Sitting In

Today, Karen and I were teaching about Jonathan Kozol and his decision to use a Langston Hughes poem with his 4th graders that was against school district rules when we took off on a tangent about the sit-ins that occurred in Greensboro, North Carolina on February 1, 1960. That day, at about 4:30 pm, four Black college students defied racial segregation laws by sitting down at a Woolworth's lunch counter (Blacks could stand up at an adjacent snack bar) and refused to get up when they were denied service. These men, all freshmen at North Carolina Agricultural and Technical State University, remained in their seats until the store closed unusually early. The next day, about 20 additional students joined the original 4 and the next phase of the Civil Rights Movement was launched, leading to the creation of SNCC (Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee) and the rise of such leaders as John Lewis, Diane Nash, Julian Bond, Marion Berry, and many others.

But what hit me in the moment that we turned to these sit-ins had to do with this question of how to decide what is right and how to act in light of that decision. When we asked students about Kozol's decision to consciously use a poem that was not part of the 4th grade curriculum, some said he did a wrong thing but for the right reasons. Others commented that it might have been against the rules, but it was still the right thing to do. I then challenged them and myself to put ourselves in the place of the four students from A&T. What would we do and why? And I knew, I just knew, that when I was a college student, I would not have done the right thing. I would have been too scared to sit-in. I knew the right thing was to defy the law and sit-in, if for no other reason than to uphold equality and justice, to do what needs to be done to create a decent society where no innocent person is forced to suffer public humiliation. But I would have lacked the guts to follow through on what I believed.

Imagine the courage of those men at that moment. There was a good chance they would be taunted, harassed, and even assaulted. And it was extremely likely that all the powers of the State would not support the protesters, but would back up the segregationists. It was a very risky thing to challenge segregation in those days. It could easily get you killed. So where did these men and so many others like them, a few Whites to be sure, but the vast majority Black, find the gumption, the sheer grit to do this?

My best guess is that they were tired in the same way that Rosa Parks was tired, not physically tired, as she is so often claimed to have been, but tired of being pushed around, tired of being constantly diminished, tired of being trampled on, tired of injustice. I am guessing, for I don't really know personally, that if you get pushed around enough, there is a point at which you just won't take it any more, even at risk of death. That is certainly part of what happened in the 1950s and 1960s when Black people, with very little support from non-Blacks, launched the Civil Rights Movement.

Incidentally, On July 25, 1960, a little less than 6 months after the original sit-ins, the Greensboro Woolworth's lunch counter quietly began to serve Blacks, even when they were sitting down.

Civic Professionalism Again

Yesterday's post was about civic professionalism, more or less as philosopher William Sullivan has delineated the concept in his book Work and Integrity. Today, I return to Sullivan with what I would say are a few key quotes from this book.

"The university is chartered by the larger society to cultivate the life of the mind for the public good" (Sullivan, 2004, p. 225).

"Professional occupations create recognized opportunities for individuals to make something of their talents and capacities. On the other hand, this is only possible through personal commitment to the disciplines of a community of practice. At its best, professional life enables individual freedom to find fulfillment as it advances the well-being of the larger society" (p. 284).

"...what makes one free and renders life worth living is finally neither satisfying one's desires nor accomplishing one's purposes, valuable as these are, but instead learning to act with the good of the whole in view, building a life act by act, happy if each deed, as far as circumstances allow, contributes to the general welfare" (p. 290).

So what's striking about all of these quotes? That professionals don't get to just develop their abilities as fully as possible; they also have a responsibility to give back, to promote the general welfare, to advance the public good. Indeed, as Sullivan would have it, we as a society invest in these professionals with an expectation that there will be a return on our investment, not just in increased riches, but also in a better life for all.

To the extent that Sullivan is right, colleges and universities should pay more attention to what they are doing to ensure that part of the education of professionals is to be aware of their responsibility to give back and to learn strategies for how best to do this, given that one's acquired expertise is owed, at least in part, to a public investment.

