Anti-Bullying Conference Coming Soon!

Franklin High School's award winning applied theatre program, (https://www.facebook.com/pages/Shadows-the-anti-bullying-drama/) Shadows,

in partnership with the Tyler Clementi Foundation (www.tylerclementi.org)

and the National School Climate Center (www.schoolclimate.org)

is offering their first ever hands-on

 

Anti-Bullying Workshop and Conference. 

 

The day will involve hands on arts activities to help student and adults explore bullying in their communities and brainstorm on ways to make their schools and towns safer and more inclusive. Presenters include theatre practitioners, spoken word artists and media specialists. Workshops run both morning and afternoon with a special lunchtime performance.

At the end of the day, adults and students will have the opportunity to come together to bring realistic, usable ideas back to their schools to try and create grassroots change in their communities. Lunch is provided.

Confirmed workshop leaders include (more being added daily!)

KEYNOTE SPEAKER FROM THE TYLER CLEMENTI FOUNDATION, www.tylerclementi.org

Richard Cardillo, Director of Education, National School Climate Center

Alyea Pierce, Spoken Word Artist, Finalist in Poetry Jam, New York City

All proceeds go to continue spreading the dialogue about anti-bullying and safer, inclusive school culture.

Join us for this very special event!

There are group rates available. Please contact Jennifer Little at Franklin High School, jlittle@franklinboe.org for more information.

Visit http://shadowsantibullying.eventbrite.com/?ref=ebtn for tickets and more information!

Dichotomy of Co-Intentional Teaching and Our Current Education System

Last week I attended a national conference on theatre education.  It was an illuminating and frustrating experience.  And this fall, I started attending graduate school in applied theatre at CUNY in New York, where I am participating in a wonderfully illuminating course, Group Theatre.  Part of the ongoing dialogue and work in Group Theatre has centered on challenging ourselves as facilitators and educators to push the boundaries, to ask difficult questions, to encourage student-based learning, to promote critical questioning and dialogue.  Sitting in a group of secondary and university theatre educators from across the country, I was struck at how strongly the field was focusing on banking education…still.  Freire identifies banking education as “the scope of action allowed to the students extending only as far as receiving, filing and storing the deposits…it is the people themselves who are filed away through the lack of creativity, transformation, and knowledge in this (at best) misguided system.” (Freire, Paolo.  Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York, NY: Continuum International Publishing, 1970). 

The workshops consisted of theatre teachers sitting in small rooms with facilitators in front of them feeding them information to file away and apply later.  Every time ideas were brought up that suggested socially responsible practice or truly comprehensive theatre education, as elucidated by Joan Lazarus in Signs of Change, a full fifty percent of educators shifted physically away from the presenter.  The discomfort in the room grew palpable.  The challenge to use theatre to engage students as members of society and citizens of school and the world seem to puzzle some teachers.  The idea of a holistic educational practice that allows students to learn and practice collaboratively in all roles from actor to researcher to audience frightened some.  It makes me question how we can continue to argue for arts education in our nation when we are so resistant to education and change ourselves.  If we are not willing to be part of a bigger, holistic educational process, which includes shared decision making, dialogue, collaboration, risk-taking and experimentation as part of socially responsible theatre practice than of what use are we?  The national debate of changing educational pedagogy from the industrial age of training workers for an economic factory environment to creating critically thinking creative members of global society centers around a holistic approach to not just theatre but all areas of education.  Why then are people so resistant to Zemelman’s list of principles of best practice outlined in Ms. Lazarus’ article?  The argument seems to center around “character education” versus “cognitive development.”  Zemelman’s list includes such ideas that learning must be expressive, reflective, social, collaborative and democratic.  The current educational system with standardized testing focuses more on math, reading and IQ – measurable skills with empirical data.  So, if future success depends on these cognitive skills, why have the arts at all?  Why have discussions about holistic, reflective, social learning? 

