Bullying's Raw Materials

Guest post by Paul Couglin, The Protectors.

Letter of Endorsement (Larry Taylor, Prestonwood Christian Academy)

Bullying's Raw Materials

Within the freedom-from-bullying community, traditional thinking had it that after high school you were usually safe from high-school-like bullying. Yet more and more tragic stories from colleges across the globe are telling us that bullying is likely increasing even past high school--an alarming indicator.  [http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2012/1107/1224326238140.html.] Why such longevity for this intentional form of abuse and anti-social behavior compared to just 10 years ago? Because the raw materials needed to produce bullying are more plentiful than before, and these materials are often not what many of us think, making our response ineffective. For example, too many in education still cling to the now discredited belief that Bullies have low self-esteem, among related myths. Here is a list of bullying's major components, which have far more to do with adult culture than school culture:  

• Arrogance: Along with unprecedented material wealth has unfortunately come the belief that the person with the most stuff not only wins--he or she is more important and valuable than others. For proof, consider how bullying's rise coincides more with our economic boom years than recent recession years.  
• Hubris: When surveyed, American high school-aged children score the highest in personal confidence when compared to students from other countries. But they rank 18th in test scores and academic performance. We're Number One! in thinking we're number-one anyway. That's not healthy confidence--that's delusional hubris, which is excessive self-confidence, conceit and haughtiness. The sages of old warned against such thinking, and we would do well to open our ears to heed these old truths again.  
• Jealousy & Envy: his tag team of discontent within a person's soul goes to the core of much bullying behavior. Unfortunately for us, who even talks about such negative and corrupting emotions? We better if we're serious about diminishing bullying. Jealousy relates more to loss, anger and resentment due to relationships, and is more likely to lead girls to lie, gossip and extort, than boys. Envy, resentment of another due to what they possess (such as status, clothing, boyfriend, girlfriend), compels people to commit abuse and related cruelty that they wouldn't commit otherwise. Narcissists often bully, and the narcissistic personality is prone toward envy. Worse, to secure a sense of superiority in the face of another's ability, bullying narcissists often use contempt as a means to diminish the other person. 
• Disdain & Contempt: Not only do a growing number of students believe they are more valuable and important than others, more and more are looking down their noses at others, believing (though we don't come out and actually say so) that others are not worthy of consideration or respect. As history is quick to remind us, some of the worst human atrocities begin with an unjustified belief in superiority over others. This helps us understand why physically and mentally challenged children are often among the most bullied. Hitler and his henchmen had them murdered, and bullies are trying to take their life in other ways today.
• Immaturity: Failure to launch--the inability of a frightening number of youth to become independent adults--isn't funny anymore. It's a serious social crisis wherein people behave in petulant ways that 10-15 years ago would have caused shock and disbelief. "That's so high school," an expression that reminds us that people usually outgrow immature behavior such as bullying someone due to how they walk and talk, is now being used to describe behavior well into a person's 20s and even 30s. To be immature is to be inevitably self-centered, self-consumed, and self-interested--breeding cells for bullying. We're expected to move past these hurdles and into adulthood and pro-social behavior. This isn't happening like it used to, and we are paying a very large price with prolonged bullying being just one of them. 
• Incivility: From most any reality TV show to just about any election above local dog catcher, our nation has become increasingly uncivil. We no longer agree to disagree agreeably to the degree we used to. Worse, crass behavior that would have caused shame decades ago is now exalted through mediums such as reality TV to the point that being a bully today can mean fame as well as fortune. Time for a national referendum on reality TV? Absolutely.  
• Fallout from the Self-Esteem Movement: A bomb went off in our culture about 30 to 40 years ago, and we are still suffering from its mutating radiation. Most of us know someone whose parents reared them to think that they are really special. Now we get to suffer the consequences of their bullying behavior. Narcissism is the unintended love child of society's union with pop psychology's panacea to society's ills: low self-esteem. For years, we've been giving the patient the wrong medicine. Your average Bully needs more humility, not more self-importance. Instead of writing poems about how special their Inner Butterfly really is, our children need to meditate on the truth that everyone is special and important.
• Shame-Free Culture: What happened to good old-fashioned and healthy (yes, healthy) shame? This negative emotion can point us back to a True North, a right form of conduct. It can help us grow in maturity by making amends for anti-social and life-diminishing behavior. It's required to repair relationships due to inevitable tearing, much the way Vitamin E helps wounds heal.
• Loss of Evil: Bullying isn't merely unfortunate, inevitable, concerning and so on--in prolonged and intense cases it's actually evil, which is among the most antiquated beliefs and words today. Fundamentally, this unique expression of evil stems from what Dante described as "cupiditas." For Dante and other Middle Ages thinkers and philosophers, the sins that spring from that root are the most extreme, or "sins of the wolf." This spiritual condition is the worst of all, in that whatever exists outside oneself has worth only as it can be exploited or consumed by one's self. People aren't people to those ensnared by cupiditas. They are commodities, meant to be consumed, exploited and even ravaged the way a wolf treats its prey and the way Bullies treat Targets. Remind you of anyone you know? Remarkably, such people tend to think that they are very moral. I have known three people ensnared by cupiditas. All have stellar church attendance and do not swear. Hitler was opposed to drinking, swearing, premarital sex, and so on. By drifting from a fundamental understanding of evil, we have drifted from a fundamental strategy to oppose and if possible transform it, leaving us with various expressions of appeasement, which are historically anemic and dangerous. As a society, we are going into battle against bullying with the wrong weapons.
• Cowardice: Most Bystanders know and feel that bullying is wrong. They usually don't need an adult to tell them. But what they need help with is overcoming a common vice, or as the Bible lists it, a sin (Rev. 21:8): Cowardice. Our children, daily, are succumbing to this vice and sin when they have the power to act and help a Target, but they don't because they listened to fear more than doing the right thing afraid. The Greek word for manliness, andreia, is the same word that represents the virtue of the warrior--bravery and courage. When you think of what it means to be manly today, do these two words come to mind? Can we say with a straight face that courage is on the rise? More likely, it's convenient opposite has grown in popularity, which is tragic since male athletes often set the moral thermostat in schools.        

Bullying will get better, but only in pockets of resistance. Let us help you. For proven solutions, go to: www.theprotectors.org

When Schools Go to War

Guest Article by John C. Littleford , Senior Partner, Littleford and Associates

When Schools Go to War

Recently, a client sent this Consultant the following note. 

“Gentlemen:

Over the last several days, we have learned that certain “concerned” members have organized a group with the intention of removing some or all of the Board. We have further learned that this group has sought members’ signatures to call a General Meeting, the sole purpose of which is to remove the Board. The formal removal of a Board is a method used when board members or the Board as a whole have committed egregious acts, failed to fulfill duties or have fallen into a conflict of interest.  Clearly, none of these are the case.

Though the Board has achieved many successes this year, especially in the areas of finance, fiscal management, control and governance, it continues to be plagued by the effects of seemingly unpopular policy changes in the dining room.   Perhaps we changed too much too quickly, and should have communicated the vision more effectively. But, I assure you we forged ahead with the best of intentions.  Though I believe we did an exceptional job delivering our mission statement, it appears it is no longer an accurate statement of our purpose.

The “Concerned Members” say it themselves: “no problem with the core operation.”

