Hypocrisy: Know Its Bounds

“My hypocrisy knows no bounds.”  The line from the movie Tombstone fit the character of Doc Holliday, who, as portrayed in the movie, walked on both sides of the line of law and order.  Sometimes a memorable line from a movie gives us something to consider.  In this case, Doc’s perception of his own hypocrisies tells us how to understand the possibility our own.  Our line should be “…my hypocrisy knows its bounds”.

Take Away

Health conditions, swirling arguments, and deeply held wants in the Time of COVID make it difficult to form some decisions.  Is it safe for children and teachers to be in school classrooms?  Is it safe for children to engage in school athletics and activities?  Recommendations by the CDC and DHS are changing – some changes being medical and others political.  Professional organizations, like pediatricians, mental health workers, teacher unions, and state athletic associations weigh in with position statements.  Parental voices are both silent and loud.  The intention of all is to influence school-based decisions.  What to do?

What do we know?

Conditions and Information will continue to change.  An argument made today may fail if infection and death rates surge and the same argument may swell if those data diminish.  New treatments provide promise, but the true goal is an efficacious vaccine and widespread vaccination.

What works in one community may not work in another.  In a neighboring state high school football and soccer seasons are under way while in this state there is admonishment to delay fall contact sports to spring.

Different people hold to different levels of risk.  Death due to COVID as a very low percentage of those infected suggests that all community activity can be justified.  Death is permanent – you can re-schedule school and games but you cannot reschedule a lost life.  Take your pick of statement – you may be correct in the end.  Or, you may be corrected.

What to do?  Hello, Doc Holliday.  Don’t be a hypocrite.  Find your high ground and keep to the strictures of that position.  Be consistent to your beliefs.  But, also understand that oppositional beliefs are present and in our representative form of government your beliefs may not become the local policies.

Why is this thus?

Decisions about school are public decisions and the public expects to participate in school decision-making.  Participation is built into school board practices and procedures by state statute and local policy.  School board work is our nation’s most grass root level of local government.  Mail, e-mail, texts, phone calls, personal conversations, and turnouts at school board meetings, in-person and remote, are expected by elected board members.  In isolated circumstances, even targeted calling out and protest directed at the person befall a board member.  Participatory decision-making sometimes is uncomfortable ground, especially in critical times.

Some confuse participatory decision-making with majority rule.  They are not the same.  While the public deserves to and must be heard, their opinions need not form the final decision.  Additionally, decision makers need to keep a perspective between loud voices and the greater community.  Often, repetitively vocal citizens appear to speak for a greater number than they are.  Two dozen constant voices do not speak for a community of 10,000.

To do

The the greatest extent possible, a School Board will know the bounds of its hypocrisies by doing the following.

  • Listen to everyone constantly and consistently.  Every speaker, writer, and e-mailer deserve the courtesy of the Board’s attention.
  • Do not allow personalities to color arguments.  Consider the argument regardless of the speaker’s personality.  It is too easy to find irritability in what you know about the speaker, but don’t.  Listen to the merits of each argument without prejudice.
  • Some are more or less articulate than others.  Do not mentally correct their grammar, listen to their ideas.  A speaker does not have to speak in complete and coherent sentences to make a speech.
  • Do not personalize.  Although all outcomes are personal, make the decision-making process impersonal.  Self-interest is at the heart of most communication to the School Board.  If you know this to be true, do not be surprised or put off when you hear it.  Treat it for what it is.
  • To greatest degree possible, base decisions on facts.  One man’s facts may be another man’s fiction, but there are building blocks in reliable and valid data.  When you find it, use it.
  • Set parameters and be flexible within those parameters.  Good decisions for large group behavior are not pinpoints but set parameters that allow for a variety of acceptable behaviors within stated boundaries.  Boards need to set their boundaries and give school administration and staff the opportunity to develop options within those boundaries.
  • If the basis for your final decision is proven wrong, be prepared to make a more current and corrected decision.  Change is a constant.  You may be faulted for a decision that does not work out; you will be damned for sticking to a decision after you know it does not work.
  • Don’t be a hypocrite.  Do the proper work.  Find your high ground.  Declare the decision and enact the decision.  And, monitor how your decision works.

The big duh

We watch our favorite sports team and understand and accept that how the team’s game plan changes.  A football team, for example, plans for its competition weeks in advance.  Hence, we expect a game plan and team practicing of that game plan.  However, when the game is underway, we watch our quarterback call an audible play.  He sees conditions across the line of scrimmage that the game plan did not anticipate.  He calls an audible and changes the play on the spot.

COVID is a humongous audible play.  All the players are adjusting rapidly to life in a pandemic that was not in the game plan.  School boards are quarterbacks considering the facts across the line of scrimmage in the state and community and they are calling audibles as the facts and conditions and guidance evolve.

