Passageworks
 
 

No Teacher Left Behind?

By Laura Weaver

A great teacher can literally change the course of a student’s life. They light a lifelong curiosity, a desire to participate in democracy, and instill a thirst for knowledge. It’s no surprise that studies repeatedly document that the single biggest influence on student academic growth is the quality of the teacher standing in front of the classroom—not socioeconomic status, not family background, but the quality of the teacher at the head of the class.

-Arne Duncan, Speech at Columbia University Teachers College, October 2009

http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/10/10222009.html

“Teacher Quality” has become a powerful movement in education over the last years, emphasizing the critical role of the teacher in achieving student learning outcomes.   With this new emphasis comes a whole host of questions, such as: what is teacher quality and how do we measure it? Is it innate or can it be cultivated? What will teacher quality be tied to?  If teachers don’t “measure up,” what will be the consequence?  And if teacher quality is tied exclusively to students’ test scores, will this initiative become “no teacher left behind?”

 

The Current Landscape of Teaching

After working with educators in the field for years now, I have seen the wreckage created by reform fatigue, funding crises, low morale, changing leadership, job insecurity, turnstile educational policies and the pressure of high stakes testing. Teachers are also experiencing a kind of “whiplash”—for years, the emphasis in education was on the creation of a kind of ”teacher proof curriculum.” Now, teachers are being named as the sole factor in making or breaking a student’s success—particularly in regard to test scores.

 

Statistics gathered in the Quality Teacher’s Initiative paper during the Bush Administration illustrate the challenges teacher’s face. 

  • “Many new teachers do not feel ready for the challenges of today’s classrooms.  Fewer than 36 percent feel ‘very well prepared’ to implement curriculum and performance standards, and less than 20 percent feel prepared to meet the needs of diverse students or those with limited English proficiency. (pg. 3)
  • “22 percent of new public school teachers leave the profession in their first three years.” (pg. 3)
  • “Fewer than 20 percent of public school teachers report that they are “very satisfied” with the level of esteem society accords them.  Teachers also report that they have problems maintaining order in the classroom and face the threat of being sued when they enforce reasonable standards of discipline. Additionally, low pay and the burden of student loans and other expenses related to teaching can contribute to teachers feeling dissatisfied with their work environment. (pg. 3)

 

http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/infocus/education/teachers/quality-teachers.pdf

 

This is all evidence that systems are not in place that prepare, assess and support teachers to thrive and express their passion for teaching.  In order to create an environment conducive to hiring, developing, and retaining quality teachers, we must develop multi-faceted strategies for systems change. This necessarily involves effective and ongoing professional development, the inclusion of teacher voice and viewpoint in policy decisions, pay schedules that reward continuing education, a variety of approaches to data collection, collaboration with parents, and a shift in teacher preparation programs to include not only skills, content and curriculum, but also developmental psychology, brain research and skills related to cultivating safe, vibrant classroom communities.

 

Teaching Presence:  A Critical Aspect of Teacher Quality

At the 2009 Mind and Life Conference:  Educating 21st Century Citizens, Dr. Lee Schulman President Emeritus at The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching spoke of the challenging nature of the teaching profession.  He noted that after working extensively with doctors, teachers, and engineers, he was convinced that teachers have the most challenging job because they are required to attend to the diverse and conflicting needs of thirty people all at once. http://www.educatingworldcitizens.org

In an effort to improve academic outcomes and standardize teaching methodologies, educational policy has, at times, sought to look through the teachers and create programs and curriculum that are “teacher-proof”—able to withstand the “worst” of teachers. The mechanical approach represented by “teacher-proofing” falls short because it encourages dry, rigid, joyless teaching that diminishes the unique spirit and capacities of each individual teacher.  We all know stories of students struggling through a favorite subject, not because the teacher doesn’t know the content, but because the teacher lacks presence and passion.  Conversely, we know that students can learn to love or excel in a “hated” subject precisely because of the presence and passion of the teacher. 

In 2000, Rachael Kessler published an article entitled “Teaching Presence”, which identified three dimensions of “teaching presence.”

  1. Our capacity to teach with an open heart and to know what closes our heart and what assists us to open it again
  2. Our willingness and ability to hold respectful discipline
  3. Our ability to be emotionally and intellectually present, responsive to the needs of the moment

 

Kessler has since added another dimension:

  1. Emotional Range: our capacity to know, understand and feel comfortable with the full range of human emotions in ourselves and others

http://passageworks.org/index.php/resources/articles-to-download

 

As Emerson says, “who you are speaks so loudly, I can’t hear what you say you are.” Perhaps this is what teacher quality is—the unique combination of our skills, knowledge and tools as teachers and deliverers of curriculum, along with our “teaching presence”—our capacity to invite students, through our own example, to find authenticity, meaning and purpose in the classroom. This definition of teacher quality includes both strong content competency AND the capacity to meet our students, build relationships, and find ways to “unlock” their ability to learn and develop as human beings.

