Embracing the Average

The Dove company, makers of soap and other personal care products has established it's marketing as embracing the beauty of all.  They started with the Dove Evolution videos, in which they showed the transformation of a model from her everyday girl on the street look to her magazine ready look to show people that this ideal to which we all aspire is an illusion created by artists.

They followed up with the Dove Beauty Sketches: You're More Beautiful Than You Think videos.  These encouraged us to realize that while we focus on our flaws others do not.  I'm on board with this, and it has gotten Dove a lot of attention as these have gone viral.  There are others, but these are the two that became the most well known.

I applaud Dove for these efforts and hope they will continue to make women of all races, sizes, and looks learn to appreciate themselves.  They have one experiment that I take issue with, however, because it seems to be asking us to deny a basic fact.  It is the Choose Beautiful experiment.  They replaced the signs above the entrance doors to a store with the words "Average" and "Beautiful."  They then recorded women as they entered.  Any woman who is like me probably didn't notice the signs, to begin with, and just entered whichever door they habitually entered, but you can see in the video that some women saw and paused to consider their choice.  Here's where I am bothered rather than inspired.  Any woman who entered the door marked Average was stopped and told that she should embrace the idea that she is beautiful.

Let's recognize a couple of basic facts.  First, by definition, most people are average.  If everyone is beautiful, no one is beautiful.  I'm not saying that everyone doesn't have some uniquely beautiful thing about them or that everyone doesn't have some special gift.  I absolutely believe that God has given everyone what they need to do what he has given them to do.  However, the idea that no one should see themselves as average is just a silly idea.

Second, the most beautiful women don't look the same every day.  Perhaps she is sick or hasn't slept well.  She may know that she is less beautiful today than she normally is.

Third, and most importantly, let's stop thinking of average as a bad thing.  Average isn't bad.  It isn't ugly.  It isn't something to shun or deny.  It is exactly what it is.  It is average.  Our culture has become so obsessed with the superlative that we can't be satisfied anymore.  A meal isn't worth eating if it isn't the best meal I have ever eaten, worthy of posting on Instagram.  A Disney cruise is somehow deficient if I don't have the luxury passes for everything.  Prom isn't just supposed to be fun; it has to be magical.  We don't post pictures with a friend that says we are friends.  We say, "my whole heart."  Setting aside the idolatry of that, let's just address that it isn't true.  That person is not your whole heart.  No matter how good a friend they are to you, they are one person in your life that you love.

With the best of intentions, Dove took something away from the women who went through the average door.  They took away their sense of self-assessment.  The attempt to make everyone think they are beautiful seems loving, but it still means I have to believe you and not myself.  In the same way that kids who got trophies they hadn't earned actually felt worse when they looked at it, telling everyone to view themselves as beautiful is making them feel worse when they evaluate the image in the mirror.  Getting a compliment on something you don't personally believe to be commendable leads to insecurity and a sense of imposter's syndrome.  "If only they knew," you will think.

My blog is supposed to be about education, so let's look at this academically.  Telling every kid that they are the best student ever seems loving, but they know their weaknesses better than you do.  When you compliment something they feel bad about, it just makes them feel worse.  Instead, have them engage in some reflection.  If they don't like what they've done, don't tell them they are wrong.  Ask them why.  Ask them what they would do differently if they could do it again.  Teach them the humility to embrace the fact that they aren't the best at everything, but they can get better at anything.

Statistically, unless you are in a school for the academically gifted, you teach mostly average kids.  That means they will be very good at something and mediocre at others.  Embrace that, and teach them to embrace it.  They should want to grow in everything, which they can't do if they are already being told they are amazing at it.  Help them develop their strengths, and help them see how they can grow in their weaknesses.  Do not try to make them think they will be the best in the world at their weaknesses in the belief that it will be motivating.

Which door would you walk through?  Some of you may rightly walk through the "Beautiful" door.  I would walk through the "Average" door and then be proud of my self-awareness, but I have a long history of not caring what other people think.

Where Were Their Teachers?

I grew up in the '80s.  Adults in my life, whether it was my parents or my teachers or adults in my church, held certain expectations for my behavior and for my attitude toward them.  My parents did not require that my brother and I call them sir or ma'am, but they certainly did not accept backtalk from us either.  Some of my teachers did require us to address them as ma'am and sir while others did not.  We were expected to know the difference between those teachers and conform to those expectations.  If I had gotten in trouble at school for disrespect, my parents not only would not have come to the school to defend my actions, I would have been in trouble at home as well.  I'm not saying this was happening in every household without exception, but it was the norm.

Fast forward to 2019.  A group of Catholic school boys is in Washington DC on a school trip.  They are there to participate in the March for Life, the annual rally of pro-life people who want to bring a voice to the millions of unborn children being killed in medical clinics.  This is, in my opinion, a laudable activity for their school to invest in that aligns with their worldview.  Good for their school for bringing them to an activity like this.  There's a lot for them to learn in being part of a legal protest that aligns with their faith.  If only that is where this story ended.  Sadly, it is not.

