EXCELLENCE & ETHICS

Updates from December, 2010

• 

  An attitude of gratitude

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog at 12:33 pm on December 22, 2010 | 1 Permalink | Reply
  

  As we approach Christmas and the end of 2010, I am reminded of a quote from one of our benefactors, Sir John Templeton, which states: “an attitude of gratitude creates blessings.”  Here at IEE we are so grateful for the many individuals who give of their time, talent, and treasure to support our mission to build the culture of excellence and ethics. I thought it might tell a little of the story of IEE and to share some thanks and praise to the people who have contributed so much to our shared work.

  It’s a very difficult thing, saying thank you to loyal benefactors, since it always seems like self-serving pandering.  Yet, how can we not have an attitude of gratitude to those who support our efforts to do good—even when their direct contributions inevitably end?

  First, I’m grateful for the opportunity to have encountered Tom Lickona’s work as a graduate student in the Fall of 1993.  My experiences and beliefs came together in Tom’s course on character education. We began a friendship and a professional collaboration that has challenged and engaged me for nearly 20 years.  Tom will retire at the end of this academic year (although knowing Tom, he’ll still outwork most). IEE continues to partner with Tom Lickona and Marthe Seales at the Center; they are treasured colleagues.  IEE owes much of its original inspiration to Tom, Marthe, and the Center.  We intend always to respect and understand the foundations of our work, while hopefully advancing it to new levels of widespread enduring impact.

  It’s difficult to really put into words all the ways that the John Templeton Foundation has contributed to our growth.  Most obviously the Foundation has contributed essential financial support for our work. But I truly believe that it is the Foundations approach to philanthropy that has contributed to our growth. We founded IEE as a response to the Foundation’s challenge to grow our capacity to grow our work.  At every step they have challenged us to “do good well” by maximizing the enduring impact of what we do. They taught us to think about cost-effectiveness and really cultivated an approach to social entrepreneurship and instilled in us a desire to build a self-sustaining non-profit. They are not just a benefactor, but a collaborator in our work. They have pushed us, challenged us—and at every step made us better.

  We were recently notified that we would not be funded for a proposal that we had before the Foundation.  Humbly, we feel that it was a strong proposal, but as an organization, how can we not trust the intuitions of a foundation that has been so good to us, and has at every step helped us to improve?  On the contrary, even the difficult “no” we accept with a sense of respect and trust, believing that it is in our best interest and in the best interest of our work.

  Good funders are like good parents, I think: they don’t ever give or do for you, what you can do for yourself. They provide essential guidance and support at critical phases so that you can learn, and grow—and ultimately become strong and independent. But they don’t prepare a legacy of dependents; they don’t pamper, coddle, or prop up.  They should teach you to stand on your own. They should prepare a legacy of strong, self-sustaining, independent, values-driven organizations.  I don’t believe in spoiling nonprofits any more than I believe in spoiling children. I believe in tough love that instills deeply the values of the funder, manifested through the unique vision and talents of the particular organization. The Templeton Foundation and our other funders have parented us well, I believe.

  Along with the Templeton Foundation, no one has been a more loyal contributor to the growth of our work than Sandy McDonnell, and the McDonnell Foundation. Sandy is a passionate advocate, a dedicated learner, a true American Statesman. Aristotle once said, “What the statesman is most anxious to produce is a certain moral character in his fellow citizens, namely a disposition to virtue and the performance of virtuous actions.” That, I believe, is Sandy personified—a statesman.

  We recently learned that Sandy is very sick, suffering with stage four pancreatic cancer—but doing so with grace and courage.  Like the Templeton Foundation, I want to genuinely thank Sandy for all of his support, and to pledge our ongoing commitment to developing the culture of excellence and ethics in St. Louis and across the country.  We are in continuing conversation with two underserved schools in St. Louis and it looks promising that they will be using our materials next year—not because Sandy will fund it (his contribution to our work is also complete), but because he helped fund our past R&D that makes it possible for us to help these schools. We pursued these schools because we want to SHOW, not just tell Sandy how grateful we are.  We want Sandy to know, in the words of Archbishop Oscar Romero, that he is a “prophet of a future not his own.”  The seeds Sandy planted at IEE will continue to grow—and God-willing, multiply.   

