As I watch my little boy grow, I start to look at the first steps he is going to go through. Smiling, laughing, listening, understanding, talking, crawling, standing, walking, running... He will try all of these things until he masters them. When he will be learning to crawl, how many times will he try and hold himself up, push himself to hold up? When he is learning to stand, how many times will he fall? When he is walking and taking that first step, 3 steps, 10 steps until he is finally walking? What is it in a little kid that allows them to fail and fail and fail again until they are successful. There we are encouraging him or her non stop. We are there counting the steps, measuring the distance or hovering around them and clearing a path. Later on, when kids do poorly there are parents who are quick to criticize the letter grades, tests of essays.
When does this change? When do kids start hesitating, or even worse stop trying? When do we stop being a cheerleader? What is that we do as parents or society that breaks the spirit to fail and make failing not an option, or looked at poorly? Failure is a big part of learning, it is about testing out ideas, ways of doing things and then doing it differently. There is a reason why there are rough sketches, rough drafts and practices. There are reasons why there are repetitive drills, exercises and edited comments.
At what age do children fear making a mistake? where does that fear come from? Is there something that parents do to stymy that desire to overcome mistakes, or is it sometthing that we do that doesn't help them overcome the fear of failure? Is it society's mockery of failure that is at the heart of it?
Every single infant in the world will fail and fail and fail and never give up and so many adults quit or don't try. Why?
Wednesday, January 1, 2014
Monday, October 28, 2013
Does Mr., Mrs. or Ms. make that big a difference?
I have had some interesting conversations as an educator with parents, neighbours, colleagues and others about "Kids these days". It is funny how that phrase has been around for years and I sometimes wonder if you can draw that expression from the 3rd generation of cavemen when the little cavechildren were not picking up wood when they were 2 but their parents waited until they were 3 and the grandcaveparents thought the caveparents were spoiling the cavechildren. Many are convinced that this upcoming generation is going to face some huge challenges in the "Real World". Again, this point is interesting because I have heard this since the mid-nineties when I started my path to go into education.
They argue that yes, that there are still a bunch of outstanding and giving kids, but that there seems to be a greater number of children who are too much in control and too anti-authority. They argue that parents are too busy trying to be their child's friend rather than their parents and treating them like little adults rather than little children. They feel that parents are sharing too much information with their children, giving them information that they are too young to absorb and understand. Jesse Miller from Mediated Reality and Gordon Neufeld both talk about the parents needing to be parents and not friends in some of their respective presentations.
One person linked it to the fact that many adults do not want to be addressed as Mr., Mrs. or Ms but rather by their first name, because Mr., Mrs or Ms. makes them feel old, and that those titles belong to their parents. The person in question had suggested by not going by title that it informally removed the adult-child relationship and created a sense of false equality. When I was a child, parents were always introduced as Mr. or Mrs. and never by their first name. The only adults that we ever called by first name were Aunts and Uncles, and we always included the Aunt or Uncle as a part of their name. Is that division of title important for a healthy adult-child relationship, or is it symptomatic of a blurred line between parent-child and friends relationship?
It is an interesting question and point for debate. Has that line become blurred and do titles make a difference?
They argue that yes, that there are still a bunch of outstanding and giving kids, but that there seems to be a greater number of children who are too much in control and too anti-authority. They argue that parents are too busy trying to be their child's friend rather than their parents and treating them like little adults rather than little children. They feel that parents are sharing too much information with their children, giving them information that they are too young to absorb and understand. Jesse Miller from Mediated Reality and Gordon Neufeld both talk about the parents needing to be parents and not friends in some of their respective presentations.
