Communication Evaluation

It always amazes me how different we can be from the ways that others see us. 

For instance, in being asked to assessment my own listening, communication anxiety, and aggressiveness, I found my scores/styles, fairly close to how I see myself. I tend to be person focused (sometimes to a fault), anxious in small and large groups when the focus is on me, and stray from aggressiveness and confrontation. Sure, I fantasize about making sharp witted comments when people offend me, but typically, my response is much more banal. 

However, it seems that others see me a little differently, and even differently between them. For instance, my mother who has "known" me my entire life, assessed my comfort in groups much differently than I did. She felt that this was a context in which I was quite comfortable as I tend to present myself well (despite the flop sweat pit stains that typically accompany me). However, my best friend, assessed my internal processes (anxiety, fear) more accurately, but agree with my mother on my external presentation. Both assessed me fairly similarly on aggressiveness and listening, as both have been on the receiving end of numerous conversations with me. Both are aware of my dislike for conflict and aggression, and feel that my listening skills serve me well in person-to-person communications. 

Honestly, it's nice to know that I come across more confident than I feel in small and large group interactions. It seems I hold my own. I tend to use humor when i'm nervous, and thank goodness this is typically socially acceptable and seen not as anxiety-based, but rather sociability. It gives me a little more confidence, knowing that my internal experience is not outting me to the group. Yet, likely not enough confidence to EVER make group or public speaking something that I enjoy. 

Myself in your shoes

Every day I come into situations with people from groups and cultures different from my own. Most days I have opportunity to consider what I would want or do if I were in their place. I ask my son to try to do the same, or to remember that we can't fully know where someone is internally that day. And while I thought I was doing a good job, maybe I can go a step farther. Maybe if makes more sense, as Bennett's Platinum Rule suggests, to consider another's situation from their own perspective, rather than my own.

Herein lies the challenge. None of us can ever truly know the experience (internal and external) of another. And most of us, on an average occasion, don't try too hard to put in more than necessary to get our own point across, much less taking the time and energy to accurately and fully understand the needs of another. However, many conflicts could be avoided or at least lessened if we (myself included) went the extra step to use the rule and treat others as they would want to be treated. This type of communion between two people requires each to have the knowledge, motivation, and skills to communicate inter-culturally.

The first step is to develop self-reflection and an awareness of what we do and do not know about another person, their culture, and their experience. It also requires attention to nonverbal communication dynamics (such as proximity, eye contact, tone, and volume), as well as verbal communication dynamics (word choice, avoidance of sarcasm, euphemisms, and other things that might not translate accurately).

Not every situation is going to go smoothly, and not every group is going to be able to find a place of open and honest communion based in empathetic understanding. In these cases, the development of a third culture might be necessary. In my daily life, my father provides me with the most relevant experience of inter-cultural communication challenges. Remembering that he is from a culture and group different from my own (conservative vs liberal, cohort differences, male vs female, religious vs nonreligious, etc), and trying to first use the rule may benefit our communication. Avoiding my own defenses and fears, and understanding that his communication has more to do with him and his experience than with me and mine may help in developing more effective communication as well as decreasing conflict. However, where this is not effective, we may have to simply agree to be different, but find common ground and common communication to meet at, thereby developing a third culture for our relationship.

Muted Relationships

     This week, we were asked to view a television show that we had never seen before, but to view it on mute. The point was to observe individuals and the relationships between them, form some assumptions and then re-view the program and assess your assumptions. For this exercise I initially though of watching a children's show, out of curiosity as to what subtle messages are being imparted, but ended up watching "Schitt's Creek", a series on Amazon staring Eugene Levy and Catherine O'Hara. The only knowledge of the series that I had prior to viewing was "The Rose family must relocate to a small town Johnny once bought as a joke" (Amazon, 2017).
     My initial assessment of the series characters is that the family (mother, father and 2 adult children) is highly affluent, but due to some legal issue, their home and possessions are confiscated, and the family is forced to take up residence in a small town motel. The family appears to be close, however under considerable stress. The two adult children appear to interact with one another, and with others to a large degree, as if they were adolescents. The adult daughter appears to be the princess of the family. The mother and father appear as a unit, with the father being somewhat passive and the mother being the primary voice of the family. No physical contact was demonstrated, either loving or nurturing or negative, yet the family gave the impression of one that cares for one anther (in a petulant teenagery kind of way). The additional primary role in the series is a scruffy, "local-yokel" appearing man from the town (Chris Elliott), who appears to initially help the family find residence in the motel, but quickly tramples boundaries and becomes an antagonist for the family. 
     After veiwing the series with dialog intact, my basic assumptions about the show were correct. The family, though very sarcastic and clearly under considerable stress, does appear to care for one another. The mother is the matriarchal powerhouse of the family (at it appears that it was her company that was seized due to tax evasion by their financial manager), yet she and her spouse remained a united front throughout the episode. The adult son and daughter both react to situations and one another in very adolescent ways with name calling, "shut-up" fights, and sarcasm. The one person that I misjudged the most was the scruffy local, who turned out to be the mayor, however I was correct in my assumptions related to his boundaries. 
     This was an interesting exercise, and one that I think would be interesting in repeating with different kinds of programs, particularly children's programs as children tend to be very observant of non-verbal communication. 