  IEE is a young and vulnerable nonprofit making its way in a tough economic and education climate.  We are, frankly, still poor in monetary assets. But we profoundly rich in the assets that matter most—vision, values, passion, and people. We have been shaped by a group of extraordinary individuals and organizations who have blessed us with their unique assets.  We are, always have been, and always will be rich in sweat equity.  (This, honestly, is a pretty good description of my own assets (I grew up the fourth of nine children; we were poor economically and I was “poor” in talent, but my parents grounded us in faith, family, and an unwavering belief in the value of hard work and pursuit of passion; I have been exceeding rich in social capital, making up in abundance what I lacked in economic capital).

  At IEE we will work hard to do good well and we will not rest no matter the past accomplishments or future challenges. Tom Lickona and the Center for the 4^th and 5^th Rs, The Templeton Foundation, The Sanford McDonnell Foundation—and so many other individuals and organizations have shared wisdom and insight, support and challenge.

  The staff and Board at IEE are extraordinary. Each member of the IEE team has a story of how they came to us; each story speaks of patience, commitment, and extraordinary faith in the mission. On behalf of our entire IEE team, I say thank you to the tremendous friends and benefactors who have supported us thus far.  I truly believe IEE is poised to make a significant and lasting difference by providing high quality, accessible tools, services, and support for building the culture of excellence and ethics needed for success in school, work, and beyond. 

  In this season of faith and hope, I am struck by the famous quote from the movie, Miracle on 34^th Street:  “Faith is believing in something when common sense tells you not to.” We have faith in the power of character and culture; it is the foundational catalyst needed in our schools, homes, teams, organizations—and in our world.  In a fast-moving, fast-changing, technological world, common sense might say look to elsewhere for solutions to today’s challenges. We embrace new knowledge, technology, and innovation; but our faith rests in people and organizations of moral and performance character. Peace, joy and purpose to all in 2011.

  

   

  Reply Click here to cancel reply.

  Name (required)

  Email (required)

  Web Site

   
• 

  Gates Research and the Culture of Excellence and Ethics

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog at 3:46 pm on December 15, 2010 | 2 Permalink | Reply
  

  A very interesting study just came out, underwritten by the Gates Foundation, designed to calculate how much each teacher has helped students learn based on changes in test scores. Here’s the bottom line: “Teachers whose students described them as skillful at maintaining classroom order, at focusing their instruction, and at helping students learn from their mistakes are often the same teachers whose students learn the most in the course of a year, as measured by standardized test scores.”

   $45 million in research—research, by the way that I think contributes very important knowledge regarding how to improve teaching and learning.  So, what’s my gripe?  It’s that I think the findings point to a small but essential piece of this puzzle that is likely not to be noticed: the need for intentionally shaping the character and culture NEEDED FOR learning.  I know, how self-serving and myopic could we be, right? You mean an organization dedicated to the intentional shaping of character and culture thinks that shaping character and culture is the solution?  Very fresh.

  But wait, I absolutely understand that we’re a small piece of the equation; I understand that school structure and size, curriculum, teaching and leadership, and all those factors related to core teaching and learning are the main components. But, what I’m saying is that character and culture are often the missing catalyst for teaching and learning, towards which the new Gates-funded research clearly points.

  Put differently, I’m arguing that understanding “what works in the classroom” has a lot of parallels to the legend of the Blind Men and the Elephant.  Each person is convinced of what the essence of the elephant is, based solely on what they can feel. And they’re vehement about what they “know.” But, it’s the perspective(s) they DON’T know or consider that is essential for a full understanding. Or to praphrase from the legend…

  O how they cling and wrangle…

  For, quarreling, each to his view they cling.

  Such folk see only one side of a thing.

  We recognize and accept the limited nature of our perspective. No matter how much attention you place on developing character and culture, it will be an insufficient response to the challenges school face. Pedagogy, teacher preparation, school size and governance—these are big parts of the elephant that is school.  We’d just like to ask for folks to see a different side of this thing, namely the small, but essential role of character and culture in classrooms that work.  

