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]

What Boston’s Battle for Integration, Anne Frank, and the Little Rock Nine Can Teach a Divided Country

A Personal Reflection on Why Black Lives, History, and Education Matter

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

 

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   My Facebook feed reminded me today that, last year at this time, I was attending my 50th High School reunion.

   While I do not feel one year wiser, I have been reflecting this summer on the Supreme Court’s June 29th decision (Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard University) to strike down affirmative action-based college admission decisions. Declaring that race cannot be a factor in these decisions, the Court has now forced colleges and universities nationwide to find different ways to select a diverse, multi-racial and multi-cultural matriculating class each year.

   Critically, if you remember or research the Supreme Court’s 1978 Regents of the University of California v. Bakke decision—ruling that universities’ affirmative action admission decisions were constitutional, but their racial quotas were not—you will recognize that (a) this new Harvard University case has completed what Bakke started; and (b) universities did successfully find new ways to adapt to the decision and recruit diverse entering classes.

   And while the institutions that want a diverse study body—in 2024 and beyond—will again adapt and succeed, the Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard University decision is yet another historical example of the centuries-long implicit and explicit bias, prejudice, and legal oppression experienced by Black students and the Black community.

   Indeed, as Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court’s first Latina, wrote in her dissent, (This decision) “rolls back decades of precedent and momentous progress.”

   But today, I want to pass on an analysis of how the recent Supreme Court decision occurred, and reflect on a more personal journey of Black unawareness to a greater (but, still incomplete) beginning level of awareness.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

We are What We Live

   “I did not get it. And, I’m sorry.”

_ _ _ _ _

   We all necessarily live in an attention deficit world and state of awareness.

   And our attitudes, beliefs, and expectations are all influenced by our lived and “unlived” experiences, and positive and negative biases.

   There are two kinds of unlived experiences. First are those that are experienced by others, but not by us. If one person lives their entire life in New York City, and another in Unalakleet, Alaska, they each live common, yet unique, experiences that the other never has or would understand.

   The second unlived experiences are those that are present in our lives, but that we consciously or subconsciously miss or choose to ignore.

   In today's world with hundreds of satellite TV channels, millions of pages of internet sites, and a constant barrage of news, information, entertainment, and other bytes, we all control our unlived experiences by being “attention deficit.”

   That is, in order to be productive, maintain our sanity, and sustain our ability to “live in the moment,” we have to choose what we attend to—leaving parts of our lives “unlived.”

   But all of us have another dimension of unlived experiences.

   Those are the experiences that are unique to when we “grew up”—the broad historical, social, economic, technological, and other contexts present during our childhood, adolescence, early adulthood, and so on.

   These are the contexts that continually influence us, our communities, our educational system. . . all the way up to who is on our Supreme Court, how individual and coalitions of Judges rule, and what decisions they collectively make.

   And these are the contexts that we must allow today’s preschool through high school students to experience.

   For when these contexts, experiences, and opportunities—for example, through curriculum, instruction, books, and discussion—are controlled, restricted, or denied, these students have lost their potential to be fully educated and prepared to succeed in their worlds.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I am What I’ve Lived

   “I did not get it. And, I’m sorry.”

_ _ _ _ _

   I was born in Boston, Massachusetts, and grew up in the suburbs about 20 miles due west of the city. Our school district was integrated, multi-racial, and multi-cultural, but White students and teachers were clearly in the majority.

   While I was in High School—fifty years ago—the Viet Nam War was escalating, Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy were assassinated, Woodstock and the Antiwar Movement collided, the Civil Rights Movement and racial unrest continued, and the Women’s Rights Movement began.

   At the time, I had a number of Black friends, but I knew nothing of Black history—beyond what was superficially taught in American History. Martin Luther King’s assassination was briefly discussed in class, but not in the broader context of 400 years of African-American denial of rights and oppression, slavery and Dred Scott, lynchings and Jim Crow, segregation and red-lining, and Brown v. The Board of Education and the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a decade later.

   In fact, in my ignorance, I remember wondering why there was a need for the emerging courses in African-American history—even though I never questioned why there were history courses in Ancient and Medieval History, Comparative Religion, and the Depression and World War II.

   And not to excuse my ignorance. . . but when I graduated from High School in 1972, many of us understood the world around us—as discussed above—through our lived and unlived experiences, what we were taught in public school during the week and religious school on the weekend, and what we read on our own. At that time, there were four television stations, a morning and evening newspaper, and a large public library which we used to complete research that was assigned at school.

   Clearly: When I “grew up,” we received a White, Eurocentric education. Culturally understanding my Black friends and their history—from a Black perspective—was not on the “agenda.”