See this article for a pretty good analysis of all the different videos.

There is rarely only one event happening in Washington DC at any given time.  There are often multiple protests from various groups, and January 18 was no exception.  In addition to the March for Life, there was also the Indigenous Peoples' March.  This is a rally for Native American groups to bring attention to the issues that affect them.  The fact that these two rallies overlap on the same day should be an example of American pluralism in action, right?  Two groups were there peaceably assemble to petition their government about issues for which they are passionate.  Both should have been able to complete their marches without incident, especially since they are not conflicting issues (after all, it wasn't like a NARAL march was scheduled to overlap with the March for Life).  If only that is where the story ended.  Sadly, it is not.

Because both marches overlapped near the Lincoln Memorial, the Indigenous Peoples' march began to attract attention from the March for Life.  There was also a group of Black Hebrew Israelites present, although it is unclear to me whether they were part of an official march or just there.  The boys from Covington Catholic were bothered by the statements of these people, which were, in fairness, designed to be offensive.  I mean, I would definitely be offended if I heard someone say "you worship blasphemy" at a rally.  I would be offended enough to turn my back and walk away.  It would not occur to me to start shouting my school's initials, pep rally style, in order to drown the statements out. 

Perhaps my understanding of free speech is flawed, but I was not taught that he who chants the loudest wins.  I was definitely taught to speak and to work for what I believed (and worked for NC Right to Life for a number of years).  I was not taught that it was okay for me to drown out the speech of others. 

A particularly outspoken facebook friend of mine insists that the Native American man was harassing the students and that if I watched the full video, my perspective would change.  I watched it.  I see him stepping over to the area in which they were chanting, but I do not see that he is harassing them.  In an interview, he states that was trying to step between the students and the Black Hebrew Israelites because he thought he could diffuse the situation.  Even with video, the truth usually lies somewhere between two perspectives, but I definitely do not see him do anything that would cause them to circle him and start chanting at him. 

She asked me what crime they committed.  When did the standard of behavior we expect from our students stop at what is legal?  Did they have to commit a crime to be considered jerks?  No, they did nothing that would get them arrested, but they did do things that would have gotten me suspended from my private school.  Whether in behavior (chanting and jumping around) or in attitude (the boy who just smirks throughout the entire encounter), expectations would have been higher.

This brings me to the real question.  Where were their teachers? 

They were on a school trip.  I've been on school trips.  I've chaperoned school trips.  There is no way that I, as a teacher, would stand around watching this happen.  Whether you believe the kids were being jerks (or like my friend, believe they were being harassed), the lack of involvement of adults is most disturbing.  Shouldn't we be seeing them talking to their students about what is happening? Shouldn't we be seeing them modeling appropriate protest behavior for the students?  Shouldn't we be seeing their teachers step in to pull them away from this situation?  Shouldn't we be seeing them? 

We are teachers.  When we are with our students, whether on trips or in our classrooms, it is not our job to observe as bad things happen.  It is our job to teach.  Whether that is telling them that they are wrong or pulling them away from a situation where there could be danger, we should not be invisible.

I'm glad that the Catholic Diocese has issued an apology.  I'm glad they are investigating the behavior of their students.  I implore them, as a teacher, to investigate the apparent inaction of their teachers. 

The Small Things

This is going to be a short post because I just woke up from a nap and have that feeling that my head weighs a lot. 

Yesterday, my yearbook staff and I met a deadline that I truly did not believe we would make a week ago.  I posted on twitter and facebook a screenshot of a little message from Jostens that said, "Congratulations on meeting your deadline." in a little green bar.  A fellow yearbook teacher replied, "I love that green notification soooo much every time."  Even better, after the staff meets their final deadline, little fireworks appear on the screen.  Those fireworks are amazing.

It occurs to me that most people think of the big things in life (weddings, proms, expensive gifts, etc.) when they think of things that make them happy.  However, the vast majority of smiles in your life come from the small things, like tiny digital fireworks, the sound of your favorite shoes clicking against the ground, or when you catch the eye of a friend in a meeting, knowing that you two are having the same thought.

Just think of the joy Charlie Brown has in finding a pencil with the teeth marks of "that little red-headed girl" and realizing she's human.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKKjqzkGo3o

Let's teach our kids to find joy in little things instead of those things that must be bought or planned.  It doesn't even have to be put in your lesson plan.  You can just model it day in and day out.

Fame Doesn't Make You Right (More Stories on the Death of Expertise)

Anyone who knows me knows that I am not a fan of professional sports.  I would never be a member of a fantasy anything team and feel like I am hearing a foreign language when people discuss games and calls.  I do, however, like a few players.  Steph Curry was one of those players. 

Then, a few weeks ago, Steph appeared on a podcast and discussed, among other things, conspiracy theories.  In the discussion, he stated that he did not believe men had walked on the moon.  As a science teacher and life-long lover of NASA, my heart sank.  My students (many of whom really like conspiracy theories anyway) would come to class with a new argument - a famous person doesn't believe it.

