Marinating...

Dear Readers,

It's been a _______________________________________ year.

I left a large blank because I can't even categorize it yet. But my blog writing has taken a hit due to all the changes hitting me over the past 8 or so months. That said, the experiences are marinating, and I hope to soon put fingers to keys and draw some verbal music out of the maelstrom. Also, a newish entry has been posted on my website aelefton.com - some thoughts on creativity and intuition.

Until soon, AE

On Tending

Tend (v):

1. to attend to by work 

or services, care, etc: 

to tend a fire.

2. to look after; watch over and care for; 

minister to or wait on with service: 

to tend the sick.

3. to lead or be directed 

in a particularly direction

4. to be disposed or inclined in action, 

operation, or effect to do something: 

The particles tend to unite.

Having worked with young people on and off for the better part of my life, there is one verb I feel best describes the work of a caregiver, parent, or teacher: to tend.

It is a gentle but profound word.

We tend fires, we tend the sick and dying, we tend our gardens.

And we tend our children.

The fire. The dying. The garden. The child.

All these are potent signs of a Reality that requires tenderness, watchfulness, oxygen - a delicate blend of vigilance and space.

I have seen children who are carefully tended - who are trained and pruned with the greatest love and kindness. These children have a gentleness of spirit fostered by a deep sense of security and protection.

Of course, all parents lose their tempers sometimes. And all children test boundaries. We are learning as we go - and making plenty of mistakes along the way. Fortunately, children are supremely forgiving of mistakes made in a spirit of service and nurturance. And almost all wounds can be healed - as long as children know they walk on solid ground.

This ground is the love, respect and trust they have for their parents, caregivers, and teachers.

I feel the best way to establish this sense of security and confidence is for a child to know he or she is being tended. This includes, but is not limited to, being attentive to a child's needs. Being firm and sometimes unyielding, but also caring and receptive.

Beyond this, tending is a posture or stance we must adopt in every aspect of our lives - not only teaching and child-rearing, but self-reflection and mindfulness. It is an attitude of leadership, directed toward unity and integration. And it begins with ourselves.

We must learn to nurture and nourish both the fire of our spirit and the sick and dying elements of our bodies and souls. These wounded or dead parts of ourselves are not to be feared and shunned, but welcomed and healed. Or honoured and let go.

We must tend our interior garden with constancy and affection. For this is the only garden we can enter without fear of being cast out.

And once we are assured the ground will not give way - that we too walk on the bedrock of our soul's own love, respect, and trust - we will glimpse something hidden in the tall grasses and shy, blooming things.

A child.

This is the child we have so long neglected. The one who can bear too much. We must signal our friendship from a distance. Then, approach.

A Dark Privilege

A few weeks ago, I submitted an essay to America Public Media's On Being blog. It was published yesterday. It contains some personal reminiscences of handling the files of roughly 200 Baha'i who were executed for their beliefs following the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

You can read the full essay and watch a related video here:

A DARK PRIVILEGE: BEARING WITNESS TO VICTIMS AND PRISONERS OF CONSCIENCE IN IRAN

5 Years Too Many

This month marks the 5th anniversary of the imprisonment of 7 Baha'i leaders in Iran, for no crime other than their belief in a faith deemed "heretical" by the Shiite clerics. This is a faith that teachers the oneness of God, the oneness of religion, universal education, the equality of men and women, and the unity of humankind. You can learn more about the persecution of the Iranian Baha'is here: http://www.bic.org/fiveyears/

In addition to the 7 imprisoned leaders, the Iranian government has also arrested and imprisoned numerous Baha'i professors, educational leaders, and students in a systematic attempt to bar Baha'is from access to higher education. In response, the Baha'is established a correspondence course which over time became one of the world's most successful underground online institutions - the Baha'i Institute of Higher Education - which is now supported by professors from around the world. Yet another example of how suffering burnishes the human spirit into action for the common good.

Daily Byte: "The Benefits of Character Education"

"Character education is not old-fashioned, and it's not about bringing religion in to the classroom. Character education teaches children how to make wise decisions and act on them. Character is the "X factor" that experts in parenting and education have deemed integral to success, both in school and in life."

 - Jessica Lahey

Read Jessica Lahey's article in The Atlantic for an insightful and balanced argument in favour of character education in schools:

THE BENEFITS OF CHARACTER EDUCATION

Lahey argues that character education and religious education are not synonymous. Instead, teaching character is something that is compatible with secular curricula. Moreover, how else can children truly be taught anything without the character traits of empathy, focus, self-discipline, and curiosity that are the foundation of any academic program?

Daily Byte: Frontiers of Learning

Let's not talk religion, but spirit. Let's not talk dogma, but soul.

FRONTIERS OF LEARNING

The young people in this film address the great spiritual deficit found in so much of education (and society) today, and through new processes of facilitated learning, are reaching a deeper understanding about the meaning of human existence and community service. Even if you take away the religious component, the teaching methodologies are valid in almost any context: dialogue, accompaniment, mentorship, service, family involvement.