 

Diagnosing the Crisis in Education:  A Systems Approach

Arne Duncan’s last speeches have focused on the importance of teacher quality and the failure of teacher preparation programs to adequately prepare teachers for the classroom. http://www.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/10/10222009.html

This focus on the teacher as essential to learning and safety outcomes is long overdue.  And yet this crisis in education cannot be resolved with a single focus.  Education is a system embedded in a unique culture and context.  Finding a solution must also involve a systemic approach that engages the problems from many sides— we need a fundamental shift in the way we all relate to education—parents, teachers, administrators, policy makers, students. It is time to move beyond finger-pointing and isolated, discrete reform movements and to engage in partnerships, collaborations and true dialogue.  Meeting the clarion call of our youth in crisis will require a different kind of activism—one that spends time deeply listening to the system it attempts to “fix” (and not only through quantitative and test scores), involves all the stakeholders including students, and focuses on the development of the minds and hearts of the educators who walk into the classroom with young people every day.

 

Best Practice

So let’s acknowledge the keystone role of the teacher. Let’s invest in the retooling of our teacher preparation programs and support school communities to value teacher voice and to create clear, multi-dimensional accountability measures.  Let’s create communities of educators who value each other’s feedback, who trust one another, who welcome classroom observation and discussion on best practice.  Let’s be absolutely honest about the challenge of teaching at this time—with the erosion of community and family structures, with students who experience intense poverty and daily trauma, with a world that is changing radically fast.  And let’s clearly define what Teacher Quality means. Let’s offer teachers the finest of curriculum and professional development and compensate them fairly.  And let’s also support them to develop essential capacities of open heart, respectful discipline, being present and emotional range—qualities in a teacher that allow classrooms to come alive and engage students in the magic of learning and human development.

 

 

Comments to “No Teacher Left Behind?”

  1. 1
    Pia Infante:
    December 30th, 2009 at 2:33 pm

    I so appreciate this reminder of the role of teacher, particularly underscoring that in order to be successful, teachers would need nurturing opportunities for development of the heart as well as the mind. Thanks, Laura, for sharing these insights and resources.

  2. 2
    Jim Olmstead:
    January 20th, 2010 at 12:42 pm

    Much of what I’m writing has been influenced by two outstanding books: Mark Gerzon’s “Leading Through Conflict” and Stephen Covey’s “The 8th Habit.”

    Unfortunately education today is being controlled by the use of fear and threats (dismissal of teachers and closing schools that don’t meet AYP) to drive whatever the latest definition of the word “achievement” means in a given state. While it is important for principals and teachers to be accountable in some manner, we are using obsolete, industrial age, managerial carrot and stick tactics to motivate human beings. When you treat both teachers and students as things or numbers (plans are to assign each student and teacher and identifier number to track and correlate achievement) they can easily lose a sense of personal leadership and influence. They start to see themselves, sometimes unconsciously, as a thing that needs to be controlled. Therefore they start to lose the initiative to act and demonstrate leadership. This dynamic can lead to co-dependency in which nobody takes responsibility for results. The Race to the Top Initiative, while well intended, could easily lead to a co-dependent-controlling mind-set and possible corruption, by compelling states and educators to “compete” for financial rewards. Teaching has always been considered “a calling” not an industrial age job in which you churn out students that are reflecting “achievement” based for the most part, on a simple test.

    Instead we could be encouraging teachers and students to be leaders by appealing to their highest motivations, talents and creativity. More importantly we are not often enough encouraging a school culture that models 21st century skills such as invention, critical thinking and creativity. We must break from this old way of being if we are to truly re-invent education rather than simply re-form what exists. Educators must model 21st century skills within their own workplace by opening their classroom doors and sharing and listening to what works and doesn’t work with peers. We must train young people to manage themselves by providing effectively facilitated service learning opportunities to allow students the chance to practice decision making skills, not controlled by external sanctions or rewards for better test scores. Sanctions and rewards are industrial age, not information age, systemic approaches. We must create a climate in schools that respects the true worth and potential of educators and students by emphasizing 21st century skills first and then content memorization. When provided a context (service learning) for applying content, the relevancy for what is being taught will result in a deeper (head, heart, hands) learning experience for the student.

