anchor” that they use to evaluate their satisfaction with their roles during coming year.

   If a rush of new students with disabilities appears over the summer, and the one day is reduced to a half-day, the staff may be so dissatisfied or disillusioned that they choose not to consult at all.

   If the students in a middle school are “warned” that the new administration will implement a no-nonsense discipline code for the coming year. . . they may refuse to listen to the administration’s collaborative student-staff philosophy during the first assembly when the new year actually begins.

   Moreover, their negatively-anchored bias may continue such that discipline offenses significantly increase during the first month of school, causing the administration to respond more punitively. . . thereby “validating” the students’ original inaccurate perceptions.

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 3. The Confirmation Bias

   A Confirmation Bias occurs when we already have a negative or inaccurate attitude or belief about something or someone, and we selectively choose or weigh the available subsequent information in ways that will only confirm our bias. In other words, people with a Confirmation Bias filter or believe the information that reinforces what they already think or believe, while missing or ignoring the information that invalidates these same thoughts or beliefs.

   For example, if a part of a Reading or Intervention Selection Committee has a pre-conceived bias toward a specific curriculum or approach, they will only select the research or choose the favored-author-interview responses that confirm their favored curriculum or approach, even as they highlight the “weak” research and “unimpressive” competing-author-responses associated with their unfavored approach(es).

   If an unpopular and out-spoken—but usually correct and instructionally effective—staff member is going up for tenure, and an administrator has been biased by the “colleagues” who want her fired, the administrator might unconsciously give low ratings to this teacher during his Classroom Walk-throughs... thereby confirming the negative bias.

   If student morale, attendance, engagement, and participation in a high school is low because the disengaged students—who make up the majority of the student body—legitimately see the administration and faculty favoring the smart, successful, and economically-advantaged students—who are in the minority. . . then (a) the administration and faculty’s bias would be confirmed if they interviewed only the favored students—in an attempt to change the climate of the school—who then blamed the disengaged students for the low morale; and (b) the disengaged students’ bias—for example, that the administration and faculty would never listen to them anyways—would be confirmed when they abdicated and did not ask them why they were not being interviewed and involved.

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 4. The False Consensus Effect

   A False Consensus Effect occurs when people overestimate how much others agree with their values, beliefs, attitudes, interpretations, and behaviors.

   For example, in a faculty meeting about curriculum, instruction, policy, and/or practice, a building principal may assume that her beliefs regarding what should occur will be so accepted that she short-circuits the discussion and prematurely puts “the solution” on the floor. When a large number of staff reject the solution and accuse the principal of “not listening” and “railroading” her position, the principal realizes the impact of the False Consensus Effect not only to the discussion and decision, but also to distrust that his faculty now have in her.

   In our politically-divided world, many school staff have learned that their assumptions as to how many colleagues agree with their professional and personal perspectives (e.g., on teaching certain historical or current event topics, on gender-neutral or trans-inclusive restrooms or pronouns) have not been as large as they thought.

   It is always interesting—for example, in a culturally-diverse school—to see how students over-estimate the number of peers that agree with them when discussing historically or socially complex events or situations.

   This is an early life lesson for students, and a leadership role for teachers: To help student avoid the False Consensus Effect “trap” by learning how to ask questions that elicit peers’ beliefs and attitudes before they make broad and definitive statements that are naïve, inadvertently offensive, and inconsistent with a broader reality that they are unaware of.

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 5. The Optimism Bias

   The Optimism Bias occurs when we overestimate the likelihood that “everything will turn out OK,” and underestimate the potential of negative events, outcomes, or interactions.

   This bias has no place in strategic planning—one reason why a SWOT analysis includes evaluations of Weaknesses and Threats, and it sometimes results in people not fully doing their research and “due diligence” which results in them not anticipating or planning for unexpected or even catastrophic events.

   The Optimism Bias was in full view during the early days of school shootings and student suicides when unprepared districts said, “It can’t happen here.”

   This Bias is evident when schools and staff believe that “everything will be OK” and that they will not be held accountable for the ineffective instruction that results in low grades and state proficiency scores, and not-ready-for-college-or-career student graduates.

   And this Bias is evident, conversely, when students have been “pumped up” with inflated grades and inappropriately optimistic feedback such that they believe that they are ready for the next test, academic school year, or post-graduation phase of their lives.