 When I go to these conferences or sit in the professional development offered by my school district, I often am struck by the exact same feelings expressed by Ms. Lazarus in Signs of Change.  “I know that a look at what is brings with it the realization of what isn’t that my vision isn’t yet my reality.  If I try to envision what might be and what ought to be, I get wildly enthusiastic, but then face fears of what may never be.”  (Lazarus, Joan.  Signs of Change: New Directions in Secondary Theatre Education.  Portsmouth, NJ: Heinemann, 2004)   I embrace ideas that lead me into new opportunities within my own classroom to explore more social dialogue and co-intentional teaching.  But I feel isolated when I see the resistance and anger from some of my colleagues.  With that resistance is derision and scorn for the new ideas and applications.  I hear people saying things along the lines of, “That won’t work.  These kids are crazy, they’ll go nuts if I try that.”  “Right, try that with my freshmen!” “I have to get the unit completed otherwise I will hear from my supervisor, I don’t have time for dialogue and debate.”  And I can empathize with some of their concerns.  I currently am struggling with applying the group theatre activities from our class in my Intro to Drama course.  It has offered a much more engaged group than is normal for this early in the year, so I feel excited by that.  I question, is that the new activities?  Is that my awareness of trying to really be co-intentional?  Or are they just a great group of students?  But I also worry that we have a state and district mandated amount of material that I MUST cover.  Will I get through it all in the time allotted, given that I am allowing the students more time to debate, dialogue, really have a collaborative voice in the process of their education?  So, when I hear the concerns of the teachers who are teaching the standardized test material, I empathize.  Theirs’ is a concern not just of meeting their deadlines but also of keeping their jobs. 

There is an interesting study occurring that fascinates me and ties in directly with Ms. Lazarus’ article.  James Heckman, a Nobel Prize winner, started a study to look at the success rates of GED graduates versus high school.  He discovered that by our society’s measure of success – money earned successful jobs, marriage and family life – that high school graduates were consistently more successful.  He questioned why?  The GED tests the same cognitive skills that the high school standardized tests do.  So why the disparity?  He came to the conclusion that the difference came in the reflective, social and democratic educational practice – i.e. character education.  So he has set out on a journey to empirically measure the impact of the United States’ shift of focusing on cognitive education in order to maximize standardize testing scores versus those schools who are still including more holistic collaborative, student-centered and constructivist learning.  He is attempting to find empirical data that there is a link between the holistic education, what Zemelman calls Principles of Best Practice Learning and Lazarus calls Best Practice in Theatre Education, and “success” in post graduate life. 

 

I agree with Lazarus that theatre has an ability to offer students the best of Zemelman’s practices – a holistic, student centered, catalyst for social and civic dialogue that offer students genuine challenges and an opportunity to re-create and reinvent the systems they encounter.  By analyzing existing theatrical forms, reimagining published scripts, devising new scripts, staging and designing technical solutions to theatrical problems; students can apply existing skills to new and creative problems.  They can find analogies between the fictional stories they explore and the very real world in which they struggle.  They can use the safety of creativity and “drama” in the theatre environment to explore and build solutions and dialogue about the challenges they perceive. 

The debate and discussion offered not just by Lazarus but by Heckman and others is relevant and necessary.  The pushback from the current educational community is real and based not just on a resistance to change but on real fear for the repercussions.  We can debate and dialogue and dream of a utopian system but we live in this very flawed one.  I am stuck in the dichotomy of what I am learning from the readings and the class and what I am experiencing in my job.  I am reaching a point of crossroads.  How do I resolve my desire for change and personal evolution within an antiquated and resistant system?  How do I navigate the waters I find myself treading? 

How To Create A Community In Which Students Feel A Part

We are about three months until the end of the year. I have been meeting with the freshmen class once a month to discuss Bullying and how we, as a community, can work together to make the school safer, stronger, more cohesive. It has been challenging. There have been times when I have been feeling that the task is bigger than I am. That it isn't a matter of educating the students but rather overcoming the school's attitude - the adults, the administration, the parents, the overwhelming apathy in face of problems that seem insurmountable and unsolvable. There are days when I listen to the people I work with as they discuss the futility of creating change when there is no clear leadership - when the students are "disrespectful" - when nothing ever lasts long enough to have an impact. And I have a student who is being bullied while I do this work, and I watch in frustration and growing anger as her parent fights for her right to attend school safely and nothing seems to make the situation better. The bullies get suspended - they don't care. We organize a group of students to walk the victim to classes and offer protection in the halls and cafeteria - the bullies target her in classes and the teachers seem oblivious. We get the teachers on board and the bullies wait for her outside her house.