Unfortunately, these feelings have been further fueled with gossip, rumored terminations, misinformation, and accusations of micro managing. Though we could refute every allegation, what would we achieve?  Members have likely heard enough and just want not be mired in a political debate. 

A General Meeting to remove the board is an extreme remedy to deal with this matter. No one has done anything egregious. So, to avoid an otherwise divisive and confrontational General Meeting, and in the best interests of all, I hereby tender my resignation.” 

What School is this? It is actually a Country Club Manager responding to the events noted above. But this Consultant has seen similar letters throughout the world coming from heads of schools to their boards, and often responding to “concerned parents” or “concerned alumni” or “concerned faculty.” 

A few years ago, these kinds of “concerned” notes might appear on the bulletin board of the faculty work room, but increasingly they appear on the Internet, in blogs, some of which are vicious in tone. Or they may appear simply as an e mail “blast” to the entire board or entire parent/alumni community. I have seen one on the inside community page of a local newspaper where disgruntled teachers took out an ad to attack the administration and board.

Lessons Learned

There are messages in the letter above that have equal relevance to schools as well as other organizations, profit or nonprofit. 

The “concerned” members’ tactic is an old one. Often the “concerned” parties do not sign their names so we cannot ascertain whether there is a strong movement afoot or there are simply one or a few disgruntled individuals.

The “General Meeting” reminds this Consultant of the Annual General Meeting (AGM) that takes place in many schools in Canada and worldwide.  These can be simple, sparsely attended sessions, which is actually a good thing.  A crowded “annual AGM usually means trouble as some angry group of parents and/or staff is attending for the purpose of berating or overthrowing the board or school leadership.

Managing constituent relations is a key responsibility of school and other nonprofit leaders and their boards.  Not managing them well leaves to frequent board turbulence which spills over to the school or the nonprofit.  The same holds true for the leadership of for profit companies.

The comments about pace of change in the letter above are key and on target. Many new heads are fired early in their tenure because they change even the seemingly most minor procedures or policies too quickly, often at the board’s insistence.  When the new head has not yet built up enough “political capital” to institute some basic and often needed changes, the rank and file faculty will become riled, feeling that the new leader does not understand the mission, culture or traditions. The comments from the manager above about healthy governance and a healthy fiscal structure can mean little to those most attached to “the way we have always done this.” 

One new Head of School arrived to find a mascot that in his mind was a throwback to an earlier time and symbolic of historic rivalries. In even suggesting a change or the thought of one, she ignited a firestorm. Her good intentions were not respected and she was criticized for being an outsider who did not understand the local culture.  

The letter above illustrates two out of the three reasons that heads/directors are “fired”:  managing the type and pace of change poorly (even if the board demands the change); and becoming the “scapegoat” in an incident that simply takes over the life of the school or entity.  The third reason (and the most common one) is a lack of institutional memory on boards due to frequent turnover of trustees which could have played a role in the case above as well.

How to Avoid the “War”

Schools go to war with themselves, when the well intentioned highly emotional board members or constituents, who cannot listen openly to another usually broader point of view, wreak havoc. In our previous Newsletter, entitled “Who Fires the Head” we talked about a case of a long term Chair and Head. The head was in danger after the Chair was forced out in a skillfully orchestrated coup d’état.  The person who engineered that result has now resigned from the Board, leaving the Board a healthier place and the Head with possibly a longer tenure. That board member had often manipulated parent opinion to further his own goals which I am sure he felt were aligned with the best interest of the School. 

Annual sessions on board governance can help avoid these problems. Many schools assume that they only need governance training if they are in trouble and that “generative” think is the next new horizon in board governance. In this Consultant’s experience governance training for all boards needs to be annual and “generative” thinking on the highest strategic level can only occur when boards are truly wise enough and mature enough to rise above the petty issues that so often challenge our schools and boards. Even the oldest, wealthiest schools with some of the most powerful board members fall into these traps of not knowing how to manage constituent unrest or perceived unrest. 

Here is one final piece of advice: always have at least one to three CEO’s of publicly held companies on your board. They tend to have the training to see the larger picture and have a more long term strategic vision. Most of our boards are dominated by good hearted, well intentioned and successful lawyers, financiers, accountants, marketing and HR people, but they do not have even one CEO of a large publicly held company. This speaks again to the key role of the committee on trustees/policy committee, which is the most important committee of any board (and includes the functions of board development and nominations as part of its role). 

Guest Article by John C. Littleford , Senior Partner, Littleford and Associates

When Schools Go to War

Recently, a client sent this Consultant the following note. 

“Gentlemen:

Over the last several days, we have learned that certain “concerned” members have organized a group with the intention of removing some or all of the Board. We have further learned that this group has sought members’ signatures to call a General Meeting, the sole purpose of which is to remove the Board. The formal removal of a Board is a method used when board members or the Board as a whole have committed egregious acts, failed to fulfill duties or have fallen into a conflict of interest.  Clearly, none of these are the case.

Though the Board has achieved many successes this year, especially in the areas of finance, fiscal management, control and governance, it continues to be plagued by the effects of seemingly unpopular policy changes in the dining room.   Perhaps we changed too much too quickly, and should have communicated the vision more effectively. But, I assure you we forged ahead with the best of intentions.  Though I believe we did an exceptional job delivering our mission statement, it appears it is no longer an accurate statement of our purpose.

The “Concerned Members” say it themselves: “no problem with the core operation.”

Unfortunately, these feelings have been further fueled with gossip, rumored terminations, misinformation, and accusations of micro managing. Though we could refute every allegation, what would we achieve?  Members have likely heard enough and just want not be mired in a political debate. 

A General Meeting to remove the board is an extreme remedy to deal with this matter. No one has done anything egregious. So, to avoid an otherwise divisive and confrontational General Meeting, and in the best interests of all, I hereby tender my resignation.” 

What School is this? It is actually a Country Club Manager responding to the events noted above. But this Consultant has seen similar letters throughout the world coming from heads of schools to their boards, and often responding to “concerned parents” or “concerned alumni” or “concerned faculty.” 

A few years ago, these kinds of “concerned” notes might appear on the bulletin board of the faculty work room, but increasingly they appear on the Internet, in blogs, some of which are vicious in tone. Or they may appear simply as an e mail “blast” to the entire board or entire parent/alumni community. I have seen one on the inside community page of a local newspaper where disgruntled teachers took out an ad to attack the administration and board.

Lessons Learned

There are messages in the letter above that have equal relevance to schools as well as other organizations, profit or nonprofit. 

The “concerned” members’ tactic is an old one. Often the “concerned” parties do not sign their names so we cannot ascertain whether there is a strong movement afoot or there are simply one or a few disgruntled individuals.

The “General Meeting” reminds this Consultant of the Annual General Meeting (AGM) that takes place in many schools in Canada and worldwide.  These can be simple, sparsely attended sessions, which is actually a good thing.  A crowded “annual AGM usually means trouble as some angry group of parents and/or staff is attending for the purpose of berating or overthrowing the board or school leadership.

Managing constituent relations is a key responsibility of school and other nonprofit leaders and their boards.  Not managing them well leaves to frequent board turbulence which spills over to the school or the nonprofit.  The same holds true for the leadership of for profit companies.