   Even when I went to college, I did not learn about Black history or interact often with my Black peers. While the opportunities were there at my small liberal arts college, we were largely allowed to choose our own courses. . . and Black history was not typically embedded in the science and psychology courses that I took.

   In fact, during my junior year abroad in England, I learned more about British, French, and Italian history and art. . . and the Holocaust. . . than I learned about Black history when I hitchhiked extensively around Europe.

   And so. . . relative to my awareness and understanding of Black history, and its depth, breadth, and importance—even as I graduated from college. . . 

   “I did not get it. And, I’m sorry.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Boston’s Battle for Integration

   Ironically, I went to high school and college during an immensely important time for Black students in my birth-town of Boston.

   According to the Encyclopedia of Boston from the Boston Research Center:

In 1965, the Massachusetts General Court passed the Racial Imbalance Act, outlawing segregation in public schools and defining segregated schools as those with a student body comprised of more than fifty percent of a particular racial group. Though 44 of Boston’s schools fell into this category, Boston School Committee members refused to develop or implement plans to integrate the city’s schools.

 

In response, African-American parents began to organize. They organized protests and boycotts, established “freedom schools” with more inclusive, often Afro-centric curricula, and lobbied for access to better-equipped and better-staffed schools in the suburbs. They established the Metropolitan Council for Educational Opportunity (METCO) in 1966, which enabled African-American students to travel to surrounding suburban schools. African-American parents also partnered with the NAACP to compel the Boston School Committee to integrate the city’s schools, filing a lawsuit, Morgan v. Hennigan, against the committee in 1972 for its ongoing refusal to comply with the state’s Racial Imbalance Act.

 

On June 21, 1974, Judge Wendell Arthur Garrity Jr. found the Committee’s efforts to preserve segregation unconstitutional. To address longstanding segregation, Garrity required the system to desegregate its schools, busing white students to black schools and black students to white schools across the city. Garrity’s decision and his subsequent oversight of the busing plan provoked outrage among many Bostonians. Garrity and his family were subjected to frequent death threats and placed under round-the-clock protection for several years as a result.

 

Critics of the decision also protested that busing would accomplish little other than interracial violence. They argued that moving students from one failing school to another didn’t address the system’s larger failures, pointing to Garrity’s decision to bus students between the poorly performing high schools in South Boston and Roxbury. Though Bostonians often criticized busing on logistical or socioeconomic grounds, their complaints were often motivated by thinly-veiled racism.

 

Protests erupted across the city over the summer of 1974, taking place around City Hall and in the areas of the city most affected by busing. One prominent leader of these anti-busing protests was Louise Day Hicks, chairwoman of the Boston School Committee, former member of the Massachusetts House of Representatives and leader of an anti-busing group called Restore Our Alienated Rights (ROAR). Comprised mainly of women, ROAR staged protests, sit-ins, and prayer sessions, as well as violent protests, arguing that Garrity and the state had usurped the custodial rights of parents. ROAR also worked to intimidate black students, hurling racial epithets at schoolchildren and burning a wooden school bus in effigy. In 1974, ROAR organized a march of thousands on the Massachusetts State House in protest of desegregation.

 

On September 12, 1974, the first day of school, many students stayed home, some in protest, some for safety. Only 13 students from South Boston High School appeared in Roxbury, and only 100 out of the 1300 students from Roxbury assigned to South Boston High School showed up. When black students arrived in South Boston on buses escorted by motorcycle-mounted police officers, protestors met the buses with eggs, bottles, and bricks. The Massachusetts State Police and the Massachusetts National Guard had to be called in to control the area. Throughout the year, violence flared on and beyond school grounds. Bused children were jeered, menaced, and periodically attacked; many students suffered from stress, fear, and illness as a result. All told, 18,000 students were bused into other neighborhoods in the 1974-75 school year. More than 30,000 Boston Public Schools students left to attend private and parochial schools.

   I watched these events from my college perch in Maine and. . .

   “I still did not get it. And, I’m sorry.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Starting to Get It

   I went to Graduate School in 1976 in Syracuse, New York.

   While there, I started to get it.

   But there was no turning point. . . no climactic moment. . . no thunder-and-lightning epiphany.

   It simply started with my practicum work in the inner city schools of Syracuse, and a continuing, horrified recognition of the disparities between rich and poor, Black and White, well-resourced schools and those “on the other side of the city” that were dilapidated and forgotten.

   While my sense of social justice had always been nurtured by my religious and Jewish youth group upbringing, by the Holocaust and my visits to Auschwitz and other Nazi death camps while in college, and by the antisemitism that I periodically experienced. . . this sense now included an urgency to understand the discrepancies that I saw in Syracuse (and soon, in schools across the country).

