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.