|
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
PERFECT PARENTING IS BAD PARENTING The French philosopher Camus' parents were illiterate; examples abound. More importantly, however, is that parents who strive for perfection can't help but fail--nobody’s perfect--which leaves the kids feeling like failures. From such a sate of mind does not confidence and ambition and happiness grow. As parents, we shouldn't go all gung ho for perfection as much as we should accept and acknowledge our IMperfections. We really need to look honestly back at our own childhoods, at who we were, and we'll realize we weren't such hot stuff then, much less now. Humility –seeing and accepting ourselves as we are--opens us up to learning and growing, as it will our kids when they see it in us. Accepting ourselves, we accept them. From self-acceptance they, like we, can grow and learn. Perfectionism, however, which is really the need to THINK we're perfect, closes us off to learning, to acknowledging who we are and going from there. Not much water in those spigots. Protecting their children from the drought, parents perpetuate it. So like their parents, kids can never feel as if they measure up. And to what? To whom? Us? Perfectionism is another way of saying that as parents we prefer that kids share our anxiety, that we cannot handle it alone, that we prefer not to experience it all by ourselves. What parent wants to leave such a legacy? Give me parents open and humble enough to accept and respect and love their kids for who they are, who accept their own limitations as they accept those of their children, who don't hesitate to share their limitations with their kids, so the kids too can accept themselves as human (rather than "perfect”). From such a strong bond cannot help but grow love, health and happiness. Perfection is a confusing, frustrating phantom to have to live up to. Such anxiety in kids leads to depression, to self-destructiveness--lethargy, what appears to be indifference, drugs, promiscuity, anorexia, etc.. How can it not: the only choice left them is to forever see themselves as inadequate, as failures, as not good enough, or to live in denial, as their parents are. TRANSITION FROM MIDDLE TO HIGH SCHOOL: the challenge, the solution: Its' pretty scary: kids who've been at the social summit will find themselves once again down, looking up, particularly if as freshman they're thrown willy-nilly into the high school social and academic cauldron. They're the challengers, so they'll be now vulnerable targets of social terrorism, sneers, put-downs, etc.. The masses, if they keep to themselves, less so from the older high school kids, but from their traditionally "popular" classmates, expect trouble/scapegoating. Academically, same problem, the result of which is self-conciousness, fear of judgement, and hence loneliness. Get the picture? The problem, as stated by the acclaimed Carnegie Commission Report, is fundamentally social/emotional. Shucked for NCLB, it calls for emphasis in middle schools on the kids' psychological/social development--relationships, in other words--above all else. THIS ALSO ENHANCES ACADEMIC DEVELOPMENT.
SOLUTIONS:
SPECIFIC SOLUTION: WORKSHOP ON “POPULARITY: Fighting Social Terrorism in our
Schools.” EMAIL BERNIE OR PUBLICIST FOR WORKSHOP INFO. Email addresses:
Publicist: pegbooth@boothmedia.com or
Bernie@Bernieschein.com
IS BULLYING BAD? IS IT BACK? DOES IT BUILD CHARACTER? Of course it's bad, and while awareness has been raised, it never left. Bullying assumes two forms: aggressive and passive aggressive. Raised consciousness and zero-tolerance may have reduced the blitzkrieg, the direct frontal attack, but snipers still fire from trees and guerrillas sneak in from the caves. In one form or another everyone is guilty at some point or another, whether it's beating hell out of a classmate physically, guilt-tripping, or making a snide comment when he raises his hand in class. Social (or physical) terrorism is motivated by fear, anger and envy. In and of itself it no more builds character in kids than abuse, neglect, war or the bombing of The World Trade Center does so in adults. In fact, it diminishes character. Social and physical terrorism, from the put down to assault and battery to school murders, just breeds more of it. It is, however, a reality. Character-building comes, as it does with all suffering, when it's faced and understood, when every single student and adult understands PERSONALLY that she has been in her life both bully and victim, that she has hurt others and been hurt herself, and why. Who hurt her? Who has she hurt? That’s where to begin.