One person linked it to the fact that many adults do not want to be addressed as Mr., Mrs. or Ms but rather by their first name, because Mr., Mrs or Ms. makes them feel old, and that those titles belong to their parents. The person in question had suggested by not going by title that it informally removed the adult-child relationship and created a sense of false equality. When I was a child, parents were always introduced as Mr. or Mrs. and never by their first name. The only adults that we ever called by first name were Aunts and Uncles, and we always included the Aunt or Uncle as a part of their name. Is that division of title important for a healthy adult-child relationship, or is it symptomatic of a blurred line between parent-child and friends relationship?
It is an interesting question and point for debate. Has that line become blurred and do titles make a difference?
Wednesday, October 23, 2013
Identity Day Fair - building a school community and a school culture
When children have attended the same school for their whole K-5 experience, so many teachers know the kids. They have had them in their classroom, seen them in platooning situations, done buddy classes, collaborative class projects and so on. As we are all missing that experience we needed to find a way to start that process happening. Last Spring, as we began planning the upcoming year, we wanted to find a way to help connect the kids to each other as well as with a few significant adults. As our school is one that is becoming more diverse we thought about doing something around multiculturalism and celebrating that diversity, but we decided that as friendships and getting to know each other was our number one priority, we needed to find a way to celebrate uniqueness and similarities all in one go. As we continued this conversation I began to think about the Identity Day Fairs that I read about from posts by @gcouros and @ChrisWejr. This fair would accomplish celebrating uniqueness, diversity and similarity all in one go.
The morning before recess was spent setting everything up and then between recess and lunch the students had a chance to visit every single class and look at the different projects. For the afternoon, our community was invited to come and be a part of celebrating 370 students unique amazingness. There was such a warm and positive vibe that came from the school. All of the students were engaged, the staff was enthoused as well as the parents, grand-parents, siblings, aunts and uncles and everyone else that came out. It was such a fantastic way to celebrate community. By bringing in so many parents it was also their first chance to meet all the new parents in the school, meet the new friend that their child has come home talking about and come in and experience a positive school culture building project.We are not certain that we will be doing an Identity Day Fair every year, but the wheels are definitely turning as to how to do another community project. This was a huge success!
Wednesday, August 14, 2013
Predators
Which predators do we need to teach our children to be wary of, the ones outside and around us or the ones who are online predators. When I was child we were allowed to go to the park unsupervised, walk to school as 5 year olds and just go out with our friends riding our bikes. We were taught to ask strangers for help if we were lost. I remember biking with my brother and running over an underground wasp nest and without worries or concerns knocking on a nearby stranger's door asking for help. We seemed to be thinking of ourselves as a large community.
It seemed like everybody on the block knew each other and trusted each other and then Clifford Olson happened in 1980/81. He shook our world to the core and parents suddenly overnight changed the open boundaries that were once given and suddenly our outdoor world became a little more confined. The trust in the community seemed to have dissapated overnight.
10 years later the abduction of Michael Dunahee happened and parents became terrified to let kids out of their sight and that seemed to have forever changed the freedom that parents were willing to let their children have. Gone were the days of randomly heading out the door and promising to be back by certain times or waiting to hear your mother holler your name and that it was time to come home. Once that happened children began to be limited to the confines of their yards and their bedrooms, it was also around this time that video games began to take off and become main stream in homes. Stranger Danger became a common phrase in schools and in homes. Don't trust strangers became the new expectations of children.
Video games seem to have almost answered parents questions, how to keep children busy and safe at the same time? Shortly thereafter the internet began to shape our new world and parents needed to start worrying about online predators. Children were making friends with random strangers, ones that they had never met, seen and had no idea who or what they were. The kids were "befriending" strangers, when did this become OK? Why was it OK for them to befriend online strangers but don't you dare talk to random people on the street. Children were befriending adults pretending to be kids, boys and girls chatting with men pretending to be girls.
Anonymity became the new identity. We became a community of strangers where it has become acceptable to chat with people that we have not met, who were separated by at least 2 degrees of separation. We were friending friends of friends without knowing whether or not our friends actually knew them or had befriended a random stranger. Suddenly strangers were being given information about smaller communities and tremendous amounts of personal detail. We still seem to be teaching not to trust thy neighbour but are failing in doing so online. It almost seems as though by protecting our children from outdoor predators we have opened a Pandora's Box for online predators.