The comments about pace of change in the letter above are key and on target. Many new heads are fired early in their tenure because they change even the seemingly most minor procedures or policies too quickly, often at the board’s insistence.  When the new head has not yet built up enough “political capital” to institute some basic and often needed changes, the rank and file faculty will become riled, feeling that the new leader does not understand the mission, culture or traditions. The comments from the manager above about healthy governance and a healthy fiscal structure can mean little to those most attached to “the way we have always done this.” 

One new Head of School arrived to find a mascot that in his mind was a throwback to an earlier time and symbolic of historic rivalries. In even suggesting a change or the thought of one, she ignited a firestorm. Her good intentions were not respected and she was criticized for being an outsider who did not understand the local culture.  

The letter above illustrates two out of the three reasons that heads/directors are “fired”:  managing the type and pace of change poorly (even if the board demands the change); and becoming the “scapegoat” in an incident that simply takes over the life of the school or entity.  The third reason (and the most common one) is a lack of institutional memory on boards due to frequent turnover of trustees which could have played a role in the case above as well.

How to Avoid the “War”

Schools go to war with themselves, when the well intentioned highly emotional board members or constituents, who cannot listen openly to another usually broader point of view, wreak havoc. In our previous Newsletter, entitled “Who Fires the Head” we talked about a case of a long term Chair and Head. The head was in danger after the Chair was forced out in a skillfully orchestrated coup d’état.  The person who engineered that result has now resigned from the Board, leaving the Board a healthier place and the Head with possibly a longer tenure. That board member had often manipulated parent opinion to further his own goals which I am sure he felt were aligned with the best interest of the School. 

Annual sessions on board governance can help avoid these problems. Many schools assume that they only need governance training if they are in trouble and that “generative” think is the next new horizon in board governance. In this Consultant’s experience governance training for all boards needs to be annual and “generative” thinking on the highest strategic level can only occur when boards are truly wise enough and mature enough to rise above the petty issues that so often challenge our schools and boards. Even the oldest, wealthiest schools with some of the most powerful board members fall into these traps of not knowing how to manage constituent unrest or perceived unrest. 

Here is one final piece of advice: always have at least one to three CEO’s of publicly held companies on your board. They tend to have the training to see the larger picture and have a more long term strategic vision. Most of our boards are dominated by good hearted, well intentioned and successful lawyers, financiers, accountants, marketing and HR people, but they do not have even one CEO of a large publicly held company. This speaks again to the key role of the committee on trustees/policy committee, which is the most important committee of any board (and includes the functions of board development and nominations as part of its role). 

Computer Labs and Labrador Ducks

Computer Labs and Labrador Ducks

Guest Post by Mr. Mark Kennedy, ACSI Canada

They’re extinct now, Labrador Ducks. And they hold the dubious distinction of being the first North American species on record to disappear from the continent, beating out the passenger pigeon by some 36 years. It wasn’t that they were over hunted. They tasted bad so weren’t worth shooting. It appears that they simply couldn’t adapt to the changing environment around them.

School computer labs may be heading in the same direction because of the changing technological environment in education. For many students, the things we’ve been teaching in those labs are redundant. Students already know them and are sometimes way ahead of us. The adaption that is most appropriate for schools serving a tech savvy generation is integrating technology into every subject. It isn’t just a matter of giving a laptop, or notebook or tablet to every student, although that would be a good start. It’s about training, or in some cases, retraining our teachers to make the most effective use of technology in order to improve student learning and raise the quality of Christian school education.

I don’t think technological change in education is going to disappear any time soon. But if we don’t learn to adapt to it our schools just might. Sort of like the Labrador Duck.

How to Enhance Teaching and Learning at No Extra Cost

By Dr. Barrett Mosbacker

Change is hard, even dangerous.   Attempts to change the behavior of others or an organization's deeply entrenched practices will run headlong into active and passive resistance, if not outright hostility.

Acutely aware of the difficulty but confident in the rightness of the cause, we embarked on changing the school's traditional schedule.

This was no small undertaking.  The schedule had been in place since the school's founding.  Various school constituencies had a stake in the current schedule.  The prevailing consensus was, "If it isn't broke, don't fix it."  And arguably, it was not broken; "We were doing just fine, thank you very much."  Classes were full.  Faculty and student retention rates routinely stood at 94-95%.  We had a 100% college admission rate.  The senior class was routinely awarded millions of dollars in college scholarships and our ACT/SAT scores were high and rising across all tested disciplines.  Complicating the problem was a lurking skepticism about school "reform."  In the U.S., too many educational fads had come and gone, creating a "this too shall pass" cynicism.  This was particularly true concerning "block scheduling," which carried with it negative connotations, mostly deserved.

So why mess with a good thing?  Because, as Jim Collin's points out, "Good is the enemy of great."  We were good but we were convinced we could do better.  The choice before us was clear; we could rest competent and content or press toward our goal of creating a Christ-honoring world-class program that propelled teachers and students to higher levels of achievement.  We chose the latter.

I am happy, and frankly relieved, to share that the new schedule has exceeded our expectations.  It is an Extended Period (EP) schedule, not a block schedule.  This is an important distinction.

What Is an Extended Period Schedule?

The Extended Period Schedule is a hybrid of a traditional schedule with features of block scheduling, but without the drawbacks.  Teachers start at 7:30 each day.  This new schedule has three components:

• Traditional seven period days on Mondays, Tuesdays, and Fridays

• Two days of Extended Period Instruction (EPI) and

• A late start on Thursdays.

Monday  (traditional schedule)                 8:00 a.m.     3:00

Tuesday  (traditional schedule)                 8:00 a.m.     3:00

Wednesday  (EPI)                                           8:00 a.m.     3:00

Thursday late start & (EPI)                         9:00 a.m.      3:00

Friday  (traditional schedule)                    8:00 a.m.      3:00

Why the Change Was Made

We changed the schedule to provide students with more hands-on, active, engaging, and collaborative learning opportunities.  Extended periods provide more time for practicing writing and editing skills (essential for college success), for interactive science labs, for learning how to work on collaborative projects (also an essential skill for college and work), and for integrating technology into teaching and learning.  Extended periods provide time for more variety, more creative instruction, and more practice resulting in richer learning experiences and deeper learning.  In short, extended periods enhance teaching and learning by giving teachers and students time to think, not merely digest information.  Students move about and work in teams.  And, as our Learning Unleashed program (1:1 computing iPad program) is rolled out, students move from learning to use technology to using technology to learn.

The Extended Period Schedule also includes a late start Thursday.  The Thursday late start provides time to train teachers to work in teams to create integrated, creative, and engaging lessons that include the appropriate use of technology.  Teachers are also engaged in technology and pedagogical training on Thursday mornings.  The late start on Thursday also provides extra time for students to complete homework assignments, work on projects, and study for exams.

How the Change Was Made

Change is hard but not impossible.  To increase the likelihood of success and to ensure that the change was systemic and enduring but not cosmetic, we implemented a four-pronged strategy: Education, Communication, Training, and Accountability.

Education

Our first task was to break through a comfortable mindset rooted in academic and geographic isolation.  Too often administrators and teachers are isolated from developments in the world.  This is particularly problematic for Christian schools where staff and students can be culturally isolated, existing in a marginalized Christian bubble.  We may catch a glimpse of world affairs through the news but understanding the deeper implications for our students requires more information and deeper analysis.  It requires constant exposure gleaned by "being in the world."