SPECIFIC SOLUTION: WORKSHOP ON “POPULARITY: Fighting Social Terrorism in our
Schools.” EMAIL BERNIE OR PUBLICIST FOR WORKSHOP INFO. Email addresses:
Publicist: pegbooth@boothmedia.com or
Bernie@Bernieschein.com
THE PRESIDENTAL ELECTION: What’s out there for little kids, tweens and teens? Most popular bet is Scholastic News Online: election 2008 scholastic.com. Click on “Parents Guide to the 2008 Presidential Election”. There you’ll find great tips on everything from how to refresh your own background to age-appropriate ways of involving, inviting and engaging your kids in conversation to when you need to keep your mouth shut. ADVICE FOR PARENTS: The key is “listening”. Don’t lecture, or you’ll turn them off. Be supportive of their viewpoints. Raise questions not to see if the kid knows the answer, but as if you’re asking them aloud to yourself. Encourage exploration and further questions by setting an example yourself. Forget excellence, expertise and answers. They’re a turnoff coming from a parent. Watch and listen and read and go online together. See what she thinks, and vice-versa. Encourage her to form her own point of view, not yours. Test yours out on him. Then listen to his. Vice-versa. If you alter yours because of his arguments, that will encourage him to further explore. ANYTIME IT’S PERSONAL, IT’S MORE INTERESTING: Does she have a relative in Iraq? Should a teen who commits assault and battery be tried as an adult? Should No Child Left Behind be re-funded? Be positive. Be able to laugh at yourselves as well as the candidates and talking heads.. RE: Recent article in McClatchey newspapers reported average teacher talks “four hours a day” in classes, thereby "losing their voices" to the extent vocal chords so weak and damaged they're now using microphones while teaching. Teaching is listening, so my best guess here is that the teachers’ vocal chords have gone on strike on behalf of their students, who are probably celebrating. My advice to the kids would be to steal the microphones to seal the deal. Teachers running on and on four hours a day have all the effect of undelivered mail. Here's an even more frightening consideration. Any kid that can truly attend to what a teacher's saying for that long every day is either masochistic, remarkably passive, or mindless. OR, to their credit, they've figured out a way to encourage the teacher to do all their thinking for them...must be nice. Like cheating, however, could catch up with them later. (Still, like cheating, a useful skill, which I'll explore more as separate topic.). 1. Recently reported: ”The Pregnancy Pact” among teenage girls in Gloucester, Mass… 2. Pact or no pact, what caused the promiscuity? 3. If basically the cause was improper or inattentive parenting (as it usually is), to take up the slack the school must spend time and energy on the kids’ social and emotional development, perhaps even that of their parents. If the approach is sensitive and honest, the kids will become more serious and thoughtful, and it will ultimately enhance their artistic and academic talents. 4. How? When NCLB is so all-consuming? 5. The primary, fundamental question for educators setting up programs—certainly the question behind NCLB--has always been, “What does the child need to know?” That should be the second question. The first should be, “Who is he?” Then: “What does he need to know?” CNN yesterday asked viewers to comment: Does Jamie Lynn Spears' pregnancy glamorize teen pregnancy? 1. Not if teens don't know about it. So the question might better be, "Does CNN glamorize Teen Pregnancy?" The answer is Yes, it does, BUT 2. Glamorizing it doesn't cause it. Improper or inattentive parenting does, particularly when, as probably in Jamie Lynn's case, it's exacerbated by a remarkably potent dose of sibling rivalry. "CHEATING Scandal Rocks Three Top Tier high Schools", Reported ABC News early this year. The Josephson Institute headlines its June 27, ‘08 Commentary with this message to America’s students: "You're Only Cheating Yourself." 