When I am talking with parents at my school they talk about meeting their child's friends' parents before they are allowed to go over and play. Parents who register at a new school after their children have already done a few grades at a previous school sometimes discuss how hard it is to get to know the parents of the other kids in the classes because many tight knit groups are formed amongst the parents in kindergarten and they are reluctant to allow their children to go and play with the new kid because they don't know the parents. Why is so much care put into this world but not the virtual world? Is the problem become too complex? too convoluted?
There was a simple strategy in place when it came to protecting kids from outside predators, which was don't talk to strangers. While Stanger Danger had its detractors at least there was a firm strategy in place. Why is it that we are not able to come up with one for online predators? There is no simple strategy that works in today's world. Parents can be screenless at home and not have a computer, but then there child would probably just go to a friend's house and use it there. There are other families that may turn off the wireless router at night, but the problem is that sometimes neighbours have unlocked WiFi or the child has their access information and have unlimited access to WiFi. Some may think that by giving them only an iPod vs iPhone that they may be limiting their access to the web as well but there are so many establishments that now offer free WiFi that doesn't work anymore and many of the chat apps now can be used like phones, sharing info and so on.
The funny thing is the solution at the heart of the matter is quite simple. We need to find ways to help our children establish their own real friendships again versus virtual ones, find common activities that take them away from the computer, establish strong lines of communication between parent and child that is built on trust and openness. Parents also need to be parents and not friends. There must be ground rules in place such as where they can access the technology, when they can do it, being screenless at night, sharing with their parent what they have posted and loss of the devices when they have been misused. Simple basic groundrules will go a long way to limiting the possibility of stranger danger on the internet.
If we try and go bigger there are too many other questions that would need to be addressed such as:
How would we define online predators in terms of stranger danger?
What are the reasons for the adults failing to address this?
Why are children failing to report this?
It seemed like everybody on the block knew each other and trusted each other and then Clifford Olson happened in 1980/81. He shook our world to the core and parents suddenly overnight changed the open boundaries that were once given and suddenly our outdoor world became a little more confined. The trust in the community seemed to have dissapated overnight.
10 years later the abduction of Michael Dunahee happened and parents became terrified to let kids out of their sight and that seemed to have forever changed the freedom that parents were willing to let their children have. Gone were the days of randomly heading out the door and promising to be back by certain times or waiting to hear your mother holler your name and that it was time to come home. Once that happened children began to be limited to the confines of their yards and their bedrooms, it was also around this time that video games began to take off and become main stream in homes. Stranger Danger became a common phrase in schools and in homes. Don't trust strangers became the new expectations of children.
Video games seem to have almost answered parents questions, how to keep children busy and safe at the same time? Shortly thereafter the internet began to shape our new world and parents needed to start worrying about online predators. Children were making friends with random strangers, ones that they had never met, seen and had no idea who or what they were. The kids were "befriending" strangers, when did this become OK? Why was it OK for them to befriend online strangers but don't you dare talk to random people on the street. Children were befriending adults pretending to be kids, boys and girls chatting with men pretending to be girls.
Anonymity became the new identity. We became a community of strangers where it has become acceptable to chat with people that we have not met, who were separated by at least 2 degrees of separation. We were friending friends of friends without knowing whether or not our friends actually knew them or had befriended a random stranger. Suddenly strangers were being given information about smaller communities and tremendous amounts of personal detail. We still seem to be teaching not to trust thy neighbour but are failing in doing so online. It almost seems as though by protecting our children from outdoor predators we have opened a Pandora's Box for online predators.