   And so, in order to be an effective psychologist, educator, professional, and person, I have tried to be a student of Black history and experience from my graduate school days on.

   And part of this includes my advocacy that every student in this country learn about the full depth of Black history as part of their understanding of American history.

   And if some students are uncomfortable confronting the facts of Black history. . . then that is a good thing.

   It is the same good thing that explains why at least 20 states in our country require Holocaust education in their schools.

   It is the same good thing that encouraged 60 House of Representative bipartisan co-sponsors and the House Bipartisan Task Force for Combating Antisemitism to introduce the Holocaust Education and Antisemitism Lessons (HEAL) Act on January 27, 2023.

   This Bill, still going through the early stages of the legislative process, will determine which states and school district require and/or offer Holocaust education, identify the standards and requirements framing this education, and analyze the approaches used by schools to assess what students are learning.

   The Press Release announcing the filing of this Bill stated:

There is mounting evidence that knowledge about the Holocaust is beginning to fade. A 2020 survey measuring Holocaust awareness in the U.S. found that roughly two-thirds of those asked did not know how many Jewish people died. The survey of Americans between 18 and 40 also found that 48% could not name one concentration camp or ghetto.

   Personally, I don’t know anything more emotional than watching scenes from the Holocaust, or anything more troubling than knowing that our President and Congress at the time restricted Jewish immigration and did not immediately respond to documented reports of the death camps.

   Anne Frank was 15 years old when she died in February 1945 in the Bergen-Belson concentration camp in northern Germany. She would have been a high school junior.

   Shouldn’t every high school junior in our country today be taught about her, and how and why she died? Should they not view and discuss video clips like the one below?

   Will they potentially be upset and impacted emotionally? (Yes)

   But is this not the right thing to do?

 

_ _ _ _ _ 

   And, similarly, should not high school juniors not be taught about the full depth of Black history? And should they not view and discuss video clips like the one below?

   Will they potentially be upset and impacted emotionally? (Yes)

   But, once again, is this not the right thing to do?

 

 

   How can 60 Congressional Representatives agree to co-sponsor a Bill on the Holocaust and antisemitism, and not support legislation that allows teachers across the country to teach the full breadth and depth of Black History without restriction?

   “I’m still trying to get it. And, I’m sorry.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A Final Piece in Little Rock, Arkansas

   For 18 years—up until the beginning of this year—I lived in Little Rock, Arkansas. When driving to my Arkansas Department of Education office for 13 years there, or to the airport on a consulting trip for all 18 years, I always passed the exit to Central High School. In fact, on a number of occasions, I attended meetings at Central, a National Historic Site since 1998.

   On September 4, 1957, the first day of school at Central High School in Little Rock, Arkansas and three years after Brown v. the Board of Education, nine Black students—Minnijean Brown, Terrance Roberts, Elizabeth Eckford, Ernest Green, Thelma Mothershed, Melba Patillo, Gloria Ray, Jefferson Thomas, and Carlotta Walls—attempted to enter the previously all-White school.

   This was fully 17 years before the buses of Black students arrived at South Boston High School to begin their (desegregated) school year.

   Now known as the Little Rock Nine, they were met on the stairs leading up to Central High School’s ornate, yet intimidating, front doors by an angry White crowd, and members of the Arkansas National Guard who were deployed by Governor Orval Faubus to prevent them from going into the school.

   Responding to Faubus’ action, Thurgood Marshall—part of a team of NAACP lawyers—won a federal district court injunction to prevent the Governor’s attempt to block the students’ entry. And so, on September 23, 1957, protected by police escorts, the Little Rock Nine entered Central High School through a side entrance and began their classes. Significantly, they were protected by federal troops and the Arkansas National Guard for the remainder of the school year.

   Late last month, on the 66th anniversary of their desegregation of Little Rock’s Central High School, the same Little Rock Nine gathered at a press conference in Little Rock. Criticizing legislation sponsored by new Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders and passed by the Arkansas Legislature in its Spring 2023 session, they decried their State’s—and all States’—legislation restricting what can be taught in public school classrooms.

   Indeed, one of Governor Huckabee Sanders’ first official acts after being sworn in on January was to sign an Executive Order prohibiting indoctrination and critical race theory in the State’s schools (even though there was no evidence that these were present). The new March, 2023 law prohibits the teaching of “divisive concepts” about racism and critical race theory, as well as classroom instruction on gender identity and sexual orientation before the fifth grade.