2/3 of students who cheat, however, according to the Institute, argue that it's justifiable. Are they right? Schools are notoriously unfair and discriminatory when it comes to students’ varying learning styles, interests and abilities. The “one size fits all” approach to teaching and testing “fits nobody”. Like schools who fudge and inflate test scores, underreport violence, and skew dropout rates, are students "gaming" an otherwise unfair and discriminatory system? For many students, Cheating's probably a fair and useful skill. When a senior in high school, I quartered off one section of the study hall in the "cafetorium" and conducted weekly classes on "How to Cheat without Guilt and Remorse". I was, in today’s jargon, so mathematically-disabled that had I myself not cheated, I would have never gotten into college, would never have become a teacher, and would never have written IF HOLDEN CAULFIELD WERE IN MY CLASSROOM. MSNBC REports (with Dan Abrams) in segment entitled “Teens Gone Wild”: 61 year old white female teacher suspends 16 year old student, who leaves school, only to return after lunch to attack her with brass knuckles. Totally premeditated. Had an accomplice, another student his age, on the lookout for when she’d be leaving her class so he could jump her. Was tried as an adult and sentenced to 3 years. A commenting judge pointed out that 19 is the most potentially violent age for kids, which is the age the kid would be upon release. Further, the sentence did not include, after his release, probation. So at 19, having become even more hardened and angry, he’s let loose UNSUPERVISED upon the world. For the world to be saved, he’s either got to be put away for an awfully lengthy period or saved himself. He is dissociated from the fear and pain that has created his tough persona, probably fatherless. If physical authority is all he respects, begin there. Cut his ass, and cut it good. Do it until defenses break down, until tears and shame emerge. They are the backbones of genuine conscience. Begin with the baby he is, as are we all, and let the therapeutic process, rather than a prison term, begin. If corporal punishment can get him on the right track, and he’s got to be institutionalized, a mental health center holds more promise for him and the teacher he attacked, to say nothing of the rest of us, than a colder, harder prison term. Perhaps corporal punishment should once again be legalized as a last resort. Will it be abused? Not as much as we are.
GROUP BULLYING Three teenage girls lure victim, with whom they'd had a vague social conflict, into a private space where they simply beat hell out of her. WHAT THEY DON’T KNOW IS THAT THEIR MOTIVE WAS FEAR. 1.An adult needs to confront these three kids. Why'd it take three? Were they cowards? They'll claim to be "friends". But are they? Who among the three just went along to kiss up, for fear perhaps retaliation might come her way if she didn’t? They were probably working themselves up and showing off for each other. Do unto others, goes the motto of the bully , BEFORE it's done unto you. 2.So the real threat to each of these three girls was not their victim, but each other. Scapegoating coalesces their alliance, which is based on fear, fear of lonliness, rejection, humiliation, fear of being the victim they abused. Unable to discern, to trust, afraid of genuinely intimate friendships where they don’t have to fake it and be cool and “tough”, like adults in this situation they cloak themselves in power. By this point, in their minds, it’s either hurt others or hurt themselves. 3.Why? They themselves have been victimized, or at least perceive that they have. Trauma made them afraid. Are they themselves victims of abuse or neglect? Of social humiliation and rejection? Of failure or inadequacy in school, athletics, what have you? Of loss so great that at the age they experienced it was too much for them to handle: death, illness, a father or mother on his/her third tour in Iraq? 4.Who hurt them? How? Who did to them what should not have been done to them? When they remember, trust can return, and real friendship, which is what they want deep down anyway, can be possible for them. The remembering, however, must be genuinely re-experienced—they must remember how it felt—for them to truly realize what they’ve done. And if they do not suffer enough, punishment is in order. It can help anyway; it makes kids like these more secure. 5.As to the victim herself, obviously whatever she may or may not have done should not have resulted in such violence against her, but what exactly did she do? Why didn't MSNBC find out and report it? They imply that intentionally or not she did something to piss these girls off. That they do not reveal what it was—indeed, if it was anything at all--raises questions and suspicions. Was MSNBC afraid of being seen as “blaming the victim” in a “culture of victimization” in which kids and adults are “playing the victim” right and left? Were they pandering? Opting for a black and white scenario that might sensationalize? If so, isn’t MSNBC guilty of perpetuating the problem, acting out of fear (Like bullies themselves) rather than trust and decency? 