When I am talking with parents at my school they talk about meeting their child's friends' parents before they are allowed to go over and play. Parents who register at a new school after their children have already done a few grades at a previous school sometimes discuss how hard it is to get to know the parents of the other kids in the classes because many tight knit groups are formed amongst the parents in kindergarten and they are reluctant to allow their children to go and play with the new kid because they don't know the parents. Why is so much care put into this world but not the virtual world? Is the problem become too complex? too convoluted?
There was a simple strategy in place when it came to protecting kids from outside predators, which was don't talk to strangers. While Stanger Danger had its detractors at least there was a firm strategy in place. Why is it that we are not able to come up with one for online predators? There is no simple strategy that works in today's world. Parents can be screenless at home and not have a computer, but then there child would probably just go to a friend's house and use it there. There are other families that may turn off the wireless router at night, but the problem is that sometimes neighbours have unlocked WiFi or the child has their access information and have unlimited access to WiFi. Some may think that by giving them only an iPod vs iPhone that they may be limiting their access to the web as well but there are so many establishments that now offer free WiFi that doesn't work anymore and many of the chat apps now can be used like phones, sharing info and so on.
The funny thing is the solution at the heart of the matter is quite simple. We need to find ways to help our children establish their own real friendships again versus virtual ones, find common activities that take them away from the computer, establish strong lines of communication between parent and child that is built on trust and openness. Parents also need to be parents and not friends. There must be ground rules in place such as where they can access the technology, when they can do it, being screenless at night, sharing with their parent what they have posted and loss of the devices when they have been misused. Simple basic groundrules will go a long way to limiting the possibility of stranger danger on the internet.
If we try and go bigger there are too many other questions that would need to be addressed such as:
How would we define online predators in terms of stranger danger?
- Sexual predators looking to lure children away from their homes?
- Predators looking to have children expose themselves for their own gratification or for blackmailing?
- Anonymous trolls who post racist, cruel comments and target children's social/emotional well being
- Anonymous trolls who find compromising pictures/information and decide to share it for the purpose of humiliation.
- People who use the internet to make comments and jokes that they would never dare to in person?
- socially detached individuals who cannot see the harm they are causing or simply who don't care?
What are the reasons for the adults failing to address this?
- Are parents afraid of tackling technology?
- Are parents unaware of what their children are doing with the technology?
- Are we failing to teach students the skills they need to be safer at school?
- Are children hiding their virtual friends in the same way we hid friendships from parents in the past that we knew they could not approve?
- Is there a sense that nothing will happen?
- Is technology changing so quickly that we always seem to be a step behind the kids?
- Have we buried our heads so deep in the sand that we are scared to take it out and acknowledge the world that is out there?
Why are children failing to report this?
- they don't know the trouble they are in until it is too late?
- the information age is too fast to be able to contain the problem
- the social networks are too large and too vast?
- they feel as though nothing can be done about it?
- the definition of what a friend is has been transformed or has become blurred?
- the number of strangers who follow you is now seen as a status symbol?
Monday, February 4, 2013
The Age of Misinformation
A simple click and that contest on facebook has been shared. Another click and that amber alert somewhere in another state or province has been shared. With all of the information available in a few clicks and seconds away we still seem to propogate a whole bunch of junk. Bogus contests, fake reports on deaths of famous people (a la Bill Cosby for one), fabricated amber alerts, speeches that were never made and so on. Why are we so willing to click and forward without even looking if it is real?
I know when the reports of Bill Cosby dying came about I took the time to look up more information, but I cannot remember if it was to see if it was real or to see what happened. This being said, there was an amber alert, supposedly out of Quebec, that came my way and I immediately forwarded it without thinking. A friend of mine on Facebook shared a link with me showing that this was a hoax, and one that had resurfaced on several occasions. Another one was a piece that was supposedly written by Ben Stein about the White House use of the Word Christmas Trees. I liked what was written but it was not the author it was reported to be. I still shared it without checking.