   Among those who referenced this legislation at the 66th Little Rock Nine anniversary celebration were:

   Robin White, the Superintendent of the Little Rock Central High School National Historic Society:

Each generation calls for agents of change. And in their moment of courage and change, 66 years ago, the Little Rock Nine, ages ranged from 14 to 17, (became those agents). So yesterday, today, and tomorrow, they are our symbol of hope. They—without pause—paved the way for us, and we are the benefactors of their sacrifices.

_ _ _ _ _

   Jermall Wright, the Superintendent of the Little Rock School District:

(It is) hard to imagine that nine brave young people who were just teenagers, just like you, could cause such a seismic shift in education that would impact generations worldwide.

 

Their cause was simple: equitable access to receive a quality education. Sixty-six years later, our charge and our cause remains the same.

_ _ _ _ _

   Little Rock Mayor Frank Scott Jr., who highlighted the sacrifices made by the Little Rock Nine and their families, and then discussed how Black history in education was under attack:

But yet there's still Elizabeth Eckford, who stood at 15, but yet some weeks ago, she stood at the age of 81 to ensure that the Little Rock School District made certain that their history, American history, was still taught to each of you.

 

And that is the type of fight, that is the type of solidarity, that is the type of work ethic that we need to continue to have in the Little Rock School District and the state of Arkansas: not allowing others to revise our history.

_ _ _ _ _

   Melba Pattillo Beals, one of the Little Rock Nine, who told the high school  students in attendance that there were three things the Little Rock Nine wanted when they integrated their school: Voice, Choice and Inclusion.

   She assured the students:

I've got faith in you, baby. You're going to make it, OK? You deserve to be whoever you think you are.

   Beals compared lawmakers' bans on critical race theory with the opposition to integrating Central High School.

You did it once in 1957, and look what you got. We are nine monsters just roaming forth. Have you ever in your life seen such big-mouthed people? So do it again and see what you get out of it, OK?

_ _ _ _ _

   And, finally, Minnijean Brown-Trickey, another of the Little Rock Nine, who expressed her concern that the history of the desegregation crisis isn't more extensively taught in the United States. She noted that, when she visits other parts of the world, the people there know more about this history than most young people in the United States.

   She noted:

It takes a half-page in your history books, if that, but it's really a complex, amazing story about all components of government, about courts, about persistence of the human spirit.

(I) believe the country grapples with a disease called 'profound intentional ignorance.' When we talk about things like that, it is an intent to have an ill-informed population so that demagogues can do whatever they want.

   She said the desegregation crisis hurts both Black and White students, and she encouraged the audience to imagine what a story like theirs did to the city, and to the country. Later, Brown-Trickey said that people need to look beyond Arkansas—that the national effort to restrict curricula is having a chilling effect on education, learning and thinking.

   She warned:

(Young people) are going to get sick of this stuff. They're going to get sick of being told they don't deserve to know. They're going to get tired of being told they're too young to know. They're going to be tired to have somebody decide whether they should feel guilty or not. And they're going to rise up, and I'm waiting for that. I'm helping them in every possible way I can.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   This Blog has asserted that our attitudes, beliefs, and expectations are all influenced by our lived and unlived experiences. . . which often establish and anchor our positive and negative biases.

   While our lived experiences unfold in both planned and unplanned ways across our lifetimes, we discussed two kinds of unlived experiences: (a) those that are experienced by others, but not by us; and (b) those that are present in our lives, but that we consciously or subconsciously miss or choose to ignore.

   But we also noted that many of our experiences (and positive and negative biases) are contextualized by when (i.e., in which decades) we “grew up.” This is because every decade brings different historical, social, economic, technological, and other events to our lives when we were children, adolescents, in early adulthood, and so on.

   Sharing an autobiographical journey, this Blog described how my awareness and understanding of Black history and “being Black in America” has evolved over the years—based not just on who I am and where I’ve lived, but also based on the history I have seen and the people with whom I have interacted.

   Part of this journey (and discussion) juxtaposes the Holocaust with Black history and the Civil Rights Movement (right up to today—2023).

   In the end, this Blog advocates for today’s preschool through high school students—each and every one of them across our country.

   Learning the depth and breadth of Black history should not be an unlived experience for these students as they attend school.

   No one—especially for political purposes—should take away these students’ rights to this information, knowledge, discussion, and understanding.

   Living is made up of thousands of emotional events. And History necessarily involves events that evoke our emotions.

   Students need to experience these events and their emotions as part of their lived experiences, and because we are mandated to educate them in the broadest ways possible.

   This must be our present. . . because these students are our future.