We need a new philosophy, not continental or analytic, but perennial. A renewal of the perennial philosophy that teaches young people about the unity of truth underlying culture and context.

If anything, we need to start speaking to young people about more than just academics, careers, computers, and sex. We need to start a conversation about the loneliness, confusion, and anxiety facing so many teens and adults. And we need to do it in a context of love and mutual respect. No prejudgment or proselytizing. But more than just "assembly-line" education.

Out of the Mouths of Kidnappers...

"A country that does not pay its professors well," one of the kidnappers asked,

 "how can that country progress?"

Photo credit: AP via BBC

This quote came from a conversation held by Laureano Marquez with his Venezuelan kidnapper. Marquez, a popular writer and satirist who was recently released from a brief captivity, had the presence of mind to joke with his captors in order to diffuse the situation. He also spoke with them about the state of Venezuela today, where Hugo Chavez's successor, Nicolas Maduro, recently won the presidential election by the smallest margin in the last 50 years. According to the AP, Maduro "faces a difficult economic panorama of rising inflation and slowing growth" caused in part by Chavez's "lavish social spending financed by an unprecedented oil boom."

For me, however, the social and economic ramifications of Venezuela's political history are neatly summed up by this kidnapper's comment. What we value as a society is reflected in the prices we place on goods and services. And Venezuela is certainly not alone in paying people in the teaching profession poorly.

A comprehensive report called PISA, published in 2012, gives data on teachers' pay and a host of other education indicators for OECD (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries. The data are interesting if not particularly surprising. For example, Luxembourg pays teachers the most (nearly $100,000 per year), while the average annual pay in the Slovak Republic is roughly $13,000. (These figures, of course, do not capture cost of living differences that clearly exist in these countries.)

In the US, we pay lawyers annually between $120-150,000. Doctors earn between $156-309,000 per year. And yet the average salary for a teacher is $45,000. Surely this is a sign of the lack of rigorous standards combined with lack of equal respect for the teaching profession?

Anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that professor pay is to some extent correlated with the robustness of a country's political and economic health. In Hungary, for example, Corvinus University is having substantial difficulties fulfilling its salary obligations to professors. Hungary is also dealing with a government in the process of rewriting its constitution and eliminating checks and balances - with little opposition.

Of course, this correlation is not scientific, but I have a feeling that how we treat our teachers and professors is directly related to the strength of our governments and societies. While teachers' unions should not shield its members from the consequences of unprofessionalism or ineptitude, we also need more advocates for high standards + high pay in teaching. Otherwise, be prepared to look for more lessons from your friendly local kidnapper...

Reflections: Servant Leadership and Self-Giving

"Your work is to discover your world

and then with all your heart give yourself to it."

~ The Buddha

Last week, readying myself for another day at work, I listened to this interview with Adam Grant, a Wharton Business School professor and author. In his new book, he classifies professionals into 3 main types: "givers," "takers," and "matchers." Basically, the idea is that givers put others' needs and goals first, helping their colleagues succeed in work environments. Takers put their own goals first, using others as means to reach their own ends. Matchers try to maintain a balance of give and take in their interpersonal relations, keeping things on an even keel.

While any sociological breakdown of people into ideal types is bound to over-simplify a bit, I found Grant's research hopeful and reassuring. It also resonates with my own professional experience, working with a number of individuals who tend to be takers. Recently I've been feeling so tapped out. I wondered whether my approach - listening to others, taking time outside work to meet with staff and work through their concerns - is really beneficial, or whether it just leaves me feel like Atlanta after Sherman's march, a little plot of scorched earth.

Photo credit: artpunk

Grant has some practical advice for people who tend toward the giving end of the spectrum. First is to set clear boundaries and make priorities when it comes to who you support. Common sense, but hard to achieve in practice. In fact, balance and boundaries are only achievable by learning how to appropriately give to yourself - a subject I don't feel is adequately addressed or understood. And yet, I believe you cannot be a sincere and full-hearted "giver" without learning how to replenish your own well.

I read a wonderful quote recently by Maya Angelou who said,

"I do not trust people who don't love themselves and yet tell me, 'I love you.' There is an African saying which is: Be careful when a naked person offers you a shirt." 

I feel something similar applies to leadership, specifically "servant leadership" - Robert K. Greenleaf's term for the centrality of service within positions of power. Giving of yourself requires, first and foremost, love. And love of others begin with love of self. Not "self-love" in its narcissistic sense, but a deep affection and honour for your presence in the world. For the kind of service only you can offer. This is the soil from which true leadership can grow.

Several words I see associated with servant leadership are "custodianship" and "stewardship". Both words imply taking care of others rather than pure self-interest. But, again, we must learn to balance giving to others (altruism) with giving to ourselves (self-care). How can this balance be achieved?