We began several years ago to heighten the awareness of our faculty about how the world has changed and the implications of those changes for our students.  We demonstrated through reviewing international test scores, movies such as Two Million Minutes and quotes from leading industrialists, technologists, and economists that our students now compete against the best students in the best schools anywhere in the world.   Here is but one example:

 With the ability to make anything anywhere in the world and sell it anywhere else in the world, business firms can ‘cherry pick’ the skilled...wherever they exist in the world. Some third world countries are now making massive investment in basic education. American firms don’t have to hire an American high school graduate if that graduate is not world-class. His or her educational defects are not their problem. Investing to give the necessary market skills to a well-educated Chinese high school graduate may well look like a much more attractive investment (less costly) than having to retrain...a poorly trained American high school graduate.1  (Neef, 1998)

This was not a one time presentation. Multiple presentations in a variety of venues were made over several years.  This "set the table" or "set the mindset" for further discussion.

Communication

Communication was sustained, accurate, and careful.  The communication that occurred over several years was intentional and followed a logical path.  The communication did not start with the end in mind (e.g., Extended Periods), it began with deepening understanding of the fundamentals of Christian education, the place of the Christian school in culture, a deeper understanding of what it means to think Christianly, the shifting context in which our school operates (a globalized, technological, always connected world), an increasingly diverse and competitive educational marketplace (traditional public schools, charter schools, private schools, Christian schools, homeschooling, and online schools), the rise of Asia, and the fall of the U.S. from the top-tier of academic performance relative to the rest of the world to the middle or lower tier relative to the industrialized world.

Language was also important.  We made a decisive distinction between being "world-class" and being “worldly.”  We differentiated between being excellent and being elitist.  And, we used terminology that was accurate yet benign.  For example, we realized early that many of our teachers and parents would confuse our new schedule with block scheduling.  Although the EP schedule had a few elements common with a block schedule, it was not a block in the traditional sense.  It was also more than a traditional schedule.  What to call it was the question.  Although not creative, we choose to call it an "Extended Period" Schedule because that is what it is; it extends the period from approximately 50 minutes to nearly 90 minutes, extending the time teachers have to engage students in deep learning and collaboration.  Language is important.  It must be accurate while avoiding negative connotations.  Because the language we use is important, it must be planned and intentional.

 Training and Accountability

Our greatest fear was that teachers would lecture to students for 90 minutes.  We knew that if that happened our students would be bored to death, our academic goals would be undercut, and our parents frustrated.

We also knew that habits die hard.  The only way to ensure that extended period teaching was more than an elongated lecture, we provided practical training coupled with constant supervision and accountability.  We began the training process two years ago by approaching the matter indirectly.  With a desire to improve student learning and anticipating an extended period schedule, we devoted two years of training to how the brain learns.  The training included books (e.g., How the Brain Learns and teacher written responses to the contents of what they read.  We also hired outside experts to train our teachers on the science of how the brain learns AND on how to teach based on this science.

In addition to this foundational training, we also hired four Christian professionals with extensive experience teaching in extended periods from two other Christian schools.  They spent two days with our teachers showing them how to create lesson plans and how to teach the effectively in extended periods.  This practical "hands-on" training was just "what the doctor ordered."  While the training on brain research laid the pedagogical foundation, this practical "how to" training is what finally created the "mind shift" we were looking for.  We noticed a discernible level of "buy in" and even enthusiasm after this training.  The theoretical was married with the practical and a new perspective on teaching was conceived. We started out with worldview, the goal of developing a world-class school, and the study of cognitive science and ended up with the creation of actionable lesson plans.  We moved from theory to practice, from presentation to application, from "this too shall pass" to "I can and want to do this."

Training, however, in the absence of accountability is a bit like throwing jello against the wall and hoping it sticks.  Notwithstanding initial enthusiasm, most of it slides off to the floor.  Training is the same way.  To put teachers through a day or even a week of presentations is unfair to them and does not change practice.  Practice changes practice.   This means that teachers must practice what they are being taught at the time they are being taught and from that point forward.  There is no going back.  The application of training to teaching is not an option, it is an expectation, a requirement.

This means that teachers must be held accountable to incorporate the training in the classroom.  The only way this can be done is through direct observation, the requirement of artifacts to demonstrate application, and through evaluations that measure consistent classroom application of training.  Anything short of these measures will result in minimal, spotty change, if any.  Without this level of accountability, we foster the "this too shall pass" attitude that plagues so many schools.

On the observation side, the junior and senior high principals and the Director of Curriculum and Instruction (DOCI) spend most of the day on Wednesdays and Thursdays reviewing EP lesson plans and observing every classroom.  They offer help and advice but also look for compliance. It has been said that "what gets measured gets done."  While we would love to think that everyone is intrinsically motivated to do what is asked, the truth is that all of us need accountability, administrators no less than teachers and students.  If something is worth investing time and money in, it is worth monitoring and evaluating.

The Cost

Some change can be expensive but most change costs very little in money but a great deal in thought, hard work, and even courage.  Aside from the purchase of books and honorariums for our trainers, there is little cost associated with our change to extended periods.  But, there is a potentially huge payoff in student engagement and learning.  Low cost combined with significant gains in the quality of teaching and learning creates a high Educational Return on Investment (EROI) and increased marginal value for our parents.  Everyone benefits.

The Results

Although it is too early to have data to measure the results, I can share that all of the anecdotal feedback from students, parents, principals, and teachers has been positive, in fact, more positive than we expected at this early stage.  This is a tribute to professional, gracious, and hardworking teachers who deeply care about students and about doing a superior job.  It is also attributable to extensive Education, Communication, Training, and Accountability.

Change is hard and risky but it is not impossible.  With vision, planning, and hard work, undergirded by prayerfulness and a love for staff and students, we can create change that changes the lives of our students.

What have you changed lately?

Reference: Neef, D. (1998). The knowledge economy. Boston: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Could We Have Been Nazis? Healing Cultural Blindness

Healing Cultural Blindness: A Christian School Mandate Guest Post by Mark Kennedy, ACSI Canada

“I counsel you to buy gold refined in the fire so you can become rich, and white clothes to wear so you can cover up your shameful nakedness and salve to put on your eyes so you can see.” (Rev. 3:18).

Nobody likes Nazis. Well, at least I didn’t in 1973 when I was a young teacher in a Toronto boys’ school. I’d seen most of the Hollywood war movies and knew for sure that Nazis were all gleefully and unrepentantly evil people. Who could possibly have any sympathy for them?

That’s why I was shocked.

“I was in the Hitler youth,” said our school nurse, a weary sadness clouding her kind eyes, “All the young people were. We just thought it was normal.”

Normal! How could that possibly be normal?’ I thought, but didn’t ask. I was too appalled.

The problem with statements like that is that they can start you thinking and I didn’t like some of my thoughts. What troubled me most were a couple of questions, ‘What would I be like if I had grown up in Nazi Germany?’ and, even more disturbing, ‘Under the same conditions could I have been one of them?

What if I had almost no exposure to North American ideals of freedom and virtue, let alone to the gospel message? In a totalitarian Nazi culture where every public expression was carefully censored and dissent violently suppressed I would have been ‘marinated', in that one worldview. And unless I had secret access to a different perspective, chances are I would have accepted the tenets of Hitler’s Nazism as ‘normal’ too. Like our school nurse I may well have been oblivious to any other ideas, blinded by my culture.