The ability to start and share rumours, make up stories, share false information or hatred in this day and age is shocking. There is more and more a pressing need to teach not only our students, but also the general population about needing to filter the information being shared. There is a tremendous need to change our mindset and not assume that because it is on Facebook or Twitter that is must be real. Deaths of celebrities and amber alerts are usually top news items in google, which are easily verfied. Contests by Disney and Costco are easily checked on their websites. Why don't we do it? Are we still stuck in the thought process that if it is written then it must be true? How do we break ourselved out of this mentality? Is it pure laziness, or based on false assumptions? How do we stop sharing junk, lies and misinformation? It has to become second nature to question all information and to cross reference it before we reference it. If there was ever a day and an age to be mindful about what information we are distributing, it is now.
If only those fake contests and stories werent so appealling!
I know when the reports of Bill Cosby dying came about I took the time to look up more information, but I cannot remember if it was to see if it was real or to see what happened. This being said, there was an amber alert, supposedly out of Quebec, that came my way and I immediately forwarded it without thinking. A friend of mine on Facebook shared a link with me showing that this was a hoax, and one that had resurfaced on several occasions. Another one was a piece that was supposedly written by Ben Stein about the White House use of the Word Christmas Trees. I liked what was written but it was not the author it was reported to be. I still shared it without checking.
The ability to start and share rumours, make up stories, share false information or hatred in this day and age is shocking. There is more and more a pressing need to teach not only our students, but also the general population about needing to filter the information being shared. There is a tremendous need to change our mindset and not assume that because it is on Facebook or Twitter that is must be real. Deaths of celebrities and amber alerts are usually top news items in google, which are easily verfied. Contests by Disney and Costco are easily checked on their websites. Why don't we do it? Are we still stuck in the thought process that if it is written then it must be true? How do we break ourselved out of this mentality? Is it pure laziness, or based on false assumptions? How do we stop sharing junk, lies and misinformation? It has to become second nature to question all information and to cross reference it before we reference it. If there was ever a day and an age to be mindful about what information we are distributing, it is now.
If only those fake contests and stories werent so appealling!
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Tears are not enough, what happens after a tragedy?
I have been thinking and wondering about all the conversations that I have been involved in, listened to, seen on the internet and read on Twitter about the tragic loss of Amanda Todd. There is a lot to think about, especially based on the publicity, the presence in social media and the reporting in all the media. The ones that have struck me the most have been under the #RIPAmanda hashtag on twitter. I have seen so many people sharing the story, saying how it reduced them to tears and being emotional about how the story impacted them. This has stirred some fear in me and a question, what happens when the tears stop flowing?
As I started to think about a "What next?" question, the Northern Lights song "Tears Are Not Enough" popped into my head and it struck a chord. Crying over something but not doing anything about it unfortunately accomplishes very little. What are you going to do differently? How are you going to act differently? How are you going to treat people differently? If we do not learn as a society, and more importantly as individuals from this, then unfortunately we risk to have it continue.
We must become the person that doesn't add to the mess. It is time to do something about the tears that have been shed, the bad memories that have come back, the thoughts that we could have done something or just the feeling of hopelessness. There must be a phoenix to rise from these ashes. There will be programs brought in, speakers hired, panels set up and other ambitious goals will come out of these conversations. There are all important steps to take, but not everyone is able to do something on a big stage. In my opinion it starts much smaller. Every person who has been touched by this story needs to do something small.
There is a small group of middle school students who have approached their principal, with request for anonymity, with a goal of doing random acts of kindness for students that they know are struggling. There are high school students who are making an extra effort to spend some time at middle schools doing after school sessions specifically targeting at risk students. Everyone can do something. It means doing something extra, doing something different. It means talking to your friends who are making one person the butt of their jokes. It means cutting out the cutting comments. It means not losing it on the poor telephone service operator who in all likelihood had nothing to do with your cable not working. It means not making a rude comment when some poor person is digging through their wallet or purse trying to find the money to pay for the groceries and you are being inconvenienced by a few minutes. It means taking the time to listen to that family member who can be a drag to listen to but that you know really needs someone to listen to them. It means take a few minutes of your time to make someone's day a little better, not worse.