    John Gardner said: “Most ailing organizations have developed a functional blindness to their own defects. They are not suffering because they cannot resolve their problems, but because they cannot see their problems.” The problem lies in our inability to see the fundamental nature of who we are as human beings. We are not things that need to be motivated by external rewards. Human beings are four dimensional comprised of body, mind, heart and spirit. We can’t ignore any one of these four dimensions and expect to see a significant change in results. We tend to focus most of our efforts in schools today on the mind and somewhat on the body (physical education) but neglect the heart and spirit out of fear that we’re crossing over into values or religion. But most students will tell you that they learn more from a caring teacher who respects them. Emotion drives attention and attention drives learning. Social relationships create a sense of belonging and attachment. If we don’t get these simple concepts right in schools first, no carrot and stick systemic approach will unleash a student’s true learning potential. Teachers and students function best within a caring school culture. Does that mean we should be teaching values and/or religion? No, but perhaps we could train better leaders if we discussed and better understood our world’s diverse religions. Should we be teaching values in schools? No, but we could provide more opportunities to understand, internalize and practice universally accepted virtues such as what it means to really have empathy for others, how to respect and actively listen to differing opinions and to be honest and ethical in all actions. Is this teaching values or morals or is it simply teaching the virtues or principles we all need to function better in the workplace and a healthy world? Aren’t these the foundational 21st century skills that we all need to prosper as global citizens? Are the serious problems we face in our country and across the globe simply a result of low intelligence or cognitive capacity? Respectfully submitted by: Jim Olmstead, Foundation for Character Development & Member of the 21st Education Coalition.

  3. 3
    John D. Lawry:
    March 6th, 2010 at 8:51 am

    This whole discussion about “teacher quality” reminds me of a quote from Clement Mehlman in the Wholistic Education Review (Vol. 2, No. 3, 1989)in his article, “Walden Within.” He begins with this insight: “I have come to believe that students experience as curriculum what the teacher is doing inwardly and spiritually.” When I thought about the teachers who most impacted my life I knew that it was true.

Leave a Reply

21st Century Education from the Inside Out

by Mark Wilding

“21st Century skills” is the latest buzz in education. Is this the newest fad in slogan-based reform or is the call for 21st century skills provoking an important conversation about 21st century education?   It has certainly re-kindled a long-standing debate about content vs. skills.

“‘We are stuck,” says Linda Darling-Hammond, head of the President’s Education Policy Working Group, “We’ve been having this curriculum war for years.’”  - from "Backers of ’21st-Century Skills’ Take Flak"  (See also “Critical thinking? You need knowledge” by Diane Ravitch)

Getting Beyond False Dichotomies

Our culture has an insatiable desire for simple solutions, which usually involve false dichotomies such as skills vs. content.  Yes, we all would prefer unambiguous simple solutions to complex problems, however integrating skills and content are part of any effective educational approach. In the words of Robert Sylwester, Emeritus Professor of Education at the University of Oregon, and one of the foremost researchers on the brain and education,  "Emotions drive attention which drives learning, memory and just about everything else."

As author and cognitive scientist Daniel Willingham commented in his blog: “Clarion calls for more attention to 21st-century skills brings to mind a familiar pattern in the history of education: pendulum swings between an emphasis on process (analysis, critical thinking, cooperative learning) which fosters concern that students lack knowledge and generates a back-to-basics movement that emphasizes content, which fosters concern that student are merely parroting facts with no idea of how to use their knowledge, and so on. In calmer moments, everyone agrees that students must have both content knowledge and practice in using it, but one or the other tends to get lost as the emphasis sweeps to the other extreme.”

Discipline vs. Open Heart

Another false dichotomy exists in the apparent dilemma over teacher approaches in the classroom.  Should teachers focus on relationship building and express genuine care for their students? Or should they establish clear boundaries in order to maintain discipline. Of course boundaries are important, and educational research tells us that teachers that care for students and demand their best are the most effective.  (from Listening to Urban Kids by Wilson and Corbett) Rachael Kessler describes this need for holding both respectful discipline and open heart in “The Teaching Presence.”

Practicing What We Preach

Many have pointed out that 21st century citizens need to have the capacity for complex thinking, which includes being able to hold two seemingly opposing points of view.  As educators, maybe we could ‘practice what we preach’ and embrace the 21st century skills that we strive to cultivate in our students.  These include: discerning bias; demonstrating intellectual curiosity; generating and implementing novel approaches; interacting effectively with different individuals, groups, and cultures; recognizing the interdependent nature of our world; working effectively with others; and cooperating for a common purpose.