The scriptures are replete with examples of cultural blindness – that condition where people can’t or won’t recognize truth because of their loyalty to national or societal values. A case in point is the church that Jesus rebukes in the prosperous city state of Laodicea.

“You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind, and naked.” Rev 3:16 & 17

The people of Laodicea had become prosperous in legitimate and even admirable ways. They built up a successful industry refining precious metals, they wove textiles of a quality second to none and they produced salve that cured certain types of blindness. Christians there didn’t just enjoy the fruit of the city’s prosperity, they absorbed its secular values. The Laodicean status quo was fine with them. They were blinded by the standards of the materialistic society around them and they weren’t interested in having their blindness healed.

It is no accident that Jesus chose to condemn the very things the Laodiceans cherished most; their wealth, textiles, and eye ointment.

“There are none so blind as those that will not see,” says Mathew Henry in his Commentaries. Our school nurse knew the kind of cultural blindness that is inevitable in a totalitarian society. But the cultural blindness of the Laodicean Christians was worse because they had the God’s illuminating truth in the Old Testament scriptures and apostolic teachings. But they chose not to see.

I wonder how contemporary North American Christianity will appear to students at the end of this 21st century—people who aren’t suffering from our particular strain of cultural blindness. What will they think of our Christian schools? Will they look at us and see ‘God‘s school system’ or will some of our schools appear to be mere defenders of an ideology that is chronically conservative unthinkingly religious, and assertively materialistic? Will they see by our actions (if not by our words) that we venerate the values of the secular business world around us without question, absorbing its priorities, sharing its definition of “the bottom line,” and seeking first the kingdom of gold in the fervent hope that what’s good for General Motors is good for Christian schools?

In this first decade of this millennium we in North American Christian schools still have a wonderful opportunity and privilege. We’re still allowed to teach the two things that can raise our students above contemporary North American values, including the values we may have wrongly venerated in the past. We can teach a Christian worldview and biblical discernment - and we had better teach them well! We had better prepare our students to examine our North American culture as well as our evangelical Christian subculture in the light of the unchanging Scriptures. After all we have a distinct advantage over the church members in Laodicea. For now at least North Americans have free access to the whole counsel of God‘s Word. We can use it to help cure our students of the blindness that so easily afflicts us all—to discern where we have been mirroring and even exalting the false virtues of the broader society just like the Church of Laodicea did. And if our students accept the cure maybe they will build a Christian community that is increasingly defined by scripture.

It won‘t be easy. For us and for the Church of Laodicea, cultural blindness is a serious disability compounded by our stubborn tendency to deny it exists.

Jesus once asked a blind man, “Do you want to be healed”? When it came to cultural blindness, the Church of Laodicea in effect said, “No thanks.” And that is probably why it doesn’t exist today. We had better help our Christian school students respond to Jesus question with a resounding “YES!!”

Do We Talk Too Much? "How to Speak More Strategically"

By Dr. Barrett Mosbacker

As school leaders this is problematic for several reasons:

• It places the focus on us rather than on others or organizational initiatives

• It raise questions about our motivations

• It may discourage input and candor from others

• Sharing more information than needed may create problems or complicate existing ones

• It may cause us to miss critical information because we are so focused on what we want to say , which can lead to misunderstanding and/or bad decisions

For these reasons and more, the Bible gives simple, straightforward advice:

• Know this, my beloved brothers: let every person be quick to hear, slow to speak, slow to anger… (James 1:19)

• When words are many, transgression is not lacking, but whoever restrains his lips is prudent. (Proverbs: 10:19)

• Do you see a man who is hasty in his words? There is more hope for a fool than for him. (Proverbs 29:20)

Because I'm convinced that we often talk too much, I found this article by Mr. Bregman to be relevant and insightful.   This is a guest post by Mr. Peter Bregman and is posted with permission.   The article was originally published in Harvard Business Review," click here.

NewImage.png

Peter Bregmanis the CEO of Bregman Partners, Inc., a global management consulting firm which advises CEOs and their leadership teams. He speaks, writes, and consults about how to lead and how to live. He is the author, most recently, of 18 Minutes: Find Your Focus, Master Distraction, and Get the Right Things Done, winner of the Gold medal from the Axiom Business Book awards, named the best business book of  the year on NPR, and selected by Publisher’s Weekly and the New York Post as a top 10 business book. He is also the author of Point B: A Short Guide to Leading a Big Change and co-author of five other books. Featured on PBS, ABC and CNN, Peter is a regular contributor to Harvard Business Review, Fast Company, Forbes, National Public Radio (NPR), Psychology Today, and CNN.  Peter can be reached at www.peterbregman.com.

How to Speak More Strategically

It had been three weeks since my throat started to feel sore, and it wasn't getting better. The pain was most acute when I spoke. So I decided to spend a few days speaking as little as possible. Every time I had the urge to say something, I paused for a moment to question whether it was worth irritating my throat.

This made me acutely aware of when and how I use my voice. Which led me to a surprising discovery: I spend considerable energy working against my own best interests. And if my experience listening to others is any indication, so do you.  In my observations, we speak for three main reasons:

• To help ourselves

• To help others

• To connect with each other

That's not surprising. All three of those objectives are legitimate and worthwhile.

What is surprising though is how frequently we fool ourselves into thinking we're achieving those objectives when, in reality, we're thwarting them. The more I listened, the more I noticed how we undermine our own interests.

Frequently, I had the urge to gossip about someone else. I realized that I did this to help myself (I will feel better if I think I'm better than that person) and to connect with the other gossipers. But clearly that would distance me from the people about whom I was gossiping. In fact, it would probably even distance me from my fellow gossipers too; who could trust someone who talked behind other people's back? My attempt to strengthen relationships was, instead, hurting them.

I also had the urge to share information when I thought it would be helpful to someone. That's a productive reason to speak. But several times I had the urge to say something simply to show that I knew the answer. Or to get attention. Or to increase my power in the group. It became clear to me that my urge to speak in those moments came from my desire to feel special. I wanted people to like me and to think highly of me. But who likes the guy trying to show off?

Sometimes I wanted to help myself by getting the answer to a question, or making sure I was counted in a decision. That's useful. But other times, I just wanted to make sure my voice was heard over the din of the other voices. I caught myself wanting to speak over someone in a meeting. Or arguing a point to get others to agree with me so I'd feel more confident in my own opinion (which I'm hearing a lot this political season). Is that really helping someone else?

In fact, I was amazed at how often I wanted to speak simply to assure myself that I was here. I had a role. I was noticed.

As I sat silently, trying to preserve my voice, I had the opportunity to notice how and when other people spoke as well. And I noticed all the same tendencies.

If I were to reduce our counter-productive speaking to a single motivation, it would be this: We often speak to make ourselves feel better in the short-term.

But life and relationships are long-term. And when we gossip, raise our voices, speak behind other people's backs, offer unsolicited opinions, or make jokes at other people's expense we're isolating ourselves over time.

There was some good news in my experience of talking less: I listened more. And listening, it turned out, was a much more productive way to achieve my speaking objectives than speaking.

When I listened, I helped myself, helped others and built relationships at least as effectively as I did speaking and with much less collateral damage.

I'm obviously not suggesting we stop speaking; we can't achieve our three objectives unless we do. We need ask for things. We need to share information. And there are a number of ways — like offering compliments and rephrasing what we're hearing — we can build relationships through speech.