One comment I found enlightening comes from John Adair, Visiting Professor of Leadership Studies at the University of Surrey and Exeter:

"Although it is impossible to prove it, I believe that holding firmly to sovereign values outside yourself grows a wholeness of personality and moral strength of character. The person of integrity will always be tested. The first real test comes when the demands of the truth or good appears to conflict with your self-interest or prospects. Which do you choose?"

In my own life, I feel I can deeply relate to this dilemma. I have chosen a professional path which has taken me from volunteerism and internships, to freelance journalism/research/teaching, to managing a small NGO focusing on social justice through media - none of which are very lucrative or stable careers. I have also recently moved countries twice, meaning I am away from friends and family, in a country whose language I don't speak - which may sound romantic and adventurous, but in reality is often doubt-filled and isolating.

At the same time, I feel so drawn to unheard voices from the margins of society that despite the struggle, I can't turn away from this road either. So - which do I choose? A truth that is tugging me on, or a personal reality that causes much internal questioning and stress?

One of my university mentors gave me some sage advice, which I go back to at times like this. Whenever you are faced with a stark choice between two seemingly competing options, he said, find another way. Reframe the problem. Step outside the duality, and seek some resolution in a truth that is both internal to you, and externally rooted in the world.

This internal/external grounding reminds me of Professor Adair's advice to hold firmly to "sovereign values outside yourself." This could be taken to mean adherence to some moral code of conduct. Or it could be allegiance to a political ideology. It could mean belief in religion. Or being guided by the values of your family and social group.

I think there is some danger inherent in any of these "sovereignties" because they are all, in some sense, subjective, and can set people against each other. At the same time, I am a firm believer in human beings as open systems. Unlike closed or isolated systems, which have limited to no interaction with ideas or energies beyond themselves, humans are in a constant state of (ex)change and (hopefully) growth. Yes, our bodies, and even our brains, may deteriorate over time. But there is an essential part of ourselves that, if given enough space and nourishment, continues to learn and expand.

No doubt this part of ourselves is guided by certain sovereign values - values I believe are universal, not culture-dependent. It would take the combined brainpower of people a great deal smarter than me to parse out exactly what these values are, but I feel they do exist.

Even if we can only vaguely agree on what these values are - honesty, respect, generosity, compassion - they are essential in crossing the divide between servant leadership and self-giving. Because people who stand firm within themselves, who are grounded in values beyond self-interest, are those human beings who do not seek from others what they cannot learn or practice themselves. They are not "takers" because they have internalised Plato's maxim:

"Be kind: everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle."

Moreover, they witness and respect the soldier doing battle within themselves. They are kind to themselves, forgive themselves, because they recognize their own struggles and do not make the war harder by a barrage of friendly fire.

These are the leaders - the people - I look up to. They are not perfect. They may even be embattled at times. But they are people who have learned to find moments of peace within the war. They stand firm within themselves as they step out into the world. And they do their work gladly, with all their hearts.

Democracy Rewired: Can Societies Achieve Creative "Flow"?

"Repression is not the way to virtue. When people restrain themselves out of fear, their lives are by necessity diminished. Only through freely chosen discipline can life be enjoyed and still kept within the bounds of reason."

~ Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

I used to discount the generalization that East Europeans can be a tad pessimistic, Americans overly optimistic. But now I am beginning to see why the dispositional divide.

It is hard to have a sunny outlook when basic cares require so much daily effort, so much frustration and anxiety. Then there are the political and economic ills - governments fanning the fumes of nationalism, ethnic tensions, spiralling debt. Sociologists like to separate the individual from the collective, but the two interrelate in subtle and profound ways.

An ageing population, a social memory that includes both Nazism and Communism, and a definite disillusionment with democracy - all these nourish apathy and a general mentality of "Just keep your head down and soldier on...."

People belittle the "power of positive thinking" as a throwaway cliche. With books like "The Secret" and self-help manuals laying out 10 easy steps to a better you, is it any wonder optimism has a bad reputation?

I find it interesting to the point of irony that one of the fathers of positive psychology is, in fact, a Hungarian, Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi. Actually, I don't know why I find it surprising. Humans thrive in the heart of paradox. If there is a society that gravitates toward the negative pole of existence, there will be those observant individuals within it who see in pessimism the seeds of engagement and passion.

Csikszentmihalyi coined the term "flow" - a state of complete creative absorption in one's work. As a writer, this is the rare bird we stalk through all the distractions and blocks that make up the bulk of writing life. But I'm beginning to wonder: is "flow" a purely individual phenomenon? Or is it possible for societies as a whole to achieve something akin to this creative experience?

I don't think I have yet discovered a city or town that has an overall feeling of flow - of active, organic engagement. But I know this feeling can exist collectively because there are places in every city that foster this outlook: certain universities, centers of cultural exchange, some holy places, and always parks and nature reserves.