6.This child may well be totally innocent, but MSNBC has done her no favors by withholding information. If she indeed is less than pure here, What did she do? Then, as with the bullies themselves, Why’d she do it? Did she spread a nasty rumor on the internet? Undermine one of these girls’ relationships with a boy or another girl? Was she trying to socially divide and conquer and got caught? Did she put them down? Brag about the part she got in the play when she knew perhaps these girls didn't get one or brag about her grades when she knew these girls were sluggish academically? In other words, is she pissing people off without knowing it, or knowing it and thinking she can get away with it? If so, she needs to know that this too is bullying, that she may have more power than she realizes, which should strengthen her, but if used wrongly can socially backfire on her. Again, she may well be totally innocent, but if not, Why? Who hurt her? Who created the anger that caused her to become passive- aggressive, the fear that caused her to be afraid to stand up for herself directly? Once all this is out in the open, with a sensitive, strong, understanding adult in the room, she might be surprised, as might the bullies, with what she has in common with them: strength, yes, but also fear and vulnerability. If she’s totally innocent, the bullies, having confronted their own past hurts, could feel even worse, i. e., guiltier, more ashamed, real remorse. 7. If they don’t, if they end up talking the talk but not walking the walk, which means they’re still running from their own pain, they need to have their asses cut. Do unto them what they did unto her. They’ll feel it then. When they’re bawling and crying and totally humiliated, as she was, that means their defenses are down and they’re back to the babies we all are deep down. Then begin the process again. They’ll be more ready. 8. We must, as adults, begin with teenagers where they are. If only Might makes Right is what they believe, them we have to show ‘em, as a first step and last resort, who’s boss. Otherwise, everyone in that school or community is frightened, including the adults. In this same segment, a 16 year old kid, suspended from school early in the morning, returned after lunch and attacked his 61 year old female teacher with a pair of brass knuckles. July 6, N. Y. TIMES article, "In Schools, How Tight Must Discipline Be?" A few unruly kids--every classroom has them--backed by vengeful and vindictive parents, create classrooms of terror in our schools. Why? How has it come to this? What can be done? Indeed, In Schools, How Tight Must Discipline Be? Tight. Generally, it's a few kids, implicitly backed up by guilt-ridden or angry parents, parents who themselves are often abusive or neglectful, who wreak havoc in a classroom. Often they are the same kids year after year. Frightened inside, they grab power, often by showing off, when what they're really looking for is safety, security and trust. To get it, they've to be stopped. If not, unruliness spreads throughout classroom because their classmates are more afraid of them than the teacher. Sometimes, as the great educator Arthur Combs once said, "You got to lick 'em before you can love 'em." Yell at em. Scare "em half to death and the whole room will feel safer. Tell ALL the kids what you're doing and why you're doing it, and even the most unruly will appreciate it. As it is, the fear of litigation ties teacher's hands. So: Remove 'em from the classroom. Suspend 'em. FOR THESE FEW KIDS, TOUGHLOVE, as a beginning, QUIETS THEiR DESPERATION. PUT IT BACK IN THE LAP OF THE PARENTS. IF THE PROBLEM IS PURELY ONE OF DISCIPLINE AND NOT PEDAGOGY, THE ENTIRE FAMILY NEEDS DISCIPLINE, THERAPY OR BOTH. IF NECESSARY, NOTIFY DEPT. OF FAMILY AND SOCIAL SERVICES. THEY PROVIDE ANONYMITY. IF THE TEACHER IS TRULY EN LOCO PARENTIS, AUTHORITY MUST BE RESTORED. THE PUBLIC REACTION AGAINST THE REAL PROBLEMS OF ABUSE AND NEGLECT OVER THE DECADES HAS RESULTED IN AN OVERPROTECTIVE , HANDS-OFF POLICY THAT INSURES NEGLECT, PEER AND TEACHER ABUSE IN OUR SCHOOLS. WHILE ABUSE AND NEGLECT ARE REAL PROBLEMS AFFECTING OVER A QUARTER OF OUR STUDENTS, THE TRIVIALIZATION OF THEM HAS BECOME EQUALLY PROBLEMATIC. TEACHERS ARE TERRORIZED BY THE SPECTER OF FALSE ACCUSATIONS. THE WITCH HUNT IS ON. FOR THE SECURITY AND