 

_ _ _ _ _

   How have your lived and unlived experiences, and the events during the decades of your life, influenced your journey and current beliefs regarding these issues?

   Will this Blog encourage you to think (and, in some cases, rethink) your beliefs. . . changing them or making them stronger?

Best,

Howie

 

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

Solutions for Selectively Mute Students and Educators

The Long-Term Adverse Educational Effects When Inappropriate Behavior is Ignored

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

Dear Colleagues,

Introduction

   During a recent elementary school consultation, a building-level Multi-Tiered System of Supports (MTSS) Team was beginning a student case study using our data-based problem-solving process.

   The case involved Brittany (a pseudonym), a young girl at the early elementary school level who was repeating a grade and appeared to be selectively mute. When she entered the District in preschool, Brittany qualified for speech services for both articulation and receptive and expressive language. Before preschool, she had a history of middle ear infections, tubes were put into her ears three times, and her speech development at home was quite delayed.

   Brittany talked and verbally interacted with others (including her Speech Pathologist) during her first year in school. . . until approximately March. Around that time, she lost one of her grandparents. . . and then she lost a second grandparent during the next summer. Significantly, Brittany never stopped talking at home after her grandparents died, and her mother reports that “she talks so much at home with no issues.”

   After receiving a video of Brittany reading to her parent at home, Brittany’s current teacher showed her the video, telling her that “your mom wants you to read at school like you do at home.”  That day, Brittany did speak and read aloud a portion of her book. She has now read the whole book to her teacher, and she has started on a second book. 

   Since then, Brittany has spoken more to her teacher. . . when prompted, but not at her own initiative. She will also talk to some peers when prompted, and she even talked to me—a total stranger—when I was in her classroom and asked her name and told her that she had “a pretty voice.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Selectively Mute Children

   Selectively mute children are among the most challenging to work with successfully. In the final analysis, you cannot “force” a student to talk, you can only “motivate” them.

   But the beginning of the process, nonetheless, begins by understanding the student—trying to isolate the “why” before moving

   While some might assume that Brittany stopped talking at school because she lost her grandparents, that did not explain (a) why she continued to talk at home after their passings, or (b) how a family loss would “mysteriously” affect her interactions at school. And yet, this is what happened as I watched the Case Study in the MTSS Team meeting I was observing unfold.

   By way of background, according to Psychology Today’s Diagnostic Dictionary:

Selective mutism is a rare childhood anxiety disorder in which a child experiences a trigger response and is unable to speak in certain situations or to certain people. It is not a form of shyness, though it may be thought of as extreme timidity. Nor is it an intentional refusal to speak, though it may be perceived that way. The child is simply unable to speak. Symptoms and co-existing conditions can vary from individual to individual, as can treatment options.

 

Symptoms. The onset of selective mutism is usually between the ages of 3 and 6. Most children who develop selective mutism also suffer from social anxiety, or social phobia. Temperamentally, they are timid and cautious in new situations, even as young infants. They may experience separation anxiety. Many show physical signs, such as awkward body language, stiffness, and lack of facial expressions. Those who are comfortable in a situation may be mute but have more relaxed physical characteristics. A child with selective mutism may speak in some select situations but not in others, or with select people but not with others.

 

For instance, the child may speak normally at home or with close friends, but not at school or other social settings, where there is the expectation or pressure to communicate. Some children with selective mutism can use nonverbal communication, such as nodding their head or moving their hands, while others may appear frozen. Others may experience so much pressure for their selective mutism that they become mute in all situations, with all people. To be labeled selectively mute, the symptoms must continue for at least a month, not including a child’s first month of school.

 

What are some signs of selective mutism? Children who suffer selective mutism may appear: Shy, socially awkward, anxious, insecure and clingy, embarrassed, rude, indifferent or aloof, stiff or tense, avoids eye contact, remains expressionless, and or motionless. However, with family or other close relationships, the child may be angry and aggressive. Some will use hand gestures to communicate. With the prospect of a social event or even while preparing for school, kids with selective mutism may suffer stomachaches and headaches, or feel nauseous or suffer diarrhea.

 

Causes. Children with selective mutism often have a family history of anxiety disorders. The neurological basis for selective mutism is thought to be a cascade of events in an area of the brain known as the amygdala, which receives danger signals from the environment. The anxiety from a situation perceived as dangerous to the child’s well-being causes a communication shutdown. Children with selective mutism may have a variety of co-existing disorders, such as autism spectrum disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder,  developmental delays, or sensory processing difficulties.

