Tag Archives: relationships

Doors of perception

We don’t see the world exactly as it is. We see the world through the spectrum of white light, and our eyes fill in the blank spot in our vision that is created by our optic nerve. Other animals can see in the ultraviolet spectrum. We can’t sense an earthquake tremor as quickly as birds. We can’t smell as well as our dogs, we can’t see in the dark as well as our cats. We appreciate different shades of colours that some animals can’t see. In fact, our culture and upbringing affects our appreciation of colours and our ability to distinguish colours from one another.

All this to say that we don’t see the world as it really is. Our senses are so powerful, yet they limit us. And that’s before our biases even creep in. Politics, religion, science, mind altering drugs, diet, confidence, insecurities, mood… so many things alter the way we see the world.

We don’t see the world as it is. We are quite literally delusional. Our perception of the world is one-of-a-kind, uniquely different than everyone else’s. This is useful to remember when we can’t come to a mutual understanding. When we disagree on a perspective, it isn’t just that we don’t see eye to eye, it’s also that we are seeing from different eyes.

Understanding this, we need to be more patient with each other. More open to different views. More appreciative about where others are coming from. Our perception of the world is different than others, and always will be… no matter how wide open we think our perceptual doors are.

Appreciating true friends

I’ve had a couple really enriching conversations with two really good friends recently. They have made me contemplate the value of a true friend.

You can share who you are in full confidence. You can listen and connect in ways that are far beyond the banter of story for story or ‘that reminds me of’ conversations which are more on the surface.

You walk away feeling you know them, and yourself, better.

You know time in between visits won’t reduce the connection, but you also don’t want too long to go by before you connect again.

There is nothing quite like time spent with a true friend.

Opportunity not Obligation revisited

I wrote about the idea of offering people ‘Opportunities not Obligations‘ back in November 2019. I have used this a lot since then. It’s one of my favourite social hacks to allow a person to feel guilt free about turning down an opportunity. (Read the post to really understand what this is all about.)

I want to add something to this now, some advice to the person saying it… if you use this phrase and the person declines the opportunity, well then you need to let it go. You need to be authentically okay with the person not accepting the opportunity. Otherwise, your follow-up will undermine the good intentions of the phrase.

If you say, ‘Are you sure’ Or ‘that’s too bad’, or if you ask again, then you are making the thing you offered feel more like an obligation. You are making the person feel like you are disappointed or let down.

“This is an opportunity, not an obligation.”

When you use the phrase authentically, then it is freeing to both you, the asker, and your friend, the receiver. No apologies needed, no guilt. But if you aren’t authentic and you will be disappointed, then this isn’t a helpful phrase to use.

How important is it?

It’s that time of year when students are applying for university, or college, or a technical institute, and the concern about their marks is at the forefront. Suddenly, a difference of 2% could matter. And while some schools want a personal profile, and want to know more than just marks, the marks matter a lot. But I wonder how many straight ‘A’ students head off to university and then drop out during or after their first year? I bet it’s a higher number than you would guess.

How many students have had their grades spoon fed to them with cookie cutter precision, doing exactly what the teachers want, but not learning what it’s like to manage their own time, or direct their own learning, or manage relationships with people outside the safety of their own grade and school?

Universities don’t find out a lot about a student when they determine entrance by small differences in GPA. How important is a 2% difference in grades, when so many other things factor into success? But if you are short 2% and your application doesn’t get looked at, it actually matters a lot.

Relationships can be the same. How important is: communication; money; sex; balance of responsibilities; work/life balance; diet & exercise; or support in a relationship?

If you are running a deficit in any of these areas, then it matters a lot. If you feel you have balance or your needs are being met, these things don’t matter much. If something is unbalanced or missing, then the level of concern increases. A simple example is money. If you have a little less money than you wish you had, you might not go on as expensive a vacation as you hoped for, that’s a minor issue and money isn’t really important. If you can’t pay rent or buy groceries for the week, then money is a major issue.

It doesn’t matter if it’s marks, or money, or any other concern I did or didn’t list, it’s when there is a deficit that these things become important. We often take advantage of the things that are working in our favour, because they aren’t a concern, and worry about the things that we are missing. While this is necessary for us to meet our desires and needs, it can often be at the expense of living a good life.

What is the price paid by a high achieving student who is so marks focused that they don’t enjoy other aspects of their lives so they can get a 96% instead of a 94%? What about a workaholic who is trying to squeeze out a few more thousand dollars by working a 65 hour week?