  Click for a more detailed discussion of this blind man’s assessment of the recently released Gates Research and the culture of excellence and ethics WhatWorks_IEE-GatesResearchResponse.

  

   
• 

  Curb Your Distractability

  Kyle Baker posted in Character Blog at 8:48 am on December 13, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  

  This morning I read a great quote from Jim Collins:

  “If you have more than three priorities, then you don’t have any.”

  For many of us, this presents a HUGE challenge.  We live in a on-demand world where multitasking is an essential skill.  This isn’t necessarily a bad thing; anyone who has ever made the leap from cell phone to smart phone can likely recall the lightning-bolt moment when you realize you now have email, the ability to review important documents, and a fully functional GPS device all in the palm of your hand.  However the risk in all of this, even for those of us that consider ourselves multitask-wizards, is distraction and curbed productivity.

  Want to “measure your distractibility”?  Check out this interactive feature from New York Times Online (you may need to sign in, registration to NYT-Online is free):

  Test Your Focus

  When you finish the test, you’ll get your results stacked up next to “low multitaksers” and “high multitaskers.” At first glance, I was quite pleased with my results.  I consider myself a high multitasker (and I likely demonstrate that in the best and worst of ways), and I passed the distractibility test with flying colors…

  But you also get this:

  “Researchers at Stanford University found that high multitaskers performed poorly when presented with multiple distractions, meaning they had trouble filtering out irrelevant information. Low multitaskers were not affected by the distractions and could hold more items in their short-term memory.”

  Uh oh.  That means those of us who multitask the most are also most prone to distraction.  So why did I beat the odds?

  Probably because of the intentional moves I made to stop curb my distractability:   I was alone in a quiet office before dawn (click here to read quotes from well-known early risers, something I am not, but aspire to be…maybe), had already created my 3Board today based on the quote from Collins (3 priorities on the board, directly above my primary workspace, nothing gets added until something gets checked off), and turned off my Blackberry (something I typically only do when the cabin doors have closed). Of course as you can see from the picture, writing a blog post was not on my 3Board   Better get started.

  _

  _

  _

  Respond to this post by clicking the “reply” link to the right of the title, or by clicking here.

  What’s on your 3Board right now?

  _

  _

  _

  (Startup Quote! and Daily Routines are both awesome sources for interesting quotes and tidbits of information. Definitely follow-worthy.)

  

   
• 

  Is character caught or is it taught?

  Matt Davidson posted in Character Blog at 3:53 pm on December 3, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  

  In Greek, the word “character” translates roughly as “enduring, lasting, or indelible mark.”  Character is the distinguishing mark of an individual (or organization).  We often say that “character is values in action.”  It becomes your distinguishing mark as you repeatedly (and consistently) put your espoused values into action.  Mother Teresa is remembered as just, loving, faithful (and faith-filled) because of how she lived her life. She consistently matched her actions to her deeply held values.

  Often we focus a lot on the knowledge aspect of character (What does justice mean? What does it look like? How should we think about justice?). The cognitive piece isn’t unimportant, but in our work we’ve become much more focused on how to help folks consistently put their espoused values into action, believing that when you repeatedly perform an action it becomes a habit—a stable and automated response.  I don’t have to think about how or why to do something a certain way, I just act; it’s who I am and how I operate.  

  How does this happen?  How does character go from an espoused value (this is important) to a consistent behavior (this is my consistent response when faced with similar situations or stimuli)? Is character caught or is it taught?  Do we “catch” character from being around good role-models and in an environment where particular values are consistently lived out?  Or, are we taught what good character looks like, sounds like, and feels like?  Sociologists and psychologists—as well as practitioners from every walk of life—might certainly argue for one or the other. 

   Our belief is that it’s both.  Character develops when it is both caught and taught. What’s that mean?  It means character develops best when we explicitly teach the skills (or competencies) needed to put values in action.  However, these skills must also be lived; they have to be part of the core norms guiding everyday behavior.  Character skills don’t really become stable until, like fish in water that learn to swim and breathe in and through their environment, we cannot separate who we are from how we live.  