One of the most powerful ways that young people learn is by example.  Is it possible that leaders in the field of education could collaborate with folks that think differently than they do?  I know this will generate less entertaining blog posts, but it might help us create an education system that our grandchildren will thank us for.

Individuals and organizations who advocate either for the importance of content or for 21st century citizen skills should be partners in this conversation about innovation.  This is not just because cognitive and human development are both important, but because an integrated approach is synergistic — supporting improved academic performance, 21st century skill development, individual student resilience, and school safety.

End vs. Means

This brings up another cosmic education question.  Are so-called learning and life skills ‘ends’ in themselves or are they a means to an academic end?  There is mounting evidence that social and emotional skills are fundamental competencies for 21st century citizens and they are also essential for academic performance.  The Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning (CASEL) states it this way, “Developing these competencies fosters academic achievement, a sense of belonging, engagement, and positive behavior, and equips children with the skills and attitudes they need to succeed in the 21st century.”

"The drive to promote life and career competencies – often called “soft” or “applied” skills – has been part of American school policy debate for years. The SCANS report of 1991, for instance, listed interpersonal skills, effective management of resources, and personal qualities such as responsibility, self-management, and integrity as essential to successful job performance. Lauren Resnick, a member of the original SCANS panel and current director of the University of Pittsburgh’s Learning Research Development Center says, ‘What really needs to happen is to bring these [two agendas] back together. They never should have been separated in the first place.’"  From the Partnership for 21st Century Skills

An Emerging Coalition

Over the last few months, our institute has been participating in an emerging coalition of organizations in Colorado that partner with schools to offer programs for social and emotional learning, character development, and service learning. The coalition is dedicated to developing effective schools through the integration of learning and life skills and academic content knowledge, and we support the inclusion of 21st century skills standards in addition to content standards to achieve both academic excellence and mastery of the learning and life skills. The collaboration is new, and there is a lot of work to do, but the time is ripe for organizations  to come together around our common goal of supporting schools and teachers with this integrated approach. Coalition members:  Foundation for Character Development, Abraham Lincoln Center for Character Development, Front Range Earth Force, PassageWorks Institute, Peace Jam, Rachel’s Challenge.

I believe that if educators invest the time in listening to each other about what kind of schools we want, that there would be much more agreement than we think, and that this common ground could be the foundation for collaborating on a more complete and integrated approach to educating young people.  I want my two grandchildren (and one ‘on the way’) to attend schools that are safe and intellectually challenging environments — so that they have the cognitive, physical, emotional, and social skills to be successful and ethical citizens in the 21st century.

 

Mark Wilding is the Executive Director of PassageWorks Institute. Mark is the former Director of the Marpa Center for Business and Economics at Naropa University. He helped launch a graduate degree program at Naropa in 1995 and continues to teach graduate courses in authentic leadership and systems thinking. Mark has held leadership roles in government, business, non-profit, and academic organizations. Mark helped found a public computer software company in 1985 and served on the board and in several roles until he left as President in 1993. He has a B.S. in Biology and an M.A. in Environmental Leadership. 

Comments to “21st Century Education from the Inside Out”

  1. 1
    Liz Amore:
    October 6th, 2009 at 7:02 pm

    Well written. Thank you.

  2. 2
    Luis Blayton:
    October 9th, 2009 at 10:07 pm

    Hi Mark!

    I agree with you 100% on your recommended approach for the education of our children, although i would like to include some thoughts of my own. I, being the father of a 5 and a half year-old who has high functioning autism, have researched thoroughly on the methods for teaching my son to respond socially to his “normal” peers. In the process I have learned that “normal” is only normal because it is the status quo–the easily and currently accepted form of being. Through him I have come to believe that perhaps being so “politically appropriate” and “socially condescending” is not the true way of expressing your sincere self. However, lets be realistic, some adulation and “socially required” lies are necessary to maintain a verbal interaction with your peers in order to be accepted as a “normal” human being…. how sad! I am convinced the 21st century human should and will be a sincere communicator; a multicultural and multiethnic person; and spiritually sound not influenced by “commercial” religions. Let us hope our governments and educators, and especially society, agree.