How important is it to meet the needs you have, and what’s the true price of meeting these needs? I’m sure in some cases the effort or sacrifice is important enough… but other times it really isn’t, and focusing on the deficits might make you lose focus on what’s really important.

Seeing the good in people

We need to have boundaries and if someone is harming you, you need not try to find the good in that person, when they are not being good to you. When you are being ill-treated, find a healthy way to disconnect from the person who is harming or insulting or mistreating you, and there is no need or responsibility to see the good in a person that treats you that way. Unhealthy relationships like this are best to be severed without an attempt to see the good… that’s how domestic violence is perpetuated, “He’s not always like this,” or “He’s good to the kids.” No, he’s broken and your face isn’t going to fix his fist. Get out!

This isn’t about toxic relationships where people use and abuse power over you. But, most people do not come across other people that victimize them on a regular basis.

On the other hand, we need not dismiss someone or think less of them simply because we do not agree with them. When you simply disagree with someone, that’s when it’s important not to make it an ad hominem attack – an attack of the person, rather than their ideas. On a day-to-day basis we will often come across people that we have different views from us, and while they may not see the world from the same perspective as us, that doesn’t mean they aren’t good people. That doesn’t mean they deserve to be treated poorly.

Most teachers understand this. They can be disappointed in a student’s behaviour without making the child feel worthless for making a mistake. They see potential in a kid even when the kid acts out in inappropriate ways. They give students the benefit of the doubt. Good parents do this too.

Yet somehow this gets lost when dealing with adults. Adult to adult disagreements and arguments often come with beliefs that people are one-dimensional. But what’s the harm in seeing the good in others, even when we disagree with them. What would happen if we understood their intentions more than their words? What if we decided that our disagreements were with a good person? How would that change the argument or the circumstances?

A lot of good can come from looking for the good in people.

From faith or with faith?

This isn’t meant to be a critique of any specific religion, and it’s not a criticism of having faith in your beliefs. It’s a simple question: What should religions really teach us?

All religions have benevolent followers who act out of kindness and love. Support for family and community is a driving force for them.

All religions have unkind and unlikeable followers who act out of selfishness and self-indulgence. A lack of care for others well-being is inherently in their goals and aspirations.

Many people have benefited from a church or religious community supporting them. A sense of greater belonging strengthening their identity with like-minded people.

Many people have suffered in religious wars, crusades, and attacks from foreign people with foreign beliefs. A sense of alienation, a world of slavery, forced conversion, or death follows the invasion.

Do we need religion to act kind and benevolent? Could we be loving, caring and community-minded without a holy scripture? Could we be good people without faith in an organized religion, without a scripture to point the way?

Does goodness come from following a faith, or does a faith promote the goodness already inherent within us?

We can coexist with people of different faiths being loving and kind to one another. We can see the good in others who approach their faith with benevolence, even if their faith is not the same as ours. And if a faith prevents this, is that a benevolent God to follow? Can we seek peace beyond our faith, with those from outside our faith?

Do we learn to be good from our faith, or do we need to better understand how to be good to everyone beyond those that share our beliefs, as well as those that do? For it seems to me that in this day and age, if one’s faith does not promote openness and love beyond that faith, the faithful need to question how much good that faith brings them?

What students remember

What students forget:

  • The Krebs cycle
  • Historical facts
  • How to solve quadratic equations
  • The homework they did
  • Answers on tests
  • Worksheets
  • Teachers who will forget them

What students remember:

  • Teachers who will remember them
  • Teachers who listened
  • Teachers that made them laugh
  • Teachers who were passionate about teaching
  • Teachers who didn’t give up on them
  • Friends
  • Engaging projects
  • Sports and clubs

These lists are not extensive… but they are the inspiration for a question: What will students remember about school during the 2020-2021 pandemic?

Teachers have it tough right now. Students too. More than ever teachers need to focus on teaching students, not subjects.

Yesterday I saw an article with a title like, ‘Study shows students are months behind in reading skills due to remote learning.’ Squeezing one more book into the year won’t change that. Showing students a passion for reading will.

Focus on students… and they will remember you, and what you taught them, for all the right reasons.

A chance to teach

Our grade 10’s are working on resumes and yesterday I got to work with them on a lesson about job interviews. Their pre-lesson homework is to fill out an application form, I use an old one from Subway. I start by sharing some of my experience hiring as a Starbucks manager, then we discuss what makes a good application form, resume, and interview.