 

Treatment. (When confirmed), (i)t is best to seek behavioral therapy or family therapy as early as possible for a child with selective mutism because the condition may not go away on its own. It is important to the success of therapy that the mental health care provider be a good fit for the child and the family. Treatment typically includes helping the child develop skills to control their anxiety and “unlearn” their dependence on mute behavior. In some cases, treatment may also include antidepressant or anti-anxiety medication in addition to psychotherapy.

   The first issue, as I watched the school’s MTSS Team deliberate, was that they began to develop selective mutism interventions before collecting and analyzing an objective, independent, or clinical data that confirmed that diagnosis.

   While the collection of data was the primary MTSS Team agenda at this meeting, too many MTSS Teams use whatever information is available, “jump” to premature conclusions, develop improper interventions that expend time and resources, make the problem worse or more resistant to change because of this, and end up missing or delaying the right interventions.

   The second issue was that, even if Brittany was correctly diagnosed with selective mutism, a root cause analysis was still needed to isolate the emotional and/or motivational events that triggered her lack of talking at school. . . so that these triggers could be targeted by and integrated into the intervention.

   Given this, the best MTSS Team consultant for Brittany’s case would be an appropriately-trained school or child-clinical psychologist. Moreover, the root cause analysis would likely include social-emotional and behavior rating scales, classroom and other observations, interviews with parents and teachers, and assessments with Brittany herself.

   Until these assessments are completed, the MTSS Team should probably refrain from making definitive diagnostic conclusions, and specific interventions should not be implemented.

   Indeed, while Brittany’s lack of talking in class is concerning (hence, the MTSS referral), she is currently not in psychological crisis. Brittany is attending school, she is staying in her classroom the entire day, and she is eating lunch and going out to recess without any problems. Once again, the wrong intervention at this stage of the game might counterproductively “make the problem worse.”

_ _ _ _ _

   Schools are necessarily complex and multi-layered organizations that too often are conceptualized and run in simplistic and sequential ways.

   Many think: “All we need are good teachers, sound curricula, essential resources, and motivated students, and we’ll be successful.”

   But that’s simply not true.

   It’s not true in business. . . not true in government. . . not true in the non-profit world. . . not true in medicine. . . and not true in education.

   Indeed a good hospital is not simply about the presence of good doctors, nurses, and support staff. A good hospital is also dependent on effective planning, organization, staffing, training, teaming, implementation, and evaluation. . . the processes that make it successful.

   Good schools. . . that maximize all students’ academic and social, emotional, and behavioral learning, mastery, and independence. . . are exactly the same. They need both skilled professionals, as well as sound processes.

   When MTSS Teams use an effective data-based problem-solving process, the Problem Analysis step should always be completed before any clinically-targeted services, supports, strategies, and interventions are determined, linked, and implemented.

   Said a different way: MTSS Teams should not—figuratively—play “intervention roulette” by brainstorming or spit-balling interventions.

   As we have asserted in the past:

“Every time you do an intervention with a child that does not work, you potentially make the child more resistant to the next intervention.”

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Selectively Mute Educators

   In a parallel way to the Case Study above, there are times when I work with “selectively mute educators.”

   While I am sensitive to the dynamics and the desire to protect themselves and their jobs, these are educators who know that something is significantly wrong with, for example, the quality of instruction and/or supports to students. . . in a colleague’s classroom, at their grade level, in their department, at their school, or in their district or educational setting.

   And yet, they remain selectively mute about it.

   Indeed, these educators share their concerns with their closest colleagues, their confidants, and their spouses or significant others.

   But they do not share their concerns with the individuals who are directly or indirectly hurting their students. And they certainly will not share their concerns with those who need to know (including parents), and those (e.g., supervisors or administrators) who have the potential to remediate, eliminate, and improve the situation.

   Instead, these educators often “look the other way,” or assume (hope) that someone else will address the problem.

   This is most frustrating when students’ academic and/or social, emotional, or behavioral learning, progress, and proficiencies are being directly affected or undermined. . . and when these students’ classrooms are negative, unsupportive, demeaning, or toxic.

   It is equally frustrating when specific colleagues’ behavior in group or team meetings damage the climate, communication, and productivity of the group. . . and indirectly impact the quality of instruction.

   All of this is more than heartbreaking. It is unnecessary, unprofessional, disgraceful, and unethical. . . especially when students’ safety, security, physical or emotional well-being, or educational futures are being compromised.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Electively Astute Solutions

   As with our Case Study above, it is important to—a la Covey:

“Seek first to understand; Then to be understood”

   That is, if we see colleagues demonstrating consistent, persistent, or significantly inappropriate professional or personal interactions with students— and we are inclined to be selectively mute—we need to, directly or indirectly, collect the information so that we can understand where they are coming from.