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 6. The Misinformation Effect

   The Misinformation Effect is the tendency to alter your recollection of what actually occurred during a specific event due to what occurred after it was over.

   This especially occurs when the event occurs under conditions of emotionality. . . resulting in experiential gaps that you feel “need to be filled in.” Or they occur when questions about the event are asked a certain way, or you talk with someone who had a different perspective of the same event.

   The Misinformation Effect occurs when different people have a different perspective of a school crisis, a student fight, or a playground accident. . . even though they were all there at the same time. As one person shares their observations, the others listening may modify what they were “sure” occurred to conform to the first person’s account.

   The Misinformation Effect occurs when an evaluation team observes a teacher during a classroom walk-through. Once again, as different team members later share their observations, others on the team may “second guess” their “discrepant” observations and modify them accordingly.

   Finally, the Misinformation Effect may occur when an accident occurs on a kindergarten playground, and the students are interviewed later to determine what happened. If an administrator asks, “Did Michael get pushed off the slide?”. . . the students might agree even though they did not see anyone do this.

   If the administrator asks, “Did you see with your eyes Michael get pushed off the slide?”. . . the students might say, “No, we only saw him on the ground after he fell.”

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 7. The Hindsight Bias

   The Hindsight Bias occurs when, after an event—even a random event—has concluded, people act as if the event was predestined or predictable and say “I knew that was going to happen.”

   This occurs when a school, administrator, or staff member is unsuccessful, and others conclude, “We knew s/he wasn’t going to work out.”

   It occurs when students are unsuccessful and/or they later drop-out, and staff conclude, “We knew he would be just like his older brother.”

   And it occurs when students are randomly assigned to a group for a lab or project, do poorly on the assignment, and later think, “I knew this group was not going to be able to work together and succeed.”

_ _ _ _ _

Bias 8. The Self-Serving Bias

   The Self-Serving Bias is a tendency to take credit (e.g., for being prepared, working hard, being flexible—when this is not true) when good things happen, and to externalize the blame (e.g., to students, technology, “bad luck,” or the lack of administrative support) when bad things occur.

   When underserved credit is taken, individuals do not learn what is really needed to be successful in the future, and—if the success was due to a group and not the individual taking credit—the group may feel disrespected and marginalized.

   When the responsibility for a poor outcome is externalized, individuals do not self-evaluate and change what needs to be changed, and they carry an inappropriate belief that others around them are incompetent or cannot be depended on.

   For example, when an unexpected percentage of students pass their State Proficiency Tests in a school. . . despite the inept leadership of the administration and the ineffective instruction of the teachers, both administrators and teachers may take the “credit,” and not change or improve their instructional approaches for the next year.

   When a less capable and motivated group of students do not pass their State Proficiency Tests the next year, the administrators and teachers might then “blame” these students. . . after all, “they got the same support and instruction as last year’s group.”

   When half of the students in a project-based learning group work competently on the project, and the other half “skate through,” there are times when the latter group takes (self-serving bias) credit for the good grade that was given to the entire group.

   When these latter students later fail the individually-administered test on the project’s content, these students may externalize the blame for the bad grade—ignoring the fact that their earlier poor participation and effort was the root cause.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Preventing or Overcoming Cognitive Biases

   There is no one “way” to prevent or overcome one or more cognitive biases.

   Sometimes they can be prevented or overcome by using objective implementation success and outcome criteria and protocols (or rubrics)—tools that help us to more judiciously self-pace, self-monitor, self-evaluate, self-correct, and—accurately—self-reinforce.

   Sometimes cognitive biases are prevented or overcome when we establish “courageous” collegial climates and group norms and expectations that allow them to be modified through positive and constructive feedback, critique, and recommendations for continuous improvement.

   Sometimes these group norms include giving colleagues permission to approach others to share their observations regarding possible implicit or unconscious biases or blind spots.

_ _ _ _ _

   None of this—especially the latter—is easy. Indeed, maintaining professional (and personal) objectivity, integrity, accountability, and productivity is hard work.

   But it is the responsible and necessary work—especially in education—that we must do on behalf of our students, parents, and communities.

   When asked how to recognize and overcome cognitive biases, Dr. Kia-Rai Prewitt—writing for the Cleveland Clinic—suggested:

Accept that we all have cognitive biases. Start by acknowledging that we all have biases. If you don’t acknowledge it or even see it as an issue, then you probably won’t be open to understanding someone else’s perspective or thinking about things differently.