And yet, despite my frustration and my anger. My feelings of impotence. My days when I listen to colleagues as they vent about their lack of power and their feeling that it is useless to try and create change because change will never come. And then I have moments... moments when the students themselves (always the first to embrace change and willing to take leaps of faith) take my breath away. I went in for the March Bullying Awareness sessions (as the students have dubbed them). We had discussions about the ultimate fallout from bullying - bullycide. We talked about the Tyler Clemente case and the Dharun Ravi sentencing. And the students explored who Tyler's death impacted. And these young people, who in October questioned why we should "stick our noses where they don't belong," who asked me "were you raised to stick your nose into every one's business?" who claimed they would never "snitch," and that if it didn't impact them, it didn't concern them. These young people suddenly spontaneously began discussing bias and safety and how do we as a community, make it safe for everyone to be who they are and to have privacy no matter what. How do we change things? What message does it send to the gay community if they feel unsafe to be open about who they are? They argued passionately about posting videos that have the potential to embarrass others and how they would feel if someone was so impacted by their "joke" or "prank" that it shattered their life. They were engaged. They were passionate. They were a community.

When did this happen? I didn't even notice. Their teachers noticed. They have pulled me aside and thanked me for the dialogue; for the opportunity; for the growth they are seeing. And even though I still feel (on days) tired and the lone voice in the wilderness. I still feel anger and frustration for the victims who still are unsafe. I feel hope. I feel that if we continue the dialogue, the awareness building... we can build a community where bullying just isn't tolerated.

So to end this meandering... I'll add a diamond poem written by some of the freshmen about bullying and their feelings.  Poems created with nine words, utilizing what bullying means to them, how it looks, how it sounds, what safety means and then some sort of ending. Here are a few examples of their work:

Upset

Helpless            People

Laughing               Crying               Screaming

God                 Parents

Together

Disgusted


Pain                      Fear


Cries                   "Help"                        Laugh


Home                                 God


Overwhelmed

Frustrated


Pain                 Evil


Hell                            Tears                       Silence/Whispers


Acceptance                    Trust


Gone

Mad

Verbal               Physical


Cursing                        Shouting                      Yelling


Friends                Counseling


Relief

Week Two in Our Year of Respect

Week Two has commenced with the anti-bullying project and our Year of Respect.  It has been interesting to see what the students have retained so far and to see what stereotypes they hold.  We started with a simple discussion of what they've noticed in their community since we last spoke.  I asked them what, if anything, they noticed about bullying in our school, on the busses, in the community.  Many mentioned an ongoing story that we have airing on WANT TV (our school announcement and news television program).  The story is called "Freshman Frenzy" and concerns a freshman who can't find his classroom (our school is very large).  Along the way to trying to find his room, he meets a variety of characters, one of whom bullies him.  The students mentioned the fact that this young character was being bullied on WANT TV.  (The story hasn't yet been resolved.) 

They noticed some posters in the halls.  And many spoke of a fight that had broken out in the cafeteria earlier in the week.  That was a big topic of discussion.  When I brought up the fact that by the end of the year, I was hoping they would be more aware of what was occurring around them; they would be more aware of words coming out of their mouths; they would be more cognizant of their community as a whole because they were going to be in this community for the next FOUR years -- they seemed stunned by the realization.  Four years!  That's forever.  I don't think it had occurred to them.

We then moved on to the human barometer game which provoked a lot of lively discussion and some out and out contention.  Especially when it came to issues like are men more likely to bully than women and whether poor are more prone to violent acts than people with money.  They were very passionate about their views.  Interestingly, the girls felt they were far more viscious than the boys.  The boys persisted with a view that girls were "sensitive" and more "delicate," while boys were more prone to physical altercations.  Girls brought up the fact that many physical fights are girl on girl and include hair pulling, scratching and slapping.  They also mentioned that girls are viscious with their verbal attacks while boys are more likely to let it roll off their backs.  It was interesting to see the positions from each side and to see them try to articulate why they perceived one gender as more aggressive than another.  There was one group that stood out as being different than the rest of the students.  Our ESL students (primarily Hispanic but some African) were also divided by gender but in what we would consider in a more traditional sense.  The girls spoke of how boys considered all things possessions, including their girlfriends, and that through a sense of bravado they would sometimes use physical force to impose their rules or opinions.  The boys spoke of how girls were delicate and boys weren't "allowed" to hit them but girls were allowed to hit each other and boys.  Plus girls were "more prone to drama" than boys.  Their gender divide was the most pronounced of all groups.