   The “high-hit” reasons for these inappropriate interactions often run along a continuum that includes the Colleague:

·       Being Unaware of what they are doing and/or its impact

·       Not having the Skills to perform or behave appropriately

·       Not having Emotional Control under specific conditions

·       Not caring, or having an underlying reason or motivation for the harmful behavior

·       Experiencing some personal or historical “special situation” in their out-of-school lives that is impacting their interactions at school

   To collect the information needed to differentiate among these possibilities, we need to observe and then approach the colleague-in-question to discuss the issue(s)-at-hand.

   While this is a scary proposition, if we have a good relationship with the Colleague, this is an important step.

   In fact, this direct approach is often better than “doing an end run” and discussing the issue immediately with a supervisor when (a) we do not yet understand the problem from our Colleague’s perspective, and (b) the Supervisor may turn the situation into a “personnel issue” that impairs our relationship with the Colleague (or worse).

   Indeed, if done well, a direct, empathetic, problem-solving discussion with the Colleague may both resolve the issue and strengthen the relationship.

   To do this well, it is recommended that you:

·       Prepare and practice your collegial discussion ahead of time—focusing on your concern for the Colleague and his/her students, what you are observing and its outcomes, and your desire to better understand the situation from the Colleague’s perspective. 

Your preparation and practice should include anticipating your Colleague’s possible positive, defensive, and/or negative reactions, your counter-responses, and how to maintain your emotional control and effectiveness during the actual discussion.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Set up a time and place for your collegial meeting that allows both privacy and enough time for the discussion.

_ _ _ _ _

·       At the beginning of the meeting, identify the purpose and goals for the discussion, emphasizing your desire to better understand the situation, and to be as helpful as you can. 

One goal should be a focus on what you think your Colleague needs to change, improve, and do... rather than what your Colleague needs to stop or discontinue doing.

Here, you might describe times where you have seen the Colleague behave or interact appropriately, suggesting that this same behavior is needed more consistently across time, settings, students, or colleagues.

_ _ _ _ _

·       During the meeting, use a tentative, empathetic, problem-solving tone of voice (think Columbo), while simultaneously communicating that you are not comfortable with the behavior continuing.

_ _ _ _ _

·       Describe the behavior or interactions of concern directly and explicitly, avoiding the tendency of being vague or overly wordy as a way of nervously “talking around the problem.”

_ _ _ _ _

·       Listen carefully to your Colleague’s response, watch his/her posture, and attend to his/her tone of voice and sincerity.

_ _ _ _ _

·       If you feel that your Colleague understands your concerns and is committed to change, you can summarize these elements and thank him/her for understanding the importance of the issue to you and your students.

_ _ _ _ _

·       If your Colleague rejects the concerns or is not committed to change, you can suggest—if the behaviors or interactions warrant this—that the two of you meet with a Supervisor or Administrator for further discussions.

_ _ _ _ _

A Consultation Example

   As an outside consultation, I need to take a different tack when I see staff behavior or interactions that I have experienced, investigated, and validated as significantly unprofessional and potentially harmful to students.

   This tack is often based (a) on my contract with the school, district, or agency, and who I am professionally responsible to; and/or (b) the depth or breadth of the problem at-hand.

   Most often, if specific teachers or a group of teachers are demonstrating harmful behavior or interactions toward students (including where they are withholding services or supports). . . and my contract is with the school. . . I talk with the Building Administrator.

   NOTE that I do not talk with the teachers involved as (a) I do not know that the Administrator—who the teachers are accountable to—wants that to happen; (b) I do not know whether there is a history of similar teacher problems in the past that the Administrator is already addressing; and (c) I cannot predict how the teachers will respond, because I have no history with them.

   In some cases, however, the problem is broad enough that it warrants, for example, a “higher level” discussion.

   I remember a consultation one time in the Mid-West where a school administrator brought me in for a number of days to train her staff on social skills instruction. One day, we began to discuss student behavior in the common areas of the school, and concerns about the “Orange bus” were shared. Apparently, this bus was consistently out of control, and students would walk into school most mornings similarly out of control due to the bus ride in.

   I offered to do “bus training” with the Orange bus, and all of the students who rode that bus were summoned one lunchtime and told to get on the bus where I was to conduct a “social skills lesson.”

   Within minutes, I lost complete control of the kindergarten through Grade 5 students on the bus (fortunately, the bus was only parked in front of the school). At that point, I shut down the lesson, and students were returned to lunch.

   It was only then that I was told that the bus was full (literally and figuratively) with students from two nearby trailer parks, and that the residents of these trailer parks had been feuding for over three generations (think “Hatfield’s and McCoys”).