Listen.  Rely on facts.  Provide clear details in each audible.  Be consistent in enacting decisions.  Allow for flexibility within the parameters of your decision.  Do not accept hypocrisy.

Self-Interest Drives School Choice

School choice is self-interest and self-interest is what it is, self before all else. One can parse out all the other motives and characteristics that underlie school choice and the one common denominator is “I want to choose who my child will associate with in their school attendance.” Is self-interest a good or a bad thing? Not necessarily either. In a world that places the highest values upon “the Dream,” American or otherwise, giving people the opportunity to express their self-interest by choosing the school their children will attend seems an American thing to do.

Lest we forget, school choice is not a new phenomenon. Parents in our nation have made choices relative to the school their children will attend for hundreds of years and almost always on the basis of social association. Parochial schools, preparatory schools, military schools, and finishing schools have been part of the K-12 landscape since colonial times. In my hometown in the 1950s, my childhood friends spun off in many school directions. Whereas, most attended their local neighborhood public school, kids in my neighborhood also attended Catholic and Lutheran parochial schools. We played street ball and kick-the-can without any consideration of where our school desks were housed. When we left our elementary schools for junior high, several kids left the neighborhood for military school, most notably Shattuck Academy or St. John’s Military Academy. I remember overhearing our parents talk about “a need for discipline” and the next time I saw my friends they were home “on leave” with very short haircuts. And, when it was time for high school, the last culling sent several friends to selective college preparatory or finishing schools. They sent letters from Exeter and Phillips Academy and Patricia Stephen’s Finishing School.

Did these choices truly make a difference in the lives of the children they affected? That is a difficult answer to make. For my parochial school friends, their parent’s choice of a Catholic or Lutheran education was a commitment to sustaining their chosen family values. “Everyone in our family goes to St. Patrick’s” was a way of saying “we are and will be a Catholic family.” And, many still are these many years later. Attending a prep school in New England was a variation on the same theme as a parochial education. Going to Exeter said, “these are my peers and being in their social cum economic circle is an investment in a powerful professional future.” Most of my friends who went East to school stayed East in their professional and cultural adult lives. They truly became doctors, lawyers and business leaders. And, the girls who attended Stephens made the social register when they married; they were debutantes.

School choice has been with us a long time, but the choosing of a school in yesteryear was different than the burgeoning school choice issues of today. When we look at the child in the school choice discussion, school choice still is about associations. It is the parental determination of “who will my child attend school with and what advantages will accrue from those associations” that drives the specific selection of a school. Parents give lip service to matching their child’s learning needs to a particular pedagogy or curriculum. School choice is an aggressive election to move away from undesirable school associations and to move toward more desirable associations.

When we look at the adult in the school choice discussion, school choice is about power. It is the power of a parent to make the decision of school attendance and the political and economic mechanisms that support the parental power to decide. Whereas, parents always had the power to send their children to parochial, military, prep and finishing schools, they personally funded their choices. Today’s school choice discussion is all about the reallocation of public funds to support parental school choice decisions and getting at these large public funds is all about state and local politics.

One does not redirect tax-based dollars without writing new laws. Moving another step, one needs elected lawmakers to write new laws. And lastly, elected lawmakers need financial backing to assure that they remain elected. Hence, school choice today is not about a parent in the neighborhood who wants his or her child to attend a different school in order receive a more advantageous education. School choice is about getting candidates, and enough candidates, elected to office so that new laws will direct state money that otherwise would be allocated to public schools redirected to “schools of choice” and to vouchers for the public payment for a child to attend a school of choice.

Or, from a different perspective, school choice today is about reinstitutionalizing a child’s education. The old institution of public education is being taken down and the new institution of consumer- and commercialized-education is being raised up. The power brokerage necessary to create new institutions needs organization and funding and there is plethora of political action groups ready to funnel the dollars of large and small donors to purchase and sustain the legislative votes necessary to create charter and for-profit schools of choice.

Self-interest is a powerful human motivation. One should understand a person’s self-interest in order to predict their future human behavior. When the nominated Secretary for the US Department of Education, Betsy DeVos, states that she is “…in favor of charter schools, online schools, virtual school, blended learning, and any combination thereof, and frankly, any combination or any kind of choice that hasn’t yet been thought of…”, then one can predict that we have not yet conceptualized the extent to which school choice will be institutionalized. The fact that a wealthy political activist like DeVos is even nominated to head the USDE moves the actualization of self-interest in school choice from choice as an alternative to choice as the new mainstream.

One thing we can know is this, the school choice available to our grandfathers will be nothing like the school choice available to our grandchildren. In fact, public school may become so deinstitutionalized that PS #1 in your community will be the school of choice for only those who cannot or will not choose to send their children elsewhere.