When we spoke of the economic divide, the debate grew heated and intense.  Some students were very committed and intense in their belief that money and power corrupts...absolutely.  That the more money people get, the more they want and they'll do ANYTHING to do get what they want.  Since they have money and power, they believe they can buy their way out of the situation.  Others felt that although people with money may be corrupt, they wouldn't resort to violence, but rather theft and extortion (i.e. ponsy schemes) to achieve their goals.  Violence wasn't necessary in their world.  Students were incensed by the thought that this didn't qualify as "violence," which necessitated a discussion about how to define the word.  Some felt it was any act that induced pain and suffering, where others felt there must be physical aggression involved.  The students who felt the poor were more likely to commit acts of violence felt that desperate times called for desperate measures... ergo, since poor people needed things -- food, money, shelter -- they would resort to anything to achieve their means.  This was a hotly debated argument.  One student asked me, "which answer is right?"  I think he was a bit frustrated to discover...that I wouldn't give him statistics to back one opinion.  The point of the discussion was to explore where the student stood and to listen to opposing views.  It is always fascinating for me to hear how students justify their beliefs.  I heard that "rich people lie better," "poor people are maladjusted and rich people are insecure."

We moved onto a bullying quiz, which exposed many stereotypes young people held.  For example, most felt that bullies were misunderstood, unhappy, insecure individuals who were just "lashing out."  When they heard that statistically, most bullies were confident, secure with a core group of friends, it puzzled and I think frustrated them.  We need to feel there is a reason behind people's actions.  But this quote from a young man who has participated in bullying gives a lot of justification:

"As the bully, it's different.  It's different...it's power.  It's the greatest high you can feel.  Sure you feel bad after, but the rush.  It's enough to drive anyone to any lengths.  The high it gives you just transforms you.  It becomes the only drive you need to get through.  It's a twisted and disturbed high, but nothing can beat those moments."

We continued to tackle the stereotypes and the students had some really wonderful moments as they argued, debated, discussed and pondered the issues.  They questioned me; they questioned each other; and they questioned themselves.  This is the groundwork I think we need to lay in order to go forward and start to create more empathy for victims and a safer environment to stand up and say, "it's not cool to hassle that kid...back off."  We shall see.  The questions always remain... will this have an impact?  The fact they remember our last discussion and were ready to go further this week, to me, is a positive sign.  It is making them evaluate their beliefs.  Now, let's see if we can get them to change their actions...
For those of you interested, the following is the lesson plan I introduced this week to the freshmen here at our school:

ACTIVITIES

·        The teacher will then lead a Human Barometer Game – where the students will have an opportunity to discuss and evaluate their perceptions about bullying.  There will three zones – Strongly Agree, Strongly Disagree, Not Sure.  The teacher will read a list of statements – students need to choose a zone based on whether they personally agree, disagree with the statements.  If they’re not sure how they feel, they choose “not sure.”  After choosing their zone, groups in each zone discuss why they chose that zone and choosing one speaker (a different speaker for each time we have a statement), they must find a way to say in one sentence why their group is standing there.  After all three groups present their arguments, an opportunity is given for students to move to a different group, (to reassess if you will).

o       In today’s world, bullying is expected and often rewarded.

o       Sometimes violence is a necessary solution.

o       Teasing and rough play is not that serious.

o       Bullying and harassment are the same thing.

o       Cyber bullying can easily be prevented.

o       Poor people commit more acts of violence than people with money.

o       Men are more likely to be bullies than women.

o       The family is where we first learn to bully.

o       We can someday live in a non-violent world.

        ·       

·        Students will take a piece of paper and crumple it up, stamp on it and really mess it up but NOT rip it.  Then the teacher will have them unfold the paper, smooth it out and look at how scarred and dirty it is.

o       Teacher will then have the students apologize to the paper.  Even though the students say “they’re sorry,” and try to straighten out the paper, the teacher will point out all the scars left behind.  Those scars will never go away, no matter how hard they try to fix it.

o       The teacher will point out that is what happens when we use words like “ho,” “fag,” “loser,” “stupid,” “retard,” and “fat.”  They may say they’re sorry but the damage is done.  I discovered that this activity wasn't effective with some of the students -- especially those who were more vocal in their beliefs that victims bring bullying on themselves.  For that group, I ended switching things up a bit and brought in http://www.teachingtolerance.org's/ quiz on bullying.  It created some great discussions about stereotypes about bullies and victims.