It is these places that encourage people to be mindful of themselves and their surrounding that expand flow beyond the individual. In this way, I think flow is related to meditation, but in its active, workaday form. Or perhaps flow is just another face of meditation. In the West at least, we tend to put meditation into this little box of sitting still with your eyes closed, breathing. But meditation is so much more than that.

Meditation is the ground of life. It enables us to access those meanings and insights that make all the struggle worthwhile. And flow is what happens when meditation meets action - individual and collective - in the real world. Imagine it! "Democratic flow". Or "meditative democracy." I searched Google for the terms, but no luck.

I am fully aware of how "squishy" these phrases sound. Words like flow and meditation and - horrors! - spirituality strike many people as worse offenders than even positive thinking in their associations with pop psychology and pseudo-mysticism. I do not come from any of these camps. In fact, I actively reject most of their premises. I studied subjects that honest my allegiance to scepticism: international relations, social science, and analytic philosophy.

And yet there is an unexamined closed-mindedness among many experts in these fields that makes me cringe. Why do we value things simply because we can measure them? Why are "utility" and "realism" the watchwords of a functioning society? Why are schools still run like factories? And why do we still boil everything down to money and power?

Until we start questioning the shaky premises upon which society rests, not even a desperate attempt to maintain the status quo will prevent growing stagnation and decline (not to be too prophetic about it).

We speak about freedom, but what does it mean? Freedom from external repression is one thing. But freedom to act and serve is another. Both types of freedom are missing in many parts of the world - and brutal experience of the first can leave people wary or incapable of the second.

This is what I observe in Central and Eastern Europe today - a legacy of external repression that has hampered the growth of an internal drive to engage and change. Of course, this is a generalized tendency, and not specific to many open, active individuals. But it has certainly made me think about new ways of constituting our social and political systems that puts more emphasis on grounding our actions in reflective awareness.

I believe societies can achieve a form of creative flow. In fact, I believe that until we do, disillusionment with democracy is justified.

Daily Byte: Discrimination at Oxford

Affirmative action (or 'positive discrimination') often gets a bad rap in higher education, but it's better than the alternative:

OXFORD UNIVERSITY ACCUSED OF BIAS AGAINST ETHNIC MINORITY APPLICANTS

The Guardian reports that the data go beyond anecdotal evidence, to show structural, "institutional" racism at one of the world's most prestigious universities.

Should we be surprised that elite schools favour certain groups over others? Legacy students - those whose parents attended the school - already have significant advantages.

Or are these differences in admission rates due to the very real "achievement gap" between white and poor or minority students?

Even if the achievement gap contributes to lower admission rates, the very fact of this gap is a form of structural discrimination that needs to be addressed.

While Oxford spokespeople refute the allegations, the data still demand an honest conversation about all forms of discrimination in education.

Democracy Rewired: Free Press Protests in Hungary

(Author's Note: Having recently moved to Budapest, where serious challenges to democracy are taking place, I have decided to start a new series about 21st century governance - "Democracy Rewired")

On Sunday, 17 March, in a deliberate echo of the events that triggered the 1848 Hungarian Revolution, protesters gathered in Budapest's Kalvin Square to demand a return to democratic values, especially freedom of the press.

The protests, delayed due to freezing weather conditions, were meant to coincide with Hungary's National Day, which honours the courage of reformists who took to the streets on 15 March 1848 to protest monarchic rule.

Today, demonstrations are aimed at Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban's government, which pushed through constitutional amendments on 11 March. Many independent observers view these latest changes - which follow the passage of a new Constitution in January 2012 - as yet another attempt by Orban's conservative Fidesz Party to consolidate power and eliminate checks and balances. Moreover, there is increasing concern that the present Constitution will harm vulnerable members of Hungarian society, including the poor, homeless, and minorities.

The leaders of the 1848 Revolution drafted Twelve Points which became the foundation of Hungarian democracy. The first point reads: "We demand the freedom of the press, the abolition of censorship."

Similarly, the 17 March protestors laid out their "12+1 Points" before a crowd of several thousands. The protestors came from all walks of life, representing diverse ages and backgrounds. The event was organized by One Million for the Freedom of Press in Hungary, a grassroots civil action group that was established in January 2011 in reaction to Orban's new media law, which allows the government to impose fines on journalists for "violating public interest, public morals or order."

On Sunday, speeches were given by famous figures of the Hungarian Left, including women's rights activist Rita Antoni, constitutional lawyer Laszlo Majtényi, civil rights activist Jenő Setét, free speech scholar Peter Molnar, and Arpad Schilling, creative director of Krétakör, a contemporary art centre and production company.

The event began with a mock "dictator", who satirized the petit-dictatorship of Orban's government with a fiery speech. The tone grew more sombre as Ms. Antoni began reading the 12+1 Points. Their contents hint at the state of Hungarian society and politics today.