I am, however, suggesting that we think ahead — long term — when we're about to say something in the moment. And that, before speaking, we ask ourselves one simple question: Is what I'm about to say going to detract from one of the three reasons I speak? If the answer is yes, consider saving your voice.

My throat is better now and I can speak as much as I want. Which left me feeling a little nervous; now that I know how easy it is to be self-defeating, will I keep myself on the productive side of the speaking equation?

Thankfully, the sore throat left me with a gift: the memory of a sore throat.

These past few days, when I get the urge to talk, I find myself doing a little calculation in my head: If I only have so much speaking I can do in a day, is this thing I'm about to say a worthwhile use of my voice?

What's amazing is that most of the time I immediately know.

Do We Need Teachers or Are They Becoming Obsolete?

By Dr. Barrett Mosbacker

This is not a rhetorical question.  Perhaps for the first time in history serious questions are being raised about the long-term need for flesh and blood classroom teachers.  For many this may seem ridiculous but for those on the frontier of technology it is anything but ridiculous.  Consider the following developments.

Computers Approach Human Capacity to Grade Essays

A recent NPR headline* asked: "Can A Computer Grade Essays As Well As A Human? Maybe Even Better, Study Says" According to the article, the answer is a qualified yes:

Computers have been grading multiple-choice tests in schools for years. To the relief of English teachers everywhere, essays have been tougher to gauge. But look out, teachers: A new study finds that software designed to automatically read and grade essays can do as good a job as humans — maybe even better.

The study, conducted at the University of Akron, ran more than 16,000 essays from both middle school and high school tests through automated systems developed by nine companies. The essays, from six different states, had originally been graded by humans.

In a piece in The New York Times, education columnist Michael Winerip described the outcome: "Computer scoring produced "virtually identical levels of accuracy, with the software in some cases proving to be more reliable."

Artificial Intelligence

image

Machines that can think like and interact with humans beings is the goal of Artificial Intelligence (AI).  While holding a conversation with a C3PO or R2D2 is unlikely in the near future, the possibility of holding an intelligent conversation with a machine is not as preposterous or as far away as one might think.  Consider just how unrealistic, preposterous, and futuristic today's technology would have seemed just twenty or thirty years ago.  Imagine your grandfather's reaction if you told him that you foresaw a world in which:

• Everyone will be connected by an invisible but all pervasive thing called the Internet.  We will access this Internet through computers (machines that can calculate faster than humans can think, play chess and beat the worlds best Chess Masters, and fly unmanned drones that can kill from miles in the sky), handheld phones called SMART phones (pocket sized computers), and tablet computers that look much like the slates seen on Star Trek with which one can store a digital library larger than the Library of Congress, read magazines and newspapers from around the world (mostly free), listen to music, watch streaming movies, shop online, take colleges courses online, book travel arrangements, access a map of your city or of the world, play games, socialize through something to be called Social Media, look up restaurant reviews, keep up with breaking news through Tweets (140 character ubiquitous updates), and search the Internet for almost anything you need to know.

• Using computers, SMART phones, or tablets, we will connect to the Internet wirelessly from virtually anywhere.

• Print books will slowly be replaced by digital books.

• We will be able to call a digital assistant named Siri and ask her for directions, product suggestions, make an appointment, send an email, send a text message, search the Internet, suggest a restaurant, check the weather, calculate a large equation, or create a reminder for us all by voice and she will often do so with a sense of humor.

• There will be driverless cars and pilotless planes

• We will send a pilotless rover to Mars that will scamper about on the surface of the planet sending back photos for several years.

• We will have voice enabled handheld mobile Global Positioning Systems on phones, tablets, and dedicated GPS devices) that communicate with satellites in space  that will give us turn-by-turn directions to our destination.

What once seemed preposterous, the stuff of science fiction, is now commonplace, illustrating that the uniformed and unimaginative dismiss the capacities and likelihood of AI to their own peril.  Consider this summary of research on the progress and promise of AI:

When will human-level AIs finally arrive? We don’t mean the narrow-AI software that already runs our trading systems, video games, battlebots and fraud detection systems. Those are great as far as they go, but when will we have really intelligent systems like C3PO, R2D2 and even beyond? When will we have Artificial General Intelligences (AGIs) we can talk to? Ones as smart as we are, or smarter?

Well, as Yogi Berra said, “it’s tough to predict, especially about the future.” But what do experts working on human-level AI think? To find out, we surveyed a number of leading specialists at the Artificial General Intelligence conference (AGI-09) in Washington DC in March 2009. These are the experts most involved in working toward the advanced AIs we’re talking about ... The majority of the experts who participated in our study were optimistic about AGI coming fairly quickly, although a few were more pessimistic about the timing. It is worth noting, however, that all the experts in our study, even the most pessimistic ones, gave at least a 10% chance of some AGI milestones being achieved within a few decades ... In broad terms, our results concur with those of the two studies mentioned above. All three studies suggest that significant numbers of interested, informed individuals believe it is likely that AGI at the human level or beyond will occur around the middle of this century, and plausibly even sooner. **

AI and Robot Teachers

Mobile technology and ubiquitous access to the Internet combined with online learning have many suggesting that the days of the traditional classroom teacher are limited.  Although hardly ready to take over the class, meet Saya, the substitute robot teacher.

Japanese School Tests Robot Teacher

Crude yes, but by what standard?  Twenty years ago this would have been amazing.  What will Saya be capable of 20 years from now?  The questions is not what is possible now but what may be possible in the not too distant future?

I am not ready to dismiss AI or robots or some other yet to be imagined technology as capable of teaching if one defines teaching as conveying information, assessing knowledge and measurable skills, and then customizing a new teaching routine to address identified weaknesses.  Such technology is already available in rudimentary form through computer aided instruction (CAI).

Teaching versus Educating

However, the transmission of information and the use of sophisticated algorithms to customize lessons and testing are not the same thing as educating students.  Transmitting knowledge is necessary for a good education but is not sufficient.  Teaching and educating are not necessarily synonymous.  No matter how sophisticated our technology becomes, it is doubtful that it can replace educators.  Here is why; the transfer of information does not:

• Equal nor impart wisdom

• Provide a role model

• Convey passion and a love of a subject

• Discipline

• Build relationships nor teach how to navigate difficult relationships

• Add the emotional element vital to learning

• Question deeply by engaging in Socratic dialog

• Mentor students

• Serve students

• Pray for students

• Love students

Technology can only be conceived as a replacement for traditional classroom teachers if we reduce teaching to the transfer of information, drilling skills, and preparation for test taking.  Sadly, too many teachers have been reduced to this mundane level: such teachers ARE replaceable.

Loving, wise, dedicated, servant-hearted, educators who mentor, pray for, and discipline their students will never be replaced.  They have nothing to fear from technology.  For such educators, technology is their servant, not their masters or replacements.

Sources

*  http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2012/04/24/151308789/for-automatic-essay-graders-efficiency-trumps-accuracy

** http://hplusmagazine.com/2010/02/05/how-long-till-human-level-ai/

The Heart of our School Service

By Dr. Barrett Mosbacker

"For you yourselves know, brothers, that our coming to you was not in vain. But though we had already suffered and been shamefully treated at Philippi, as you know, we had boldness in our God to declare to you the gospel of God in the midst of much conflict. For our appeal does not spring from error or impurity or any attempt to deceive, but just as we have been approved by God to be entrusted with the gospel, so we speak, not to please man, but to please God who tests our hearts. For we never came with words of flattery, as you know, nor with a pretext for greed? God is witness.