  3. 3
    mwilding:
    October 15th, 2009 at 3:26 am

    Luis: Thank you for your comments. Your insights into what is ‘normal’ ring true for me. I also agree that there is so much to learn from every child and adult in our lives. Our oldest son is one of the kindest and most gentle people I know, and he had some very difficult experiences as a child in school because he was different than many of his classmates. I believe we have a lot of work to do to welcome and embrace difference in our schools and our culture.

  4. 4
    Michael Strong:
    October 15th, 2009 at 7:56 am

    These debates always strike me as analogous to having a public debate on whether food should be salty or sweet, hot or cold, chocolate or vanilla, spicy or bland, etc. The truth is that food should be all of the above and more, one of the wonderful things about food is that each of us can satisfy our own tastes and our own beliefs regarding what is healthy. It is madness to have public debates around what education “should” be, just as it is madness to have education controlled by a political process.

    To shift to a different analogy, imagine where the IT industry would be today if every decision regarding the future direction of the industry was subject to public debate and the political process: If we took, say, 1960 as a baseline technology, we would still be having passionate public debates about the use of COBOL on mainframes, and NONE of the subsequent developments would exist. See “Why We Don’t Have a Silicon Valley of Education,”

    http://www.edspresso.com/index.php/2006/05/why-we-dont-have-a-silicon-valley-of-education-michael-strong/

    for more.

    These dichotomies are easy to resolve when educators have complete autonomy to resolve them in their own ways. They will never be resolved when educators’ decisions are dictated by the political process.

  5. 5
    Kathleen Christensen:
    October 15th, 2009 at 9:01 am

    Interesting and insightful–thank you.

    I too get tired of polarization. It happens in the conversation about ADD, which I have. Meds are just a way for Big Pharma to make money! Not using meds is a form of medieval medicine! ADD is purely a disability! ADD is purely a gift! Aaargh! The truth, as usual, is far more complicated.

    I love the question you raise: Can we help teach children to have “the capacity for complex thinking, which includes being able to hold two seemingly opposing points of view”? If more people had this skill, it would be great for eveything from interpersonal relationships to the public debate.

    I’ve written blog posts on the complexity of the ADD/ADHD medication decision at http://headintheclouds.typepad.com/head_in_the_clouds/2009/03/its-complicated.html and http://headintheclouds.typepad.com/head_in_the_clouds/2009/09/its-complicated-redux.html )

  6. 6
    John Esterle:
    October 15th, 2009 at 3:44 pm

    Mark,

    Thanks for such a clear and thoughtful overview and analysis. You raise a lot of important themes that touched off a lot of different thoughts for me. And the emerging coalition you talk about sounds really promising. Anyway, I blogged about your post here: http://thewhitmaninstituteblog.blogspot.com/

    Look forward to following more on PassageWorks’ blog.

    Best,
    John

  7. 7
    David Vaughn:
    October 16th, 2009 at 8:34 am

    Luis, your experience and conclusions mirror my own. As the father of a now 9-year-old boy on the autism spectrum, I have spent a lot of time pondering the big questions about what it means to be “normal” “happy” “productive” and “successful.” A day doesn’t go by when I wish I had my son’s verve for life, his deep feelings and reactions to his environment, and his persistent quest to live fully in the moment, without holding on to negativity from the past or anxiety for the future. He is literally not wired to do that, and it leaves me wondering aloud which one of us has the “disability.” Almost daily, something happens which prompts me to think: “I’ll have what he’s having.”

    At the same time, I understand that his struggles are real and at times debilitating. But those struggles are as much a part of him as are his optimism, his persistence, and his enthusiasm for facts and figures–and they should be celebrated as such, not mourned for their capacity to inhibit his conformity to some social norm.

    A number of parents in similar circumstances to ours (kids with diagnoses and kids without) have recently formed a non-profit organization here in Massachusetts called the Collaborative Learning Project with the goal of starting a school where all kids–in their individual glory and with their own unique talents and perspectives–can come together and learn/develop socially, emotionally, and academically. By celebrating (dare I say loving) each individual child, we can nurture them in a way that is honest and true, while at the same time build a vibrant community where “happiness” and “success” are a natural by-product instead of an outcome designed to fit within the lines of a Hallmark greeting card.