 

Have experiences with a variety of people. Intentionally seek out conversations or opportunities to interact with people who have diverse backgrounds, ideas and ways of thinking can help. It’s important to hear how others might be approaching a situation.

 

Allow yourself cognitive flexibility. What does that mean? You want to consider the context before you interpret a situation or make a judgment about something. For example, someone who only sees things as black and white may not be considering other important information. Whereas, someone who has cognitive flexibility is able to see the gray area—that some things aren’t right or wrong, or this way or that way.

 

(When) help(ing) others identify and work on their own cognitive biases, tread carefully.

 

One of the things I suggest is to know your audience. Are they open to having a conversation? And even if they’re not, you can still use assertive communication. Sometimes, it’s not even saying that you agree. By just saying, ‘I understand’ or ‘I hear you’, you can help facilitate conversations with people who you may not agree with.

 

Overall, cognitive biases affect how you make decisions and can lead to difficulties in your career and personal life. But with practice, you can get better at recognizing when you may have a cognitive bias and how to change your perception of a situation. And, again, it’s important to recognize and accept that we all use cognitive bias.

 

Our brain is naturally wired to make sense of information. With all the information that is thrown at us at one time, we can only focus on certain things. And we use cognitive bias to help us process all that information. Unfortunately, sometimes, when we’re biased, we may be making an error in how we process that information.

_ _ _ _ _

   Expanding on Dr. Prewitt’s ideas, Host Larry Jacob interviewed me last week (March 25, 2024) as we discussed:

“How Cognitive Biases Affect Student Perceptions and Educator Decisions”

   Below is our 33-minute discussion:

 

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   This Blog discussed how cognitive biases affect educators’ positive and negative perceptions of students, staff, and systems, and how they similarly impact judgments at the individual, grade, and school levels. We especially focused on how to understand, prevent, or address the implicit or unconscious biases or explicit and conscious biases that interfere with or undermine productive interactions and objective decision-making.

   Initially, we defined “Cognitive Bias,” and discussed their overlap with stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination. We then described and provided examples for eight (out of the more than 180 different biases identified by behavioral scientists) of the most common cognitive biases in education, discussing how they functionally impact teachers, related services professionals, administrators, and students.

   The eight cognitive biases were organized along a continuum from those that impact decisions before we make them, as we make them, and after we make them.

   Cognitive Biases Before We Make a Decision:

·       The Halo Effect

·       The Anchoring Bias

   Cognitive Biases As We Make a Decision:

·       The Confirmation Bias

·       The False Consensus Effect

·       The Optimism Bias

      Cognitive Biases After We Make a Decision:

·       The Misinformation Bias

·       The Hindsight Bias

·       The Self-Serving Bias

   The Blog concluded by making a recent 33-minute Education Talk Radio interview—with Dr. Howie Knoff and Host Larry Jacobs—available to provide additional context and information available in this important area.

_ _ _ _

A New Funding Opportunity

   When districts or schools are interested in implementing my work—especially when funding is dwindling or short, I often partner with them and help them write (often, five-year) federal grants from the U.S. Department of Education.

   To this end:

   A new $4 million grant program is coming up in a few months that focuses on moderate to large school districts with at least 25 elementary schools.

   As we can submit multiple grants from different districts, if you are interested in discussing this grant and a partnership with me, call (813-495-3318) or drop me an e-mail as soon as possible (howieknoff1@projectachieve.info).

   A separate five-year $4 million grant program will likely be announced a year from now. This program is open to districts of all sizes.

   If you are interested, once again, it is not too early to talk.

   BOTH grant programs focus on (a) school safety, climate, and discipline; (b) classroom relationships, behavior management, and engagement; and (c) teaching students interpersonal, conflict prevention and resolution, social problem-solving, and emotional awareness, control, communication, and coping skills and interactions.

   If we partner, I will write the bulk of the Grant proposal (at no cost), and guide you through its submission.

   Beyond these grants, if you are interested in my work for your school or educational setting, I am happy to provide a free consultation for you and your team to discuss needs, current status, goals, and possible approaches.

   Call me or drop me an e-mail, and let’s get started.

Best,

Howie

[CLICK HERE to read this Blog on the Project ACHIEVE Webpage]