Tears are not enough for this tragedy. There must be a significant shift in behaviour. The phoenix that must rise is how we respond to what has happened by altering our actions, our attitude our treatment of others and the respect we show ourselves, others around us and the environment we live in. Let's take a memory of a tragedy and do something about it to have some positive light come from this. It would be great to move from #RIPAmanda to #InMemoryOfAmanda and then mentioning some small deed you did to make the world a better place.
We must become the person that doesn't add to the mess. It is time to do something about the tears that have been shed, the bad memories that have come back, the thoughts that we could have done something or just the feeling of hopelessness. There must be a phoenix to rise from these ashes. There will be programs brought in, speakers hired, panels set up and other ambitious goals will come out of these conversations. There are all important steps to take, but not everyone is able to do something on a big stage. In my opinion it starts much smaller. Every person who has been touched by this story needs to do something small.
There is a small group of middle school students who have approached their principal, with request for anonymity, with a goal of doing random acts of kindness for students that they know are struggling. There are high school students who are making an extra effort to spend some time at middle schools doing after school sessions specifically targeting at risk students. Everyone can do something. It means doing something extra, doing something different. It means talking to your friends who are making one person the butt of their jokes. It means cutting out the cutting comments. It means not losing it on the poor telephone service operator who in all likelihood had nothing to do with your cable not working. It means not making a rude comment when some poor person is digging through their wallet or purse trying to find the money to pay for the groceries and you are being inconvenienced by a few minutes. It means taking the time to listen to that family member who can be a drag to listen to but that you know really needs someone to listen to them. It means take a few minutes of your time to make someone's day a little better, not worse.
Tears are not enough for this tragedy. There must be a significant shift in behaviour. The phoenix that must rise is how we respond to what has happened by altering our actions, our attitude our treatment of others and the respect we show ourselves, others around us and the environment we live in. Let's take a memory of a tragedy and do something about it to have some positive light come from this. It would be great to move from #RIPAmanda to #InMemoryOfAmanda and then mentioning some small deed you did to make the world a better place.
Monday, October 15, 2012
Time to look in the mirror
There are times where the topic of bullying becomes more rampant than others. Amanda Todd's tragic story has brought it to the forefront, and rightfully so. There is much work to be done, and done with care and that is a topic all on it's own. There are many points to consider such as what is bullying and what is bad play or social emotional difficulties? Each one can be damaging, but each one also needs to be dealt with differently.
There is another important aspect to this that needs to be considered as well. What I am finding frustrating is the number of individuals coming out and talking about how we need to stop bullying and yet are publicly demonstrating similar behaviours to that which they are denouncing. It is also usually around this time that we will read comments about how awful the kids are today, how they lack respect and are becoming a lost generation. Truth be told it is at this time that we probably need to start looking in the mirror and thinking about what our actions, what we celebrate, what we watch and what we say around the children and youth around us and thinking about how our behaviours might be impacting them. Far too often it does appear to be "do as I say" and not "do as I do".
As we are in election year in the US and the provincial Liberals in BC are trying to stay in power, the attack ads are running. The same politicians who are denouncing bullying are supporting ads and social media driven agendas that essentially demonstrate what could be perceived as cyberbullying. They are directed at one person. repeatedly, targeting them sometimes mercilessly with a goal of humiliation, embarrassment and essentially trying to destroy the public image. In these ads, or ads in the past, personalities are attacked, mistakes from 30 years ago are aired and other points are raised trying to seemingly convince voters of the ineptitude of the opposition. At times it feels as though political parties have private investigators looking into finding as much dirt as possible on the opposition and ensuring that it is leaked, broadcasted and streamed via social media. It doesn't seem to matter if lives are destroyed, it seems to be all about winning regardless of cost.