Civic Professionals

Those of us working in the field of civic engagement are increasingly drawn to an idea called "civic professionalism" that has been particularly well articulated by a philosopher named William Sullivan, one of the co-authors of both Habits of the Heart and The Good Society. Civic professionalism, which Sullivan explores most extensively in his book Work and Integrity, can be a rather elusive term and concept. One simple way to understand it might be the responsibility that any member of a profession has to learn from and add to the knowledge, skills, and values that constitute a profession's community of practice, and then to use what is gained to contribute to the overall public good. 

Just to be clear, this definition suggests there might be four stages to becoming a civic professional. First are the pre-professional educational experiences where we acquire the general knowledge, skills and sensibilities that allow us to become better thinkers, more skillful inquirers, and more well-rounded and understanding human beings.  Second is the somewhat narrower learning where novices acquire the knowledge, skills, and dispositions held by seasoned professionals about what it means to conduct oneself thoughtfully, skillfully, and ethically in that particular profession. From this perspective, it isn't enough to be a knowledgable and skillful practitioner. You are also expected to gain a perspective on the professional that is moral, that offers an account of what it means to treat clients and co-workers respectfully and compassionately. Third, one accepts the responsibility to become a leader in the profession by continuing to improve that community of practice and by actively inducting new members into the profession, again keeping in mind that knowledge and skills aren't enough. There is also a professional ethic that must be given its due.  These first three stages are part of what it means to be a good citizen of the profession. 

The fourth stage, which requires considerable "fleshing out" by both Sullivan and myself and others, invites experienced professionals to use their expertise to promote community betterment, and may even oblige them to be open to what can be learned from outsiders who have made use of the services that professionals provide. That is, civic professionals who are, say, doctors, contribute their expertise to solving social problems that have a medical dimension, but they also remain open to what patients and other observers of the health system can share about making the profession of medicine even more effective, humane, and inclusive for everyone's sake.

One of the attractions of civic professional is that it encourages more of us to think about how we might enact our civic responsibilities, perhaps not primarily in the public sphere through some form of community service, but definitely within one's profession or vocation. Even if a person only reaches the third stage of civic professionalism, there is still a significant role for that person to play in practicing the habits of a good citizen, which may contribute significantly to that profession's ability to be responsive to society's needs. Civic professionalism also carries important implications for how we educate people for highly responsible vocations. Gaining a sense of how that profession has developed over time, what that profession contributes to the public good, and how practitioners can continue to ensure that the profession's overall impact is benign might be important additions to professional education that could even begin in the pre-professional courses that make up general education. 

In any case, civic professionalism, rightly understood, is something we all can get behind because of its potential to help all of us as individuals become more effective practitioners, even as we also focus on how our professions are contributing to the general welfare.

SNAP Data

Courtesy of today's Wall Street Journal, a few statistics about SNAP or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Formerly known as Food Stamps.

Throughout the U.S., 47,791,996 people are on SNAP, which is 15% of the population.

In New York State, 16% of the population are on SNAP.

In New Jersey, 10% of the population are on SNAP.

In Mississippi, 23% of the population are on SNAP.

In North Dakota, 8% of the population are on SNAP.

In California, 11% of the population are on SNAP.

In Louisiana, 21% of the population are on SNAP.

In 2012, about 75 billion dollars was spent on SNAP.

In 2007, about 30 billion dollars was spent on SNAP.

The average monthly benefit for SNAP nationally in 2012 was $133 a month or about $4.43 a day.

Roughly 45% of all SNAP recipients are children.

Without SNAP, tens of millions of Americans would be significantly undernourished, reducing their ability to concentrate, work well, or learn.

With SNAP, many Americans are still more undernourished than they should be, but most have enough to eat in order to concentrate, work well, and learn.

SNAP works. Please support the full funding of SNAP.

The Future

“Same-sex marriage is very new,” Justice Samuel Alito recently observed during the Supreme Court hearings regarding the constitutionality of same-sex marriage bans. The Associate Justice further noted that “It may turn out to be a good thing; it may turn out not to be a good thing. But you want us to step in and render a decision based on an assessment of the effects of this institution, which is newer than cellphones or the Internet? I mean, we do not have the ability to see the future.”