Then students take turns in groups of three, being interviewer, interviewee, and observer. They are given a 10 question interview, but the second and third person to go get 3 new questions each turn… this adds a bit of variety to those that have watched the other students go before them.

This is a lesson I’ve done many times before, and one that I enjoy sharing. It is practical and useful, and I share some personal, funny, and even embarrassing stories that help students get to know me a bit better.

In the craziness of school startup, it’s just wonderful to spend a bit of time teaching, to remember why I do the things I do. I have not had a lot of teaching time the past few years, and spending a bit of time with students like this really charges my batteries!

Is it just me?

I’ve seen incredible understanding, kindness, and patience in schools this year. I’m a bit worried about the kids who worry, and I wish classes could mix, but it seems everyone is being so considerate.

Maybe it’s just the honeymoon stage, but I’m impressed with the gratitude and thoughtfulness of digital communication I’m seeing. I’m noticing appreciation from families for what is happening… even if it isn’t ideal, or what could have been possible without so many restrictions.

This doesn’t show up in the news. This isn’t what makes headlines. Schools are resilient places. Educators are caring people. Students want to do well.

Everyone is stepping up.

It’s only the start of the journey, and it may be a bit of a bumpy trip… but everyone is doing the best they can (students, educators, and families) and that is making a noticeable and positive difference.

Is it just me, or are others noticing this too?

The best they can with what they’ve got.

I’m sure if I go looking, I’d find a similar post I’ve written before, but this idea is worth exploring (again) and it was inspired by Aaron Davis’ comment on yesterday’s Daily Ink.

I don’t remember where I first heard this, but it was decades ago, before I became an educator: “People do the best they can with the resources they have.”

This is such an empowering position to hold when dealing with an upset person. They are trying, they are doing their best, they are hurting and need compassion. This shifts the direction of the conversation, especially when your own buttons are pushed by the person or when they are showing their upset by going on the attack.

If you go into a conversation with an upset person believing they are only there to attack you, that leaves you only with a choice of being defensive or going on the attack yourself. If you go into the same conversation thinking this person is upset and doing the best they can, suddenly you can shift to helping them, even when their strategy isn’t ideal.

This isn’t always easy. Here is an example from a while back at another school: Student does something very inappropriate. Parents are invited in. Parent has heard the student’s ‘creative’ perspective on how they are not at fault. Parent comes in with metaphorical ‘guns-a-blazing’ to defend the kid.

Whether it’s a father or mother that comes in, I call this ‘mama bear’ behavior. Mama bears will do anything to protect their cubs. So, what’s the worst thing that you can do with an angry mama bear? Attack the cub in front of them.

The easy, but unhelpful reaction to hearing a parent defend a kid, who has fabricated a story to the parent about the innocence of their behaviour, is to call the kid out. The harder thing to do is to remember that the kid is scared and doing the best they can, and the parent is angry and doing the best they can. A counterpoint at this juncture can easily lead to an unhealthy argument. So, a softer approach is better.

It’s a matter of remembering that we want the same thing… to take care of a student who has in our eyes done wrong and in the parents eyes has been wronged. And so that parent is doing the best they can with the knowledge and resources they have.

This doesn’t mean that you let the kid off. It does mean that you can take an approach that is more aikido than karate, more deflective and less of a direct attack.

Without going into specifics, I talk about how more than one kid was involved in the situation. I talk about how intentions aren’t always known and that two people can see the same situation in different ways. I ask the parent to remember that the other kid has a parent too, and might ask what they would think of the situation if they were the parent of the other child (this is delicate and not something to do early on, only when the parent is less angry than when they came in to defend their cub).

It’s only when the parent can see another perspective that I then discuss their kid, and the approach is that ‘we both want the same thing’. Without saying it bluntly, the approach is asking ‘Do you want your kid acting this way?’ or more subtly, ‘Do you want your kid being perceived they way they are being perceived?’

In essence, it’s about giving the parent more information and resources than they arrived with, to deal with the situation better than an angry mama bear has defending a cub from danger. It’s about saying, ‘Your kid made a bad choice’, and separating their behaviour from their identity and the parent’s identity too. And then it’s about helping both of them get the strategies and resources they need to make the situation better.

It’s not easy. But when a mama bear sees that you want what’s best for their kid… and that’s really what you want even though the kid made a really bad choice… then the outcome becomes what you intended it to be. That same mama bear parent has, at times, even wanted to go harder on their kid than I do. If it comes to this point, they are still operating under the same pretence, they are doing the best they can with what they’ve got.