In sports the trash talker or the agitator is often celebrated for getting under people's skin and getting them off of their game. We laud the fact that this person has said so much and been harassing the person to the point of getting them to lash out. A case in point would be the Zidane headbutting of Materazzi after comments were made to him. This was a defining moment in the World Cup Finals as Zidane was sent off and France lost the game. Materazzi was hailed for having successfully gotten the French star off of his game and lashing out. It is such a famous moment in sports that there is actually a statue erected commemorating the moment. Some football players, hockey players, basketball players and other athletes are known for verbally abusing their opponents to the point of retaliation or playing poorly because of the distraction. We cheer the fact that they successfully tormented their opponent. Slashes to the back of the leg, knees to the heads when coming out of a scrum, fingers to the eyes when coming up after a tackle, digging cleats into an opponents foot when possible... What does this teach our young athletes? How can we tell young athletes that it is OK to verbally taunt, torment or physically assault their opponents and not expect kids to think it is OK elsewhere in their lives. Truth be told, I don't think it has a place anywhere. It does appear that winning, no matter how it comes about is important. Break a leg, give the person a concussion, verbally abuse them until they react or wilt and so on. It doesn't matter if you don't have as much talent as they do if you can cheat, steal and physically beat your opponent.
TV shows are also navigating a slippery slope that is definitely going to have a greater impact if the trend continues. If we look at the TV shows of the 70s and 80s there was an innocence to them. Many TV shows now seem to be all about snappy comebacks, put downs, setting people up for embarrassment. The language that is used on a daily basis is language on TV seems to be getting worse. The sexual overtones, gender portrayals, stereotyping and portrayal of women in videos and movies is sending an embrassingly wrong message to young girls. There are shows that celebrate people's embarrassments that are shown, all kinds of things put up on YouTube, too often without the person being embarrassed knowing, and especially too often without true consent versus pressured consent. It doesn't seem to matter what the message is as long as it is provocative enough to get enough attention to keep the show running for another year or to see how many hits you can get on your site.
Kids are told to talk respectfully to adults and yet they will see adults publicly put down and embarrass their colleagues, strangers, friends or other kids. We tell kids to be respectful to referees and opposition but when they come and watch us play we are berating the official, trash talking our opponents, deliberately hacking away at them to get them off of their game. We tell them to be careful about what they post on facebook and how they respond on other social media outlets and yet they see important adults in their lives posting pictures of themselves drunk, publicly insulting someone, posting a tweet with violent overtones directed at someone in anger. YouTube clips of others are posted without asking permission minutes after telling kids to not do the same thing. Yes, it can be argued that as adults we are better at interpreting social situations than kids, but they see what we do and want to mimic it.
There is no doubt that here is a significant and important teaching quotient that does need to be done to address these issues, but much of it is reduced when kids see adults behave in ways that contradict what is being taught. If we want the youth of today to make better choices, the adults of today need to show them how it is done. Perhaps today's adults need to look in the mirror and think about what message we are sending our kids by the way we are behaving, what we celebrate, what we watch and encourage, how we respond to situations, what we cheer for and how we treat others.
If this is a "Lost Generation", then we must examine how we have not done a good job of being guides for them.
There is another important aspect to this that needs to be considered as well. What I am finding frustrating is the number of individuals coming out and talking about how we need to stop bullying and yet are publicly demonstrating similar behaviours to that which they are denouncing. It is also usually around this time that we will read comments about how awful the kids are today, how they lack respect and are becoming a lost generation. Truth be told it is at this time that we probably need to start looking in the mirror and thinking about what our actions, what we celebrate, what we watch and what we say around the children and youth around us and thinking about how our behaviours might be impacting them. Far too often it does appear to be "do as I say" and not "do as I do".