   I now understood (and experienced) the seriousness of the situation.

   This was validated by the Orange Bus Driver—who told me his ongoing concerns about a potential accident, because his attention was often on students in the rearview mirror, rather than on the cars on the road in front of him.

   And, this was “topped off” by the school’s Administrator who told me that (a) the District’s Transportation Director refused to change the composition of students on the bus, and (b) would not fund or hire a full-time Bus Assistant for the bus.

   Given all of this—even though I was “hired” by the school’s Administrator, I felt that this was a “higher-level” district and community problem that was affecting many students (in their classrooms when agitated Orange bus students came in), and was putting the students actually on the Orange bus at risk (if an accident were to occur).

   Thus, I dropped by the district office and met with the Superintendent—rather than choosing to be selectively mute. In essence, I felt my superintendent meeting was necessary on an professional, ethical, and moral basis.

_ _ _ _ _

   My approach was similar to the one recommended above when a colleague needs to provide feedback to another colleague.

   With one contextual difference given my role as a consultant.

   When I introduced the discussion with the Superintendent, I told him that:

·       I was there to share, from my perspective, important information that I thought he needed to hear.

My intent was not to suggest that the District was doing anything wrong, to tell the District what to do, or to assume that the District did not care about the Orange bus situation.

_ _ _ _ _

·       I then described what I had been told—from a data-based perspective—about the Orange bus, its students, and their impact on the school; and then detailed my experience with these students while trying to conduct my social skills lesson with them that day.

_ _ _ _ _

·       I finally addressed the seriousness of the situation, the potential harm to these students if a bus accident were to occur, and some possible interventions (i.e., putting the students from the two trailer parks on different buses, hiring a full-time Bus Assistant, holding some community meetings—perhaps with representatives from the Mayor’s office and law enforcement—to enlist the help of the parents).

Here, I also reflected on the District’s legal liability if an accident actually occurred, and emphasized the potential that any lawsuit would uncover the District’s knowledge of the seriousness of the Orange bus situation, as well as the District’s neglect in intervening in the situation.

   As recommended above, my discussion with the Superintendent was factual, matter-of-fact, and focused on expressing a legitimate concern—while offering my continued assistance if my further involvement was desired.

   I told the Superintendent that he might not be happy that I—an outsider who he did not know—was giving him this feedback.

   But I also told him that—for me to be professionally responsible as an invited consultant in his District—it would be irresponsible for me to avoid our conversation and be “selectively mute” because he might be angry or upset.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Summary

   Two variations of someone being “selectively mute” were discussed in this piece.

   The first was an actual case study of an elementary student who stopped talking in school around the time that she experienced some significant losses at home. Critically, she never stopped talking at home, and so the MTSS Team discussing her case needed to “get past” the inclination of focusing on the home losses. Instead, they needed to look objectively for the true root causes of the student’s behavior.

   We ended this case study by emphasizing that MTSS Teams need to use an effective data-based problem-solving process where the Problem Analysis step is always completed before any clinically-targeted services, supports, strategies, and interventions are determined, linked, and implemented.

   The second “selective mute” variation discussed involves staff who see colleagues demonstrating consistent, persistent, or significantly inappropriate professional or personal interactions with students— and decide to avoid getting involved, hoping that someone else will take that responsibility.

   These include situations where students’ academic and/or social, emotional, or behavioral learning, progress, and proficiencies are being directly affected or undermined. . . and/or when these students’ classrooms are negative, unsupportive, demeaning, or toxic.

   Here, we encourage staff (and provide specific steps and strategies) to “step up to the plate” and share their concerns with the individuals who are directly or indirectly hurting their students.

   We extended this discussion by sharing a situation where, as an outside consultant, the consultant needed to have a “courageous conversation” with a Superintendent about a critical student safety issue... rather than be selectively mute.

   All of this reinforces the importance of professional, ethical, and personal integrity, and of protecting our students. . . whether from unsound assessment practices that result in faulty intervention recommendations, or from inappropriate staff behaviors that undermine student learning and success, and are potentially harmful and damaging.

_ _ _ _ _

   As always, I appreciate everyone who reads this bi-monthly Blog and thinks about the issues or recommendations that we share.

   As we continue to focus on our students’ progress and needed accomplishments, know that there are many Project ACHIEVE resources to help you (see our Website Store: www.projectachieve.info/store), and that I am always available for a free one-hour consultation conference call to help you to move “to the next level of excellence” from a student, staff, school, or organizational perspective.

   Please feel free to reach out if you would like to begin this process with me.

Best,

Howie

 

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