  Consider a context like the military. Regardless of how you feel about the military and their reason for existing and ways of operating, the military is almost without equal in their ability to consistently shape character and culture.  They begin with a vision of the character needed for success—leadership, work ethic, grit, integrity, etc.  Then they clearly teach you their “way”.  They don’t leave anything to chance—how you dress, how you stand, how you communicate, etc. You will understand the military way—which is likely very different than other ways of acting. But it’s not enough that they teach the expectations (like a class); they expectations must be lived.  They make you practice these skills so often that your response becomes automated. You’re not thinking about “what are the three steps?” or “what was it they said about how to handle this?”. Instinct takes over. It doesn’t mean that there isn’t thinking required, it just means that there is core set of essential skills that we know, believe, and do.

  Now, you might say. Most organizations aren’t like the military. We’ll grant you that. But we’d argue that every effective organization (school, home, team, or business) must shape character and culture with the same intentionality.  And unfortunately, most organizations are often decidedly unintentional about essential elements of their everyday life. They may focus on certain big items, like overall philosophy, goals, and strategy, but most ignore or neglect to shape the character and culture needed for those philosophies, goals, and strategies. 

  Here’s a concrete example using a Power2Achieve Brainstorming tool as a model.  Teamwork, collaboration, creativity, critical thinking—these are commonly desired character and culture assets.   Many organizational philosophies, goals, and strategies require these character attributes in order for success. But, how do these develop? Do you just put these in your mission statement?  Do you reward and punish, exhort and plead?  You can, but you’re likely to be very inconsistent in shaping character and culture. 

  Instead, we would argue that if these are needed for success in your organization, you can’t recruit for them or hope for them, you must teach them.  So if you want teamwork and collaboration and critical thinking, you probably want to make sure your team knows how to brainstorm. (How many times do folks get into problem solving, or launch into production, or shoot down ideas, etc.?). Brainstorming is one essential process that contributes to creativity, teamwork, collaboration, etc. Therefore we must teach how to do it.

  The following Power2Achieve Rubric clearly defines what we mean by brainstorming (and what we don’t mean). 

  Next, you must make this the operating norm for how you will brainstorm.  It has to become part and parcel of who you are. You must use this consistently and pervasively.  It has to become an automated habit. Getting there will take time, coaching, accountability (praise and polish); but eventually it will become a distinguishing mark of your organization. And for those who experience this way of being, it then produces stable or consistent character habits so that when they go into other contexts they still act this way—not because they have to or because they’ll get in trouble, but because it’s what they know, believe, and have experienced. And, because this approach has worked for them. 

  Is brainstorming really that important?  Well, it is if you want creativity, teamwork, and the identified traits above.  Do we really have to do it your way? No. But what’s your way? Can you teach it? Do your people know it and live it?  If you don’t intentionally teach it, you get what you get–both in terms of character development and in terms of positive and productive work. And, don’t be surprised if you’re running around like a fire-fighter stamping out unintended habits and behaviors.

  This tool, and the battery of Power2Achieve tools, provide what Darcia Narvaez calls “good enough heuristics”—or, simple guides for behavior.  They compress the theoretical fidelity of the existing research into convenient (i.e., simple, concrete, memorable, action-oriented) norms for behavior.  These are intentional norms for guiding action and reflection; consistent and pervasive operation according to these norms define an organizations “way” (i.e., culture), which in term shapes the character of those operating according to that way.

  You aren’t born knowing how to communicate, collaborate, work hard, make ethical decisions or so many of the character skills needed for success in school, work, and beyond. Neither do you learn to do these consistently without practice.  Building an intentional culture of excellence and ethics requires that character be taught and caught.  Next time you’re frustrated with a missing character skill in your organization, ask yourself if you’ve explicitly taught the skill in simple (not simplistic), memorable, replicable action steps.  Then ask yourself if this skill is something that is a lived norm within your culture. Is this a signature practice or way of operating, or is it a slogan on a wall?   Amazing what is possible when character is caught and taught.