First on the list is a demand that no one should be jailed for being poor - a direct jab at the latest constitutional amendments, which legalise the imprisonment of the homeless and destitute. Other points demand an end to police brutality, the continuance of social entitlement programs, free use of public spaces, and national debt reduction measures.

Mr. Molnar rallied the crowd by reminding them that "Freedom is the true Hungarian tradition!" He was referring in part to Hungary's place at the forefront of democratic movements, for example the anti-Communist Uprising that took place in 1956. Even though this rebellion was crushed, Hungary led the way among Central and Eastern European countries toward peaceful regime change in the 1980s.

At the moment, however, there is a feeling in Budapest that things are changing for the worse. It remains to be seen whether there will be enough discontent by the 2014 elections to make good on the protesters' demands.

Reflections: Wisdom and Service

"One who has merely heard of fire has ajnana (ignorance). One who has seen fire has jnana (wisdom). But one who has actually built a fire and cooked on it has vijnana (practical spiritual insight)."

~ Ramakrishna

I've always felt pretty comfortable in academic settings. Schools and universities are places where ideas get discussed, deconstructed, and hopefully rebuilt. But the phrase "ivory tower" is used for a reason. There is a divide between theory and practice that most schools have trouble crossing. No wonder many students emerge with their diploma into the "real world" with little preparation, dumped unceremoniously out of the glittering tower into the muddy streets below.

Those who are able to survive the dethroning, who can dust themselves off like Adam and Eve and walk bravely into a world of fragility and confusion, these students will be initiated into a new and more powerful magic: the combined power of independent thought and creative action.

Building and then crossing the bridge between thought and action is a theme tackled in Hermann Hesse's book The Glass Bead Game. His words hammer home the realness of the world, as well as the need for thinking people to be a part of - not apart from - it. After all, "abstractions are fine, but I think people also have to breathe air and eat bread." At the same time, learning (wisdom) imbues action with meaning and spirit, so life becomes more than mere survival. It becomes service.

There is a saying that the longest journey is from head to heart, but I think a parallel journey leads from idea to actuality. The mind is a place of ideas and ideals. Yet both can become idols if they are not broken on the sharp edge of the heart. Because the heart of man is not a smooth, untroubled paradise. It is a jagged wilderness that is the only door to the "real world" we can ever know. For it is not the brain or the senses that grasps reality. It is the heart.

Once a person becomes aware of this interior doorway and takes the trouble to pry it open even a crack, it does not matter whether they remain perched in their ivory tower, or trawl the back-alleys of slums. Because Life will find them. And once Life enters through the heart's rusty door, a bridge appears. It may take a lifetime to cross it, but the wilderness will no longer be completely pathless.

You will find that all the thought and work and theory crafted in school will have formed a very narrow, very treacherous bit of trampled ground. It's not much, I know. Believe me, I've stared at my own meagre beginnings of a path and wondered if all the years of learning and thinking was worth it. Not to mention spending! Over $100,000 and all I get is a few muddy footprints in the forest?

But the farther I've gone, past my first wobbly steps into a terrain where the only guideposts are Trust and Faith and a bit of Chutzpah, I've found a strange truth. It takes years of education to beat down a few feet of bracken, but Life has a wonderful way of clearing whole empires for us - IF we only learn to read the signs we've secretly been scratching to ourselves during all those years of study.

Because no one - no teacher, mentor, parent, or friend - can give you a better start than the one you've given yourself, despite (and because of) any failures, mistakes, or misdirections. This is the only difference between people who've heard of fire, people who've seen it, and people who've learned to make it for themselves. The latter are those who see in their own beginnings the bridge between thought and action. They have broken themselves on the raw edges of their heart, and found that these ruins are really runes - an ancient language of wisdom and service that the world is waiting to hear.

Reflections: Love and Education

"Someday, after mastering the winds, the waves, the tides and gravity, we shall harness for God the energies of love, and then, for a second time in the history of the world, man will have discovered fire."

~ Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

My mother used to tell me stories of her time as a teacher in Australia. Once, at a teachers' conference, in a room full of white Australians, a single Aboriginal woman stood up. She had been listening to the day-long discussions about how to teach indigenous children. She faced the audience and said, very simply: 

"If you don't love us, you can't teach us."

This, in essence, is what is missing from so much education today. We don't discuss love because it seems out of place in academic settings. The pressures of economics, immigration, and international competition are examined in great detail, but matters of human connection, respect, and affection are not. And in the climate of fear and legalism brought on by sexual abuse scandals, we are in danger of losing sight of this basic truth:

If you do not love, you cannot teach.