·        After the human barometer game and discussion, students will be split into groups of four to five students in a group.  They will be given a large piece of paper to share.  They’ll be instructed to brainstorm on the following:

o       A Public Service Announcement idea for WANT TV.  Explain that a PSA must inform, educate and inspire change.  The PSA should be short, can contain dialogue (but doesn't have to), and must contain some important message or action the students want the viewer to know or take. 

o       Students will create their idea for a PSA for consideration for WANT TV.  The winning 3 or 4 concepts will be produced and aired on WANT TV.

o       Give students about ten to fifteen minutes to brainstorm and discuss, write up their concept (with dialogue if appropriate) and hand in. Collect the PSA ideas at the end of the period.

·        Wrap up with a brief discussion about whether any perceptions changed during the human barometer game.  Did anything surprise the groups about the brainstorming session?  Any observations or discussions come out that they didn’t expect?  (For example, my students got into an active debate about “intent” and the definition of bullying.)

Content/Concepts/Skills students will be learning

Students will start to redefine and analyze their perceptions on violence and bullying, its roots and its future.  Students will work on their own observations, sharing stories and start to look at the school community.

Student Assessment

Students will be assessed on written PSA idea (handed in).  Students are assessed on participation in the human barometer game, verbal responses to the questions from the brainstorming session.

  

Real Education is Human... and Empowering... and Uplifting

So I'm joining in the voice of IDEA this week in celebrating the values of real education.  Those being that Real education is ... Human. ... Powerful.   ... Relevant and ... Transformative.  They are spending the week promoting blogs that help illuminate this message. 

Since I am a huge fan of using theatre to help students empathize and humanize the world around them, I thought I'd lend my voice to the process.  This year is a challenging one for me in many ways.  Our anti-bullying piece is getting more and more requests from other school districts.  The message contained in it resonates with young people and adults.  And yet, my own administration is somehow frightened of the power of the voices of the young people.  We say we want to hear what they have to say, and even when they speak within culturally acceptable standards, we are afraid.  Of what, I wonder...  Meanwhile, I move forward with the anti-bullying year long campaign here at the high school.  And the students' perceptions of what makes a bully, what makes a victim, how do we help (or is there any solution to this issue) continues to perplex me.  Even in my own classroom, where I struggle to keep the young people from treating each other and themselves poorly.  What messages are we as adults teaching them that their immediate response is to denigrate one another?

And then there is our self-esteem piece.  I have close to 500 surveys sitting on my desk these days.  I have to read them in small chunks.

"I feel like after I lose weight I'll be 100% confident all of the time."

"Sometimes when I look in the mirror all I see is disgust.  I see all my flaws immediately."

"How I feel depends on if I have my mask on or not.  (My make-up.)  I mean I love myself but I don't feel pretty.  I would change my body.  My self-esteem really took a hit when I went to a store and no clothes fit...  The perfect person?  Skinny.  A size 0 because that's what size the models are."

We use theatre to remind the young people that we are all human.  Flaws and all, we are all unique and special.  Theatre is especially forgiving to those students who struggle in other classes.  You don't have to be good in math or science or even in reading to do well in theatre.  There are ways to make it work.  If you are willing to try.  If you are willing to work with others and try to find ensemble moments.  If you are willing to take a risk...   Ah, there's the rub, right?  Taking a risk.  I constantly battle to create a safe environment for my students.  A place where they can fail and still get up and try it again.  We talk about my failures (and goodness knows I have had many) and my successes in my career.  But if I hadn't tried, I never would've succeeded or failed.  I just would've "been."  My students (I hope) feel safe to try crazy things onstage, knowing that they might fail ... but they just might be brilliant.  Unless they are willing to try, how can they know?

The fact that they have won theatre competitions empowers them.  They fact they wrote an award-winning, published play... empowers them.  The fact that their voice gets heard through their art - through theatre and music and dance and video... makes them feel like they have something to say.  And when they feel that someone is listening, they become more passionate, more involved, more committed to all aspects of the educational experience.  Too often we plop students down, gravestone style, in perfect little rows and talk at them.  In the dynamic classrooms I work to emulate, the students are moving, they are talking with the teacher and with each other, their ideas are up and presented everywhere for everyone to see.  They use technology to further their education.  Our literary club will soon have its own blog.  Our video students create, write and produce their own television show.  The theatre students write, direct and perform their own one act plays.  Their voices are being heard.  In our year of respect, the social studies students are putting together a plan of action for the school.  Their voices are being heard.

At the end of the day, that is what makes us human.  The need to connect.  The need to have our voices heard.  The need to listen and communicate and share with each other.  Real education MUST be human.