Nor did we seek glory from people, whether from you or from others, though we could have made demands as apostles of Christ. But we were gentle among you, like a nursing mother taking care of her own children. So, being affectionately desirous of you, we were ready to share with you not only the gospel of God but also our own selves, because you had become very dear to us. For you remember, brothers, our labor and toil: we worked night and day, that we might not be a burden to any of you, while we proclaimed to you the gospel of God. You are witnesses, and God also, how holy and righteous and blameless was our conduct toward you believers. For you know how, like a father with his children, we exhorted each one of you and encouraged you and charged you to walk in a manner worthy of God, who calls you into his own kingdom and glory." (1 Thess. 2:1ff)

Paul's heart for and ministry to the church is instructive as we strive to serve our students, parents, and each other in a way that pleases Christ.  Here are some simple thoughts and applications on this passage.

Boldness

We must be courageous and bold in declaring truth to students, parents, and to each other. The primary truth is the Gospel.  Never assume that a student or a parent is a believer.  He or she may not be.  As appropriate and with love and wisdom share the Gospel.

In the Midst of Much Conflict

We don't like conflict and we try to avoid it.  However, conflict is unavoidable and is even profitable IF the the conflict arises from being honest versus being a difficult person or responding inappropriately to others.  For example, we need to deal with the conflict that arises when we tell students or parents the truth.  If a student is failing to work hard (being lazy), is being irresponsible, has violated a school policy, is not yet good enough to start on the team, is a bully, etc., we need to say so.  We are to speak the "truth in love," never in a mean spirited or condescending manner, but we must tell the truth.  We don't avoid necessary conflict, we work through it profitability for all concerned.

Pleasing God not Man

We like to be liked.  It is tempting to do that which will make others like us or to avoid doing that which may make some dislike our decisions or us.  The praise of others must not be the motivation for our decisions and actions.  God's praise is to be our goal.  Popularity is as fleeting as your last decision or the latest fad or current values in our culture.  God's standards never change.  We are to desire his smile, not the smile of people.  However, we must also remember that Jesus grew in favor with both God and man.  We don't please God by being obnoxious, difficult, or self-righteous.

Not Self centered-It is Not about Us

Paul sacrificed what he had a right to, willingly gave it up to serve.  Although most of us are compensated well and fairly, most in Christian education could make more in a similar position in the public or corporate sectors.  Our work and ministry could also be easier if we never stretched ourselves, never tried new things, never adopted new methods, never reworked our material, etc.

But our motives are not related to compensation or avoiding extra work or frustration.  Our motive is to serve by being "living sacrifices," by "being "poured out as drink offerings" in service to students, parents, and each other.  This is not easy.  This is not what the world values and preaches.  Our sacrifices are not always known or appreciated by others.  It doesn't matter.  We seek "first the Kingdom of God and his righteousness;" we'll leave the rest to God's wise providence.

Not About our Reputation or Praise

Like Paul, we do not seek "glory" from men.  Whether we are liked and praised (although nice) is irrelevant. What matters is faithful, fruitful service to God as we render service to students, parents, and each other.  Like water on a duck, we must learn to let BOTH the smiles and frowns of others roll off of us.  It is the smile of God, not men, which we seek.

Gentle

I like the title Gentleman, Gentle-man.  In today's culture it is assumed that gentleness is weakness and real men (or modern women) are strong and aggressive.  There is nothing wrong with being strong and aggressive.  In fact, we must be to serve Christ.  Christ was very strong and aggressive (just think of how he responded to the Pharisees!).   But Jesus was also described this way:

Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, my beloved with whom my soul is well pleased.  I will put my Spirit upon him, and he will proclaim justice to the Gentiles.  He will not quarrel or cry aloud, nor will anyone hear his voice in the streets;  a bruised reed he will not break, and a smoldering wick he will not quench, until he brings justice to victory;  and in his name the Gentiles will hope. (Matthew 12:18-21)

We are to combine strength with gentleness in our dealing with others.

Sharing of Ourselves

It is easy to share a lesson, a lecture, truth, even the Gospel.  We just talk.

What is more difficult is sharing ourselves.  This requires time, sacrifice, even vulnerability.  We must share both WHAT (true, etc.) as well as WHO (ourselves).  For example, it is one thing to TELL our spouse that we love him or her, it is another thing to give OURSELVES IN OUR ACTIONS to DO loving things.  Likewise, it is one thing to tell students, parents, and each other truth and that we care.  It is another to demonstrate it.

Hard Labor

Those who have never taught or coached have no idea how hard it is!  It is hard work.  It is often under appreciated.  It takes time away from family.  It goes into the evening and weekends.  And, sometimes, no matter how hard we work, how much effort and time we put into coaching, teaching, or leading we get criticized.  Frankly, sometimes we just plain get abused by others.  So did virtually every saint I can think of in the Bible!  It goes with the territory!

Teaching, coaching, and leading in a Christian school is not a 9 to 5 job.  That is okay.  We are stewards of souls--eternal minds and hearts.  What we do counts forever.  It changes lives.  It changes communities.  It matters.  Therefore, it takes hard work and long hours.  No one makes us do this.  This is a calling.  This is a stewardship.  Whether other appreciate our hard work is irrelevant.  What matters is that we are faithful in cultivating our gifts and fulfilling our callings to the maximum of our God-given abilities.

We have not been called to a "nice life."  We have been called to labor.

Holy and Blameless Conduct

We are redeemed sinners.  We are not perfect.  We sin.  We fail.  We fall.

But, the tenor of our lives must be such that our conduct is holy and blameless, above reproach.  We are morally pure, we are honest and full of integrity, we don't gossip, we don't complain, we are full of the Fruit of the Spirit.  We are not self-serving.  We are, by God's grace, an example to others, especially to our students.

Exhorted, Encouraged, Charged

We urge and appeal to our students, parents and each other to do the right thing.  We encourage the discouraged, the tired, those who have stumbled and need a helping hand up.  We commission others--giving them instruction and a mission.

What a hard and glorious calling we have!  May God grant us the grace to fulfill it for his smile and for his kingdom!

Worthy of our Attention!

Guest article by Dr. Mitchell Salerno, Assistant Superintendent (The Master’s Academy)

As we enter 2012, Christian schools face some decisions that could dramatically affect the extent of our mission and impact.  A recent article in USA Today (http://usat.ly/wlEI2N), makes some suggestions worthy of consideration.  In the article, Abrams suggests seven trends that small businesses must consider to remain competitive and relevant.  Not surprisingly, five of the seven directly or indirectly involve technology.  As small businesses, Christian schools would be wise to consider these technological trends, seriously considering how to responsibly respond.

1. The Cloud

Technology is encroaching into every area of business and education.  Christian schools need to consider how the cloud can impact business and education.  Many schools already utilize the cloud for SIS services (i.e. RenWeb); however, most schools do not strategically consider how the cloud can impact student learning and the bottom line.  Has your school considered Google Apps.?  Does your school evaluate software programs, asking essential questions about if the cloud could reduce costs and increase productivity?  Quality Christian schools should begin to engage the cloud and become knowledgeable regarding its potential to enhance the essential functions of the school.