"Empowerment" Decoded and Other Doublespeak

Having worked in various NGOs, I am quite familiar with the argot of empowerment. It's one of those words that is both catchy and vague, making it the perfect addition to grant proposals, websites, and mission statements. And yet, language conceals as much as it reveals. And NGOese is a misleading and often deceptive dialect. Below, I have created a short and very incomplete list (in no particularly order) of some popular words, their common usage - and their hidden meanings...

1. Empowerment (v): to give power or authority to; to give ability to

Usage: Empowerment is the golden child of NGO-speak. It is used especially for educational projects aimed at vulnerable or marginalized groups (women, youth, minorities, etc). These projects claim to give power back to individuals by giving them the skills and knowledge to take charge of their destinies, and contribute to positive change in their communities.

Decoded: Empowerment is a gatekeeper word. By this I mean that the NGOs who use it act as gatekeepers on the type, extent, and accessibility of the "power" they are giving back to "the people." Empowerment projects are almost by definition asymmetrical. They start from the assumption that the recipient individuals are in some way lacking in the tools to succeed in 21st century society. Even if this is true, there is often little honest dialogue with the aid recipients themselves. Moreover, NGOs who preach empowerment very often are the worst offenders when it comes to empowering their own staff and contributors.

2. Capacity-Building: (v) developing the abilities of people, organizations, and institutions to overcome obstacles to their own growth and self-realization

Usage: Related to empowerment, but with a slightly more technical note, capacity-building is used to describe projects that "teach a man to fish." In other words, these projects serve the goals of empowerment, i.e. giving people the knowledge and tools to be critical thinkers and doers.

Decoded: Like all NGOese, this phrase could be applied to almost anything and have some relevance. This makes it highly suspect because it is so hard to pin down. Giving a girl a camera and telling her to take photos of her life? Capacity-building. Providing micro-loans to poor women to open their own stores? Capacity-building. Creating a network of organizations that fight hate crimes? Capacity-building. What is rarely discussed - or in many cases shoddily executed - is the level of training, knowledge, and guidance this "capacity-building" entails. And what about follow-up? Will the girl with the camera be given new batteries when the old ones die? Will the woman with the micro-loan be schooled in the complexities of loan repayment? Will the NGO network be anything more than just a list on a website?

3. Inclusion: (n) the act of including; being enclosed

Usage: The process of inclusion is always aimed at the marginalized - people in some way on the outside of so-called mainstream society. In policy circles, inclusion is meant as an antidote to both assimilation on the one hand, and exclusion on the other.

Decoded: First it was "assimilation," then it was "integration." Now the new buzz word for cultural melding is "inclusion."  It is a friendly word, but one that can, again, be applied to a huge swath of policies and projects. And it is hard to figure out if inclusion really differs from integration in any measurable way. I think policymakers would like us to believe that inclusion promotes cultural heritage, diversity, etc. while at the same time ensuring the equality and recognition of all citizens. That would be wonderful - if inclusion policies worked. But do they? More importantly, do inclusion policies actually take into account the real-life experiences, perspectives, and arguments of the "marginalized"? How many decision-makers actually know or have spoken with the people they are writing policies for? Until this happens, I remain sceptical that any kind of meaningful inclusion can take place.

4. Sustainability: (n) the ability to be supported, upheld or confirmed; the quality of not being harmful to the environment

Usage: Originally a term used in the environmental movement, now "sustainability" is de rigour in almost all socially-conscious NGOs. It is used to describe the self-perpetuating life cycle of a project or organization. A project is sustainable if it can replicate itself into the future despite limited resources. In the best case scenario, sustainable projects contain the mechanism for their own funding and growth.

Decoded: If you write the word "sustainable" on a grant application, basically you are promising the funder that its money will not be wasted. Until, that is, you actually get your hands on the money, in which case, all bets are off. I hate to be so cynical about this, but honestly, how many projects really make good on the promise of continued existence and expansion? And the charity/aid model only makes things worse. How can small NGOs claim to be sustainable when they rely on the personal whims and economic imperatives of individuals, foundations, and governments? Even in the best funding scenario, too many organizations are dependent on a strong leader who often does not share expertise, contacts, or responsibilities freely. This means that even if perpetual funds are secured, institutional knowledge is not passed on. And in my book, no mentorship = no sustainability.

There are many other words to be wary of:

Collaboration
Partnerships
Innovation
Cross-sectoral
Cultural
Measurable Impact
Etc.

All these words are reaching for ideals - which is good. Language and the world it describes should have a dimension of idealism, otherwise what are we striving for? At the same time, I am concerned that words like these are easily applied to "others", and very rarely to ourselves. While I am growing skillful at crafting language that fits the mold that grant-makers and donors require, I feel that a new paradigm of honesty and self-reflection is called for.

Do we really know what it takes to include even a single person in an existing structure, for example including a new employee in a team, or a new student in a school? Do we really want to change the nature of aid from dependency to sustainability - or is dependency secretly accepted, making it so much harder to root out? Are we strong enough and confident enough to empower the people who surround us every day, which would mean sharing and compromising more, and discovering what unique capacities they want to develop?