To be fair, Steph has recently said that he was joking, and he did take the time to tour NASA's JPL and talked with Buzz Aldrin.  He apologized to astronaut Scott Kelley for the problems his statements have caused.  Kyrie Irving has done the same, apologizing to science teachers everywhere for his statements that he thought the earth was flat. 

Let's set aside for the moment that I teach the moon landing, love the history of our space program, and therefore, have an emotional connection to this particular topic.  Let's just say for a moment that the issue is a topic I have less passion for.  There's a larger question here.  Why is Steph Curry's opinion important?  Why do students think that his statement is a win in their column?  Why does his status as a basketball champion make him more right in their minds?  It's the same argument I had with them after Kyrie Irving's statement that the earth was flat.  If he comes out with an opinion about the rules of basketball, I would find that credible, but he has no expertise in science.  Even with their walking back their statements, the question I have is why we care.  Why does a basketball player's opinion on issues of science mean anything?  If a geologist comes out and says he thinks the earth is flat, that should make big news.  But why does it matter if a professional athlete believes it?

Please understand that I am far from saying, "Shut up and dribble."  We live in a country where the right to speak is our first right.  Everyone is truly entitled to their own opinion.  Steph and Kyrie are equally as free to have and state their opinions on any issue as I am.  But the equal right to an opinion does not mean equally valid opinions.

These two stories are not isolated.  They are reflective of many issues.

- I am facebook friends with a woman whose son is autistic.  She is an anti-vaxxer as a result of her son's condition.  She, a nurse, has had ample opportunity to examine the studies involving this issue.  She has read every report, all of which show no linkage between vaccines and autism.  They all show genetics and trauma during the third trimester of pregnancy as the primary risk factors.  She does not care.  She openly says she does not care.  She has said out loud and in writing, "I don't care what the CDC found.  I know what I know.  Autism moms can't stop. Won't stop."  She is openly saying that her expertise as the mother of one child is more valuable than the expertise of those who have researched thousands of children.

- When the product Airborne started being sold, many people recommended it to me.  I have no problem with this product.  It is essentially powdered Vitamin C, which we have known for decades supports your immune system.  I have a problem with the way in which people recommended it to me.  "You should use this.  It was invented by a teacher."  I'm not sure why that should matter.  If it were invented by an immunologist, I might be more inclined to care.  Why should the fact that a teacher invented it make me more inclined to trust it? 

- Even members of Congress, while performing an investigation, fall into this trap.  While asking Google executives about how Google functions, they follow up by disagreeing with them.  This video would be funny if it weren't so sad.  They have brought an expert into the room and asked them questions only to replace his reality with their own.

We have stopped caring about whether or not people know what they are talking about.  We have entered an age of populism about knowledge.  There are people who praise that, calling it the "democratization of knowledge."  I called it the Death of Expertise.  We no longer care if someone holds a degree in the topic at hand or has experience in it.   How did this happen?

I think it starts with our cultural worship of fame.  This goes back at least as far as the age of television.  It may go back farther, but I know that when celebrities started endorsing products on television commercials, it reflected the idea that their opinions mattered more than those of others.  Remember the "I'm not a doctor but I play one on tv" commercials.  They didn't hire a doctor because people were more likely to believe a famous person.  If you believe you don't worship fame, look at who you follow on social media.  At the time of this writing, Kim Kardashian has 59.3 million Twitter followers, compared to Buzz Aldrin's 1.36 million, and the fact that I have to use google to name any of last year's Nobel prize winners.  We absolutely worship fame over expertise.  The few scientists whose names you do know (Bill Nye, Neil deGrasse Tyson) work hard at maintaining their public presence and hire publicists to do so.

Speaking of Twitter, I think social media has contributed to this problem as well.  A few decades ago, you would know the opinions of people you knew well and people who were interviewed on the news (and before 24-hour news killed good journalism, you could believe they had taken the time to seek a credible expert).  Social media has given everyone a megaphone, and while you have some ability to cultivate your echo chamber by who you choose to follow, you are exposed to the opinions of far more people than you used to be.  All opinions lie side by side in the age of social media (with the edge to your side if you are famous, of course).   Because they are all right there together, our brains process them as equally valid.  We get to choose who we will agree with, regardless of their credibility.

I know this has gotten long, and my blog is supposed to be about education, so let me wrap up by speaking to teachers.  This perfect storm of cultural cynicism, fame worship, social media leveling everyone, and some high profile falls of authority figures has led to this, and we need to do what we can as teachers to model better for our students.  We need to openly care more about expertise than fame.  We need them to see that we seek out credible sources; they should never hear us say that we "read something somewhere" without caring about who we get information from.  We need to teach them to seek out credible information (including but not limited to their sources for research papers). 

We live in a sea of "information" that is a mix of good an bad, credible and ridiculous, worthy and unworthy of our time.  We, as teachers, cannot be passive.  We must act as lighthouses on this sea, pointing them to the good and credible and worthy and teaching them to recognize it.