2.  Social Media

Much myth and hyperbole surround social media.  Rarely does one find a moderate opinion regarding social media and its purpose and values.  Zealots leap in with little discrimination or discernment, while others are fearful and avoid all forms of social media.  Worse yet, some Christian condemn social media and those that use it.  In the midst of this contentious environment, Christian schools must navigate carefully.  One thing is clear, social media has a ubiquitous presence and it is not going away any time soon.

How should Christian schools engage social media?  Certainly there are opportunities for the admissions, school communication, alumni relations, and development; however, I would suggest that in 2012 schools must seriously consider how social media can impact student learning and pedagogy.  Immediately, many are polarized by this thought.  That's too dangerous!  What would happen if students had access to all of the perils of the social media?  Really, what would happen?  Our students are engaged in this world everywhere except in our schools.

In my estimation, Christian schools must lead education by innovating methods for incorporating social media.  The modern classroom demands a skillful blend of traditional and digital pedagogy.  How can Twitter engage students and improve learning?  Do Facebook and Google+ have a place in the classroom?  As 1-to-1 technologies emerge, I question whether traditional pedagogical approaches are able to effectively utilize the power of 1-to-1 computing.  At some point, we are going to reach a tipping point where it will be impossible to ignore social media.  I believe that Christian schools should begin to engage social media for education, rather than simply utilizing it for administrative functions.

3.  Mobile

The first two trends are fueling an increase in mobile technology.  In education, these forces are encouraging distance education and computer based learning.  How do these trends impact traditional K-12 education?  Most immediately, mobile technology threatens, at least conceptually, the idea of a brick and mortar school.  While I do not believe we will see the demise of the traditional school in 2012, Christian schools must begin to engage mobile technologies.

Many Christian schools, mine included, have begun to explore 1-to-1 technologies such as the iPad.  Regardless of the device, and there will be many to emerge in the coming months and years, Christian schools must begin to ask questions on how mobile technology should impact classroom learning.  Much like the previous discussion on social media, Christian schools must not only provide mobile technology for administrative functions such as cell phones, iPads, and laptops for administrators, but they must consider how mobile devices can be incorporated into student education.  Perhaps the most challenging force prohibiting the incorporation of mobile learning is school faculty.  Much work needs to be done to encourage innovation and experimentation in the classroom.

The convergence of the cloud, social media, and mobile technologies are an exciting, yet daunting, proposition for Christian schools.  I believe 2012 will be a watershed year for Christian schools and educational technology.  Many schools will discuss technology, several will implement solutions, and a few will become models of innovation.  Regardless, we can no longer ignore the tsunami that has inundated education.

4.  Analytics

Technology provides information and information is power.  Schools can leverage this information in and out of the classroom.  Google Analytics provides data on website usage and access.  Learning management systems provide information on students access and usage.  School information systems provide information for parents, students, and teachers.  As we move into 2012, successful Christian schools will utilize the information available to them to make wise decisions.

5.  Global

"Think outside the box by thinking outside your borders" (Abrams, 2012).  Where are your borders?  This is an essential question for 2012.  We live in a world where the Kingdom can advance in a variety ways.  Therefore, it is essential that we teach our students how to leverage technology for the Kingdom.  I would suggest that Christian schools begin to determine where there borders are and how to expand them.  Personally, I am interested in connecting Christian schools together and assisting in the utilization of technology.  Christian schools have always had a global mission.  In 2012, we have tools to truly have a global impact.

Reference:

Abrams, R. (2012, January 12). Small business strategies: Seven trends you can’t ignore. USA Today. Retrieved from http://usat.ly/wlEI2N

Why Don't Christians 'Get It?': And All Jerusalem With Him

Guest article by Mark Kennedy, ACSI Canada

Do you ever wonder why so many North American Christians ‘don’t get it’ about Christian schooling - why some of the people who should be happiest about Christ’s advent in the realm of education treat Christian schools as unwanted interlopers or even as threats. That kind of spiritual paradox isn’t new. Matthew 2:3 recounts Herod’s reaction to the Messiah’s birth in his kingdom: “He was disturbed”. That’s not a surprise really. History tells us Herod sold out his Jewish heritage for the power, prestige and plunder that complicity with the Roman Empire brought. His lifestyle and privileged position were endangered by “the one who has been born King of the Jews.” But the really troubling statement doesn’t have much to do with Herod. Not only was he disturbed “but all Jerusalem with him.” Now that’s kind of shocking. You’d think the citizens of Jerusalem, the centre of the Jewish religion, would be overjoyed at the news, but they weren’t. In religion or education or any other area of life, the coming of the living Christ is a threat to those who embrace the status quo.

In education:

• He’s a threat to people who assume current secular education is the same as it was in those rosy days of yore when ‘public schools’ meant ‘protestant schools’.
• He’s a threat to those who bought into the myth of a neutral education. A school system that doesn’t permit children to learn about him isn’t neutral. It shuts out  the most important realities about life and learning.
• He’s a threat to people who believe that the primary purpose of life, even for children, is evangelism. Jesus gave us a different priority. He said the greatest commandment is to love the Lord our God with all our heart and soul and mind and strength. Evangelism is only one result of obeying that commandment.
• He’s a threat to those who believe that reality is broken into religious truth and secular truth. Fact is there’s only one kind of truth. And either it’s all God’s truth or none of it is.
• He’s a threat to people who dismiss Christian education because they know of a Christian school that operates badly.  I know of a few churches that don’t do a very good job at their ministry. But that doesn’t give me an excuse to spend my Sunday mornings at the Loyal Order of Water Buffalos Lodge. That’s because a Christian school, like a Christian church, is meant to be a place to meet Christ and grow in Him. And believers need to support churches and schools that still do that.
• He’s a threat to people who think that a couple hours of Christian training a week can equip a child against the influences of 30 plus hours of weekly secular education, many more hours of anti faith media and an increasingly complex anti Christian society.
• He’s a threat to people who believe that Christianity is only about a transformed heart. In Romans 12 Paul tells us not to be conformed to the patterns (i.e. way of thinking) of the world but be transformed by the renewal of our minds. E. Stanley Jones expressed it well, “A Christianity that addresses the heart but not the mind will not long hold the heart.” Christian schools help transform minds by teaching a biblical worldview.
• He’s a threat to people who think that teaching about the Creator of all truth and His creation is somehow sheltering students from reality.

The Academy Award winning movie, The Bridge on the River Kwai, tells the Second World War story of British soldiers in a Japanese prisoner of war camp. In order to alleviate the extreme suffering of his men, the senior British officer, Colonel Nicholson, agrees to build a bridge for his Japanese captors. And with its construction conditions for the British captives improve. The bridge becomes a  source of pride especially for Colonel Nicholson. After all he and his men have invested their lives in it. Then one day he is shocked to find a stranger, a British commando, planting explosives in order to blow the bridge up! He is emotionally torn. Should he warn the Japanese about this threat to ‘his’ bridge? In the end he come to his senses and realizes that even though his men built the bridge it belongs to Japan, and above all else he and the commando are on the same side fighting a common enemy.

Christians built the public educational systems in North America and they built them well. But now it is clear that those systems are no longer Christian in any sense. Let’s hope that more believers will come to realize that the educational status quo is fatally flawed, that Jesus’ advent in the realm of education is not a threat and that Christian schools are on their side.