FREEDOM OF OUR CLASSROOMS, TEACHERS NEED PROFESSIONAL AND LEGAL PROTECTION. NEITHER KIDS NOR TEACHERS SHOULD COME TO SCHOOL AFRAID. AND THE PROPORTIONATELY FEW TEACHERS WHO TRULY ARE ABUSIVE MUST BE HELD ACCCOUNTABLE, AS IN ANY PROFESSION. KIDS ARE STUPID BECAUSE ADULTS ARE Recent Reports and comments in The Guardian, Newsweek, et. al.: Indiana’s Perry Township School Board suspended without pay for 18 months the veteran teacher Connie Heerman. Why? She had her students, poor and at-risk, read and discuss The Freedom Writer’s Diary, the books for which she paid herself, and which so mirrored and illuminated her students’ lives that when the Board demanded they turn them in, most of the students refused. The Board’s reason: SHE DIDN’T HAVE THEIR PERMISSION. Does she also need a Hall Pass to go to the bathroom? The Board’s action, bureaucratic, arrogant and stupid, INFANTILIZES, UNDERMINES and INHIBITS ALL TEACHERS, when they need to be strong, creative and inspirational. To be at their best, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE THEIR OWN MATERIALS OF INSTRUCTION, particularly when parents signed permission slips, which these did. These Board members probably haven’t read a good book in decades. Censoring the teacher, they censor the students, WHEN THEY COULD BE READING A GOOD BOOK. Though the Board’s charge is to promote reading, THE BOARD IS INHIBITING THE STUDENTS’ DESIRE AND INTEREST IN READING. RECALL THEM. VOTE THEM OUT OF OFFICE. PETITION. PROTEST. GET DOWN AND DIRTY. BOTTOM FEED. PARENTS, TEACHERS AND KIDS UNITE. Apparently the Board objects not only to the teacher’s “insubordination”, but also to “swearing” in the book, which clearly bothers them more than kids who can’t read.. SWEAR AT THEM TILL THEY RESIGN. REPLACE THEM WITH TEACHERS ACCOUNTABLE TO THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY RATHER THAN TO A FEW SELF-RIGHTEOUS DUMBOES WHO NEED TO GET BACK TO RUNNING BUSINESSES THEY PRESUMABLY KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT. Recent CNN report: “Should kids be paid to learn?” Absolutely: 1. Their workday, including homework, averages approximately that of the average adult, and the average adult gets paid for his work. 2. Adults choose whether or not to work, if not the type of work they prefer. Kids by and large don’t. 3. Adults are evaluated on work they choose to do, presumably work that fits their abilities if not interests. Kids are evaluated on work they have to do, regardless of abilities or interests. 4. Adults are by and large permitted more freedom and afforded more respect at work than kids at school: for example, rarely do adults have to ask permission to go the bathroom, often they’re permitted to converse with each other, and they can eat lunch without being under supervision. 5. Schools are prisons, eight hours a day of boredom, monotony and ennui. Can the same be said of the workplace? Again, if you’re an adult, it’s your choice. If you’re a kid, you’re stuck. So: students should be the highest paid workers in America. They hold the future in their hands. The harder they work, the higher they rise, the greater their impact, the richer the world, or so goes the assumption. Nevertheless, kids are at a serious disadvantage when compared to adults, so let’s reverse the process: to offset adults’ freer and better working conditions, to say nothing of putting our money where our mouth is, let adults pay to work, and let’s pay kids to go to school. FOX News Reported today that in Ohio 10 year old girl not permitted to play in football league because No Girls Allowed. Not because she wasn't good enough, clearly she was (FOX News showed her catching a hell of a pass.). But because she "might get hurt", this despite her parents happily signing a Waiver of Liability form. This is paternalism and condescension in criminally discriminatory form, the message of which is that girls are The Weaker Sex, even when they're better than the boys, which clearly she is. And guess what? NEITHER GIRLS NOR BOYS SEE ONE GENDER AS STRONGER THAN THE OTHER UNTIL ADULTS TEACH IT TO THEM. Hilary Clinton was a hairsbreadth away from serving as Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, women are surviving Plebe Systems at West Point, Annapolis and the Citadel, Boot Camp at Parris Island, and fighting in Iraq, but kids' football is too dangerous for them? Strong women are too dangerous for weak men. That's the real message here, and it should be delivered, if no other way, through the courts. |
||||||