People often preach what they are most in need of themselves. In the case of empowerment, capacity-building, inclusion, and sustainability, I would say to NGOs: Doctor, heal thyself.

Policy & Practice: Segregation and Difference in Education

Between 2008 and 2011, an in-depth research project called EDUMIGROM studied segregation and its negative effects on minority students' prospects in Europe. Ten European countries were involved in the study, led by a team of researchers at Hungary's Central European University.

I am interested to read the project's policy recommendations on educational inclusion, though a cursory scan shows a lot of common sense advice in the face of increasing budgetary constraints and growing conservative/nationalist sentiments. In this atmosphere, it is more common to hear about the "failure of state multiculturalism" and the troubled EU than it is to hear about the social and economic benefits of greater interconnection.

I think an important point the study makes is that, despite the comfort both majority and minority communities often find in segregation, it only leads to poorer educational outcomes and decreased opportunities for both minority and majority students.

While majority communities can ignore this reality since their own children are "doing alright", in the long-run, this proves untrue. By having limited contact with members of other ethnic and religious groups, all students suffer. They suffer because are not being challenged to expand their conception of identity and belonging. They suffer because they don't hear stories of new places, and learn to communicate across cultural divides. And society suffers because this narrow vision perpetuates stereotypes and racism in successive generations.

I understand parents' concerns that academic quality not be diluted due to students with limited language skills who need remedial support, etc. But when parents make the decision to remove their children from schools that have witnessed an influx of minority students, they are also limiting every child's education, including their own.

I know this is a controversial thing to say, especially if there is real decline in a school's academic performance. But I believe that unless more people take the stance that escape from "otherness" is not an option, segregation will only crystallize structures of prejudice and injustice.

We are living in an era of engagement, not escape. We are being confronted with institutional decline and the systemic failure of governments, business and international organizations. Until our children learn how to live with difference, they will not be able to build the new structures and institutions needed to address injustice, insecurity, and ignorance.

An intern at my office recently wrote a blog article about the system of segregated education that continues to hinder Roma students from full access to social advancement. She flags an important stumbling block in processes of inclusion. It is all too easy to try to "mainstream" minority students without take care to preserve their culture and linguistic heritage.

I feel this loss of heritage in my own life. Two generations ago, my grandparents spoke at least two, if not three languages. My grandfather, for example, spoke German, Hungarian and English. But children at that time in American history were encouraged to speak only English in schools - to become "American", full-stop. So my parents speak only English, as do I. Now, I am back in the "old country" (Hungary), and I am surrounded by a language that is completely alien to me, although my roots are here. I feel a sense of loss, and wonder if it is possible for a universal language to exist without extinguishing linguistic diversity.

Interestingly, another research project called LINEE (Languages in a European Network of Excellence) has explored the role of "multilingualism" in education and society. Their findings? They recommend that teachers to be trained to recognize the benefits of multiple languages in their classrooms.

Of course, it is relatively easy for academics and researchers to pronounce how schools and teachers should approach diversity. But in practice, the lack of support and resources, combined with the complex needs of students, can be overwhelming.

And yet, despite these serious challenges, I know it can work. I have taught in London schools which boast some of the most diverse classrooms in the world. Teachers and school leadership make a huge difference, perhaps even more than gobs of money. Structured activities, encouragement and discipline, supplemental learning, and one-on-one mentorship are essential. But so too are learning experiences that all students can participate in.

Which is why, when addressing segregation, we cannot ignore the place of poetry, creativity and the arts. You can read here about a poetry workshop I gave to primary school students from Iraq, Lebanon, Ghana and Portugal (among many other nationalities). Everyone contributed - whether it was a word, gesture, or drawing.

When I asked the class how many were from England and another country, almost every student raised their hands. One boy proudly said, "I am from three countries. Jamaica, and England, and the United States." The next generations are going to be increasingly comfortable with multiple, overlapping and fluid identities, and less intent on planting their flag on a single plot of earth.

But as much as kids are capable of accepting difference, the educational structures in place are making it hard for them to have a positive view of it. When I was in primary school, there was a half-hearted attempt to mainstream mentally disabled kids. Yet, we only saw them at lunch and recess, where their unconventional behaviour often left them open to ridicule and outright cruelty.

This kind of "token" diversity is not enough. Tough conversations needs to be had, and students given a chance to engage in frank conversations. Teachers and parents also need to take a strong stance on bullying and other forms of social rejection. Instead of leaving kids to their own devices, adults need to really talk with them, especially when a child is labelled "different". Why is difference still seen as a sign of weakness, even among our youngest children?

Until this self-defensive instinct to attack the outsider is examined in open conversations, segregation cannot be addressed. Because the real segregation is not in schools or structures. The real segregation is in the human mind.