Competent Communicator

From my point of view, in order to be a good communicator you have to be both listener and speaker. I know a lot of good listeners, and a lot of good speakers, but very few hold both in high amounts.

One person, however, is a friend and former co-worker, Lori. Lori has served as a hospice chaplain for many years. She is soft spoken, yet holds her audience's attention, and can command a formidable audience when called for. She is articulate, educated, and well read, so she is able to hold conversations on a variety of topics with confidence and effectiveness. However, she is also familiar with popular culture, issues of diversity, and is therefore able to connect with individuals and families who may come from outside the dominant culture. She is a skilled active listener, demonstrating understanding, attentiveness, and empathy, and does this both verbally and non-verbally.

A good listener listens more than they speak. And  good speaker speaks with economy and deliberateness. Lori is able to balance these actions, and was an excellent role model for my beginning work in hospice.

Thank you Lori!

Professional hopes and goals

My hope is that what I have learned over the last 8 weeks will be the starting point for change in the lives that I affect. I hope that, through a commitment to equity and inclusion, I can facilitate can help to better the lives of ALL families that I serve with an awareness towards the unique needs of each and the discrimination or oppression that may underlie those needs.

A goal I would like to set for the field of early childhood education is a commitment to proactive rather than reactive equity and inclusion. If we are teaching and modeling anti-bias education every day from day one, we are communicating the importance of this to families, the communities we serve, and to the population at large. We don't have to wait for diversity to walk through our center doors before we begin teaching it's importance.

I would like to thank each of my peers/colleagues who have contributed to my learning and experience over the last 8 weeks. Your willingness to share vulnerable moments in your life related to discrimination has given each of us an opportunity for greater growth and empathy. Your compassionate and caring responses to one another reinforces the possibility of dismantling stereotypes, biases, discrimination and oppression. Thank you each for your thoughtfulness, your insights, your encouragement, and your kindness to one another. It's been an honor to grow and to share with each of you.

Welcoming Families from Around the World

Twice this week I have been confronted by Sweden. First, in reading a new book to my son, we were introduced to a Swedish girl, then again while browsing the book store I came upon multiple books regarding Hygge (a danish word for a moment of happiness), and how to live like the happiest people on earth. It struck me that I know very little about this culture, and that Danes who immigrate to the US may be overlooked or marginalized due to Caucasian appearance, fluency in English language (many Swedes are fluent in multiple languages due to an excellent educational system), and therefore the assumption that they are not in need of assistance in acclimation or have equity issues. So, were I to be welcoming a Swedish family there are a couple of points I would want to pay close attention to in order to be culturally responsive:

1. Language. While English is compulsory for all Swedish students (and has been since the mid 1900's), multiple languages are spoken in Sweden and it would be important to understand which the family is most comfortable with, ie, what they speak at home. Regardless of family fluency in English, I would be important to have access to a translator who is familiar with the dialect and can assist both in and outside of the facility as needed. 
2. Names. Ensure that I and my staff are able to correctly pronounce all family names. Care should be taken not to shorten or nickname the child for staff ease or comfort. As names are linked with identity, as is country of origin, it would be important to show respect by  proper pronunciation (and awareness of meaning) of names. 
3. Swedish cultural awareness. It would be valuable to have a working knowledge of the country's history, both recent and distant. This provides a framework for understanding the family, their previous experience, and general worldview. Care should be taken, however, to refrain from making the family the cultural representatives for the Swedish culture as this is an unfair and inappropriate burden.
4. Family cultural awareness. Awareness of Swedish culture is not enough. While becoming familiar with foods, dress, and language are a start, it would be important to understand the family as a unique entity. What are the values related to family structure, children, education, authority, and happiness? What beliefs does the family hold with regard to ECE, gender, race, religion, etc? How can the EC facility best support the family values, beliefs and goals? This would require direct communication with the family, if possible in their own home, as this would provide the fullest picture of family life as well as communicate interest, respect, and partnership. 
5. Ensuring that the environment represents all families. This is as important for the new family as it is for the current ones. Families who enter the environment should be met with images and materials that reflect the diversity of the group, not only as an attempt to be seen and heard, but as an attempt to build communication and partnership between families. Families may be invited to partner in choosing some of the materials to be shared, such as favorite books, examples of art or music relevant to the family and culture, as well as sight words presented in multiple languages. 

It would be my hope that by beginning with these steps, the family would feel welcomed, respected, appreciated and accepted. Continued communication with the family (and all families) would be important in making sure that this was not a superficial exercise, but rather one that represents the facility's values of anti-bias, inclusion, and cultural acceptance. 

The Personal Side of Bias, Prejudice, and Oppression

     Several days ago I participated in my son's preschool Easter egg hunt and party. Always willing to help, I offered to help a couple of the other parents (mothers) hide the eggs in the playground. Two of the helpers were moms, and anther was an aunt of one of the children. After all the eggs were hidden and we were waiting for the kids to come out, one of the mothers asked where my son would be attending Kindergarten. I advised them that he was changing schools for this, and when asked, stated that his gender non-conformity would be more supported at the other school. Two moms gave me very questioning looks, so I elaborated, that my son enjoys wearing dresses, and does so with regularity, but that the current school has told him that this would not be acceptable (as it may be distracting, make him a target, etc). One mom said, after a pause, "Well, they don't really want any of the kids wearing dresses... you know for the playground and stuff" (though her child and the other 2 girls in the class were all wearing dresses that day and routinely do). I smiled, and said, "He may not even want to wear them next year, but if he does, I want him in an accepting environment that will support him". The aunt (who was, for lack of a better descriptor, "butch" in appearance) is nodding her head and showing approval. The other mom (sister of the aunt and silent until now), says, "I have a nephew who dressed up too. He's ten, so he doesn't do it anymore, but he did for a while. So maybe your son will grow out of it" in her most comforting and encouraging voice.
     Kids experiment with gender norms, roles, and clothing. This is a normal part of play and development. So her comment was not entirely off the mark, however, the message was very clear: anything outside of the gender norm is pathological and may be overcome. Interestingly, once the hunt began, the aunt found opportunities to align herself with my son, helping him find eggs, engaging him in conversation and encouragement, and taking a moment to sit and talk to me.
     In this instance, equity was diminished. My son was viewed as outside the norm, not quite right, and by extension, so was I. One mom, a couple weeks ago, suggested that maybe he does this because he's around me all the time, without a father in the picture, in effecting 'blaming' his gender expression and choices on me. In both instances I was hurt and angry. Part of me wanted to educate these moms on the falsity of their statements, and their invalidation of an entire group of people.. Another part of me, the part that won out, left it alone, kept the focus on the egg hunt, and has since smoldered silently, knowing that this is not the isolated opinion of one or two moms, but rather the representation of the greater population.
     Given more time, and a different environment, I may have found the energy to educate the women on normal childhood development, on the biological and external factors that can affect gender non-conformity, and on harm of their biased and prejudiced comments. Possibly this would have led, eventually, to greater equity within this small community. Possibly not. Possibly when society sees transgender or gender non-compliant individuals, not as threats to their own sexual identity and safety, but as people seeking to outwardly express their internal identity, equity can be effected. Getting over the bathroom debate would be a huge first step. The second step would be acknowledging the discrimination, prejudice and hate that transgender and gender-nonconforming individuals face daily, and acknowledging 'our' roles in this and the bases for our bias. Gender associated rights and biases, though,are extremely slow to change. Perhaps because they identify some insecurity within us.  However, history and other cultures clearly demonstrate that gender non-complaint people have always part a part of our world, and are deserving of the same respect, acceptance, and celebration that every other person deserves.