As we are in election year in the US and the provincial Liberals in BC are trying to stay in power, the attack ads are running. The same politicians who are denouncing bullying are supporting ads and social media driven agendas that essentially demonstrate what could be perceived as cyberbullying. They are directed at one person. repeatedly, targeting them sometimes mercilessly with a goal of humiliation, embarrassment and essentially trying to destroy the public image. In these ads, or ads in the past, personalities are attacked, mistakes from 30 years ago are aired and other points are raised trying to seemingly convince voters of the ineptitude of the opposition. At times it feels as though political parties have private investigators looking into finding as much dirt as possible on the opposition and ensuring that it is leaked, broadcasted and streamed via social media. It doesn't seem to matter if lives are destroyed, it seems to be all about winning regardless of cost.
In sports the trash talker or the agitator is often celebrated for getting under people's skin and getting them off of their game. We laud the fact that this person has said so much and been harassing the person to the point of getting them to lash out. A case in point would be the Zidane headbutting of Materazzi after comments were made to him. This was a defining moment in the World Cup Finals as Zidane was sent off and France lost the game. Materazzi was hailed for having successfully gotten the French star off of his game and lashing out. It is such a famous moment in sports that there is actually a statue erected commemorating the moment. Some football players, hockey players, basketball players and other athletes are known for verbally abusing their opponents to the point of retaliation or playing poorly because of the distraction. We cheer the fact that they successfully tormented their opponent. Slashes to the back of the leg, knees to the heads when coming out of a scrum, fingers to the eyes when coming up after a tackle, digging cleats into an opponents foot when possible... What does this teach our young athletes? How can we tell young athletes that it is OK to verbally taunt, torment or physically assault their opponents and not expect kids to think it is OK elsewhere in their lives. Truth be told, I don't think it has a place anywhere. It does appear that winning, no matter how it comes about is important. Break a leg, give the person a concussion, verbally abuse them until they react or wilt and so on. It doesn't matter if you don't have as much talent as they do if you can cheat, steal and physically beat your opponent.
TV shows are also navigating a slippery slope that is definitely going to have a greater impact if the trend continues. If we look at the TV shows of the 70s and 80s there was an innocence to them. Many TV shows now seem to be all about snappy comebacks, put downs, setting people up for embarrassment. The language that is used on a daily basis is language on TV seems to be getting worse. The sexual overtones, gender portrayals, stereotyping and portrayal of women in videos and movies is sending an embrassingly wrong message to young girls. There are shows that celebrate people's embarrassments that are shown, all kinds of things put up on YouTube, too often without the person being embarrassed knowing, and especially too often without true consent versus pressured consent. It doesn't seem to matter what the message is as long as it is provocative enough to get enough attention to keep the show running for another year or to see how many hits you can get on your site.
Kids are told to talk respectfully to adults and yet they will see adults publicly put down and embarrass their colleagues, strangers, friends or other kids. We tell kids to be respectful to referees and opposition but when they come and watch us play we are berating the official, trash talking our opponents, deliberately hacking away at them to get them off of their game. We tell them to be careful about what they post on facebook and how they respond on other social media outlets and yet they see important adults in their lives posting pictures of themselves drunk, publicly insulting someone, posting a tweet with violent overtones directed at someone in anger. YouTube clips of others are posted without asking permission minutes after telling kids to not do the same thing. Yes, it can be argued that as adults we are better at interpreting social situations than kids, but they see what we do and want to mimic it.
There is no doubt that here is a significant and important teaching quotient that does need to be done to address these issues, but much of it is reduced when kids see adults behave in ways that contradict what is being taught. If we want the youth of today to make better choices, the adults of today need to show them how it is done. Perhaps today's adults need to look in the mirror and think about what message we are sending our kids by the way we are behaving, what we celebrate, what we watch and encourage, how we respond to situations, what we cheer for and how we treat others.
If this is a "Lost Generation", then we must examine how we have not done a good job of being guides for them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)