  8. 8
    mwilding:
    October 16th, 2009 at 7:26 pm

    Some insightful comments. Thanks to all. Luis, Kathleen, and David have offered a very helpful reminder about how ‘normal’ can create a barrier to authenticity and spontaneity, and how much we can learn from all our children. I read and then subscribed to ‘edspresso’ thanks to Michael…http://is.gd/4n5y3. I highly recommend John’s comments and The Whitman Institute blog – http://is.gd/4n77C See John’s interview with Eamonn Kelly – “There’s an increasing disconnect between the tangible assets that we can actually account for, literally, and the intangible assets that are about relationships and are fundamental.” — I am now about to leave the 2nd national conference on education since I posted this blog – one in Washington DC and one in Washington state. So many presenters and attendees who agree with each other getting together to confirm that they are indeed right. I am more clear than ever that we need to create some new opportunities for leaders and decision makers who disagree at the most fundamental level to come together and deeply listen for common ground and to embody those 21st century competencies that we aspire to offer our young people. We know how to host these kinds of conversations and we need to find the will and the courage to enter that lion’s lair of difference. See Mark Gerzon Story at http://is.gd/4n8ib

  9. 9
    Bob Kenny:
    October 19th, 2009 at 3:59 pm

    Mark,
    Gathering a group of educators who do NOT all agree with each other would be refreshing, informative and motivating. It would likely result in an education conference where we learned even as we practiced our active listening skills. Sign me up!

  10. 10
    CTChadsey:
    October 21st, 2009 at 1:28 pm

    I want to echo the importance of Mark's theme on “education from the inside out” and offer further applications of this big idea.

    I certainly agree that educational policies, programs and practices often become lost in “false dichotomies” and “either-or thinking.” We are well served to consider more holistic views of such complex systems. Even using the connector “versus” pulls us back to dichotomy. Rather than the either/or concepts that we battle over, many of the issues Mark cites are, in fact, polarities–apparent opposites that somehow define and co-create one another. From this perspective they become “both/ands:” critical thinking AND knowledge, discipline AND open heart, means AND ends. Barry Johnson's writing and work provide marvelous tools for understanding and working with polarities. (http://www.polaritymanagement.com)

    To take this one step further, I believe this is NOT simply about mental frameworks. We will never negotiate such complexity in personal AND professional lives until we are able to embody it. In The Courage to Teach, Parker J. Palmer writes, “The question we most commonly ask is the “what” question—what subjects shall we teach? When the conversation goes a bit deeper, we ask the “how” question—what methods and techniques are required to teach well? Occasionally, when it goes deeper still, we ask the “why” question—for what purpose and to what ends do we teach? But seldom, if ever, do we ask the “who” question—who is the self that teaches? How does the quality of my selfhood form—or deform—the way I relate to my students, my subject, my colleagues, my world? How can educational institutions sustain and deepen the selfhood from which good teaching comes?”

    In our fifteen years of providing retreat programs to help teachers and leaders address “the who question,” we at the Center for Courage & Renewal (http://www.couragerenewal.org) have learned that this is not simply a privileged opportunity. Rather it is a necessity for those who teach or lead because only when we have developed our own capacity to explore our inner landscape, can we bring ourselves to our daily work in ways that not only hold complexity well but open the door for others to do so. In Leading From Within, Palmer writes, “Good leadership comes from people who have penetrated their own inner darkness and arrived at the place where we are at one with one another, people who can lead the rest of us to a place of “hidden wholeness” because they have been there and know the way.”

    It is in finding this “hidden wholeness” in ourselves, our organizations and our lives that enables us to bring light to the darkness wrought by either or thinking.

    I applaud PassageWorks efforts to build coalitions of organizations that bring wholeness to children, families, and communities.

  11. 11
    mwilding:
    October 25th, 2009 at 4:06 am

    See ‘Education Is A Process, Not A Place’ “The current state of affairs in education is a false choice based on a traditional view of education as a “place” rather than a “process”” – http://is.gd/4AE29 – from Nancy Driscoll author of “Every Mind Matters: Education – A National Priority For An American Renaissance.” – also see her blog post “Thoughts on a National Action Agenda for Education” – http://is.gd/4AEn3

  12. 12
    Tracy Gary:
    January 28th, 2010 at 12:42 am

    How then can we possible thank Rachael and Passageworks’s team enough for sharing so much of Rachael’s brilliance and also her passing today?

    What a truly inspired and inspiring legacy.

    Please let us all know how we can support you each during this remarkable and hard passage and also how to support Passageworks in it’s next stage and what you all need to thrive.

    Rachael would have us all keep this amazing work moving. May it be so, even as we weep with the diminishment of such a light for the world. There she is, truly now a star beaming at us, just there.

    Onward team terrific once rested…we have a system to keep transforming…
    in the spirit of her joy, now in us all,

    Tracy Gary
    Inspired Legacies
    http://www.inspiredlegacies.org/youthgiving/
    415-377-9447

Leave a Reply