Mr. Alito is certainly right. Neither he nor the rest of the Supreme Court have the ability to see into the future.  Which affirms that any case requiring the Court to take into account the future impact of their decision should not be heard. Unfortunately or fortunately, we can't be sure because of our own inability to foretell the future, that pretty much rules out all cases. After all, every decision will have a future impact that cannot be entirely predicted. 

So using Mr. Alito's logic, the Supreme Court shouldn't be making any decisions at all, which, you have to be admit, will do a lot to lighten their workload. Furthermore, this will give them more freedom to give speeches and make thought-provoking remarks, like the one Justice Scalia offered in December about same-sex marriage:

“If we cannot have moral feeling against homosexuality, can we have it against murder?”

Consider the profundity of this statement. Isn't it powerful? Isn't it full of indisputable logic? Aren't we lucky to have such a powerhouse sitting on our nation's highest court? After all, Justice Scalia is one of the great legal minds of the 21st century, and this statement is certainly further evidence of this. With the Supreme Court freed from making decisions, he can devote all of his time to offering up these intellectually tantalizing tidbits. What a treat for the nation!

Constructivism - What it isn't and What it is

Progressive educators like to talk a lot about a theory of learning called constructivism. It is noteworthy that it is seen as a theory of learning, as opposed to a theory of teaching, for constructivism contends that our understanding of content goes deeper when learners actively work with that content to make sense of it. Constructivism is the process of using the knowledge and experience we have accumulated to clarify what we understand, to build on those understandings and then to use what is learned to adapt more successfully to our environment. Constructivism demands that we begin with sound, accurate knowledge as a basis for creating new knowledge. It is not a philosophy that claims any answer is as good as any other. By the way, here is how one aspiring teacher defined constructivism. This is a particularly fine example of what constructivism is NOT:

"I am very anxious to return to my classroom and teach science. Constructivism has taught me [that] I do not need to know any science in order to teach it. I will simply allow my students to figure things out for themselves, for I know there is no right answer."

In how many different ways does this statement misinterpret constructivism? First, you need to know a lot of science to teach it in a constructivist manner. Learning in this way requires solid, verifiable foundational knowledge (that might come from a reading, lecture, or video) that can be developed further through discussion, experimentation, or creative exploration. Second, the students don't just figure things out for themselves. They ask analytical questions, they employ some sort of scientific method, or they use a structured process for probing more deeply into the material. Third, there may not be a single right answer, but there are plenty of wrong answers, and usually only a handful of right answers that are supported by evidence, logic, or past experience.

Let me just say for emphasis that constructivism does not rule out using materials that are didactic, such as lectures, readings or demonstrations. Although these traditional methods are not emphasized under constructivism, they are often a necessary aspect of a truly worthwhile constructivist learning experience.

Constructivism, then, is an exciting, hands-on approach to making sense of the world. But at its best it is content-rich, rigorous, evidence-based, demanding, and highly collaborative. 

High Impact

We just returned from a brief meeting with the Bonner Foundation centered on what they call "High Impact Practices" for supporting students in becoming civically engaged individuals. Such practices include having students become members of learning communities where community involvement is emphasized and a structured process for reflecting on that involvement is included. When students go into communities and do something to help the residents of those communities, then spend time assessing the value of these experiences, and then attempt to write up how these experiences have shaped them, they are engaging in high impact practices that tend to make them more likely to develop the habits of active citizenship. Even more important, when they can observe the results of this involvement and how it leads to healthier, more empowered communities, they are learning first-hand what it means to benefit from high impact educational practices. All of this is in keeping with the Bonner Foundation's mission to encourage students to engage in community service and become civically involved in order to help communities everywhere more effectively address the social and economic challenges that face them.

Karen and I went to this meeting to plan for a High Impact Summer Institute which would have teams of colleges, including Wagner, decide on projects that would lead to college-community collaborations designed to directly tackle real challenges facing those communities. Prior to the Institute, Wagner will need to identify two administrators, two faculty, two students, and two community partners who will make up the leadership team and help to decide on projects that are likely to bring about change on issues that matter. 

We are excited to move forward, both to help students develop the habit of democratic citizenship and to help communities make new progress in dealing with some of their most daunting challenges.