Educating Prometheus

Over the Christmas holidays, I read a remarkable book by Thomas Merton, The New Man. In it, he revisits the myth of Prometheus, who, in Greek mythology, was accused of stealing fire from the gods.

Merton challenges the foundations of this myth, and the metaphors at its heart. The fire, he claims, is no ordinary kindling. It is man's

"uncommunicable reality, his own spirit. It is the affirmation and vindication of his own being. Yet this being is a gift of God, and it does not have to be stolen. It can only be had by a free gift - the very hope of gaining it by theft is pure illusion."

For me, this idea of the gift of fire has strong parallels to education and independent thought. Like the spirit of man, education cannot be stolen or bought second-hand. One of the hallmarks of this era of mass knowledge creation and dissemination, which began with Gutenberg's printing press, is the principle that we should all "see with our own eyes and not through the eyes of others."

Yet, while there is now a surfeit of information, there remains a deeply unequal distribution of schools, technology, and human resources to make this ideal a reality for all. This means that in many parts of the world, people are not actively engaged in the quest for truth.

Even more concerning, the data deluge means that even those of us with the skills and resources to be discerning rely on the voices of media, clergy, politicians, and other thought leaders to make up our minds for us.

Unlike Prometheus, who at least had the courage to steal his spirit back from the "powers that be", many of us are too comfortable trusting the tending of our spirit to the gods of finance, industry, and government.

For example, we have just witnessed a devastating global financial crisis that led so-called developed countries to question the era of no-limit credit and a hands-off approach to regulation.

And yet, when I graduated from university in 2011, the majority of well-paid jobs on offer were in the fields of finance, economics, and marketing.

So despite shoddy ethics and poor oversight, we continue to funnel our graduates into the same industries which helped trigger this mess in the first place.

The purpose of education, at least according to policymakers, swings back and forth between educating for citizenship and educating for productivity. Sometimes these goals are combined, but at the moment, there seems to be a clear preference for students as economic units:

In a 2012 article in The Guardian, Molly Corbett Broad, president of the American Council on Education, emphasised that the future of higher education includes "heightened international economic competition," the need to create "efficiencies and reforms" in models of teaching and learning, greater involvement of the for-profit sector, and a policy focus on "higher productivity, better consumer protection and increased evidence of learning outcomes."

The push for economic advantage starts at the top. In his 2012 State of the Union Address US President Obama highlighted the importance of the STEM fields, or Science, Technology, Engineering, and Maths:

"Think about the America within our reach: A country that leads the world in educating its people. An America that attracts a new generation of high-tech manufacturing and high-paying jobs...I also hear from many business leaders who want to hire in the United States but can't find workers with the right skills. Growing industries in science and technology have twice as many openings as we have workers who can do the job. Think about that - openings at a time when millions of Americans are looking for work. That's inexcusable. And we know how to fix it."

Yes, we know how to fix it: by designing curricula that focus on shoehorning students into the marketplace when they graduate. By creating students that can compete globally, and standardised tests that track how they are measuring up. By valuing teachers according to their statistics - number of students graduated, number of passing grades - and continuing to perfect our assembly-line education system which churns our functioning if not original thinkers.

As someone who graduated at the peak of the financial crisis - and has subsequently felt the pinch of finding paid employment - I am not in the least belittling the importance of work as a cornerstone of education.

At the same time, there is the old saying that "work is worship," and here is where this essay comes full circle. Because if work is intended to be worship, then educating good workers or good citizens is not enough.

It is not enough because citizenship and economics do not provide students with the tools to "see with their own eyes" - which includes seeing through many of the arguments offered by politicians and economists as truth.

For without the ability to see with their own eyes, the next generation will become increasingly vulnerable to misinformation - leading to distortions ranging from poor body image and cyber bullying, to racial stereotypes and religious fanaticism.

Human life is a gift, and whether it is magazines Photoshopping women into impossible ideals, or extremists detonating themselves on buses, educating the spirit that is the flame of human life is the only real pathway toward social, political, and economic progress.

Because being educated as a mere citizen or economic unit leaves unkindled the fire that each of us must claim for ourselves.

Daily Byte: Smallmedia.org

Having worked for almost a year with an Iranian journalist on issues of forced confessions, denial of education, and human rights in Iran, I see the future of the country as a bellwether for 21st century crises and opportunities. 

One organisation that seems to agree with this assessment is Small Media, which aims to "support the free flow of information in closed societies," with a particular focus on Iran. One project in particular caught my eye:

KNOWLEDGE AS RESISTANCE: THE BAHA'I INSTITUTE OF HIGHER EDUCATION

The documentary I was working on last year was about the BIHE, and it is a subject I feel has great relevance for the future of education. I feel the Institute is leading the way toward a new form of knowledge creation and dissemination forged out of repression and injustice. It is schooling students in  independent thought, global service, and moral courage. And it will be a topic explored in various ways throughout this blog.