Moral discussions
With sincerity, one teacher shouted “Let’s all set low standards!” in a recent professional development workshop. We were playing House of Cards, a simple, but powerful EnTeam concept game focused on creative thinking. Teammates are given index cards and instructed to build the tallest tower possible. EnTeam Organization measures the cooperative efforts of participants. In this case the context was a professional development workshop for teachers.
In House of Cards each team builds a tower and the collective height of all the towers in centimeters is added together. As a group, the teachers set a measurable goal in centimeters for three iterations of tower building. One teacher valued improvement over total output. He knew the group wanted to improve each round and decided to set low standards for his own group—they intentionally built towers shorter than they were capable of to ensure that they improved each round. Instead of doing their best, they wanted to look good in the eyes of others. This opened up an energized dialogue about district-wide academic goals and achievement expectations. It was eye-opening to see this teacher’s perspective because of monetarily-driven state and district improvement goals placed on him for his students. He verbalized this thought by building a simple paper tower and trying to rig the outcome for all. In the EnTeam game a dishonest motive could be discussed openly without embarrassment or scrutiny for the individual. A departure from honest motives in the real world leads to trouble as evidenced by the recent cheating scandal in Atlanta.
Simple concept games like EnTeam’s House of Cards always provide useful talking points. All of the teachers were under the same pressure to outperform their previous outputs, but the group discussed the moral hazard of the situation. To keep students from performing at their highest level now in order to outperform or “improve” on standardized tests would be wrong. The ensuing conversation began in the context of the concept game and quickly transitioned into their work-life experience. Similarly, EnTeam’s games for students first produce a tangible thinking skill through a concept game and then tie in directly to the academic content area of the class via a content game.
Do you have any favorite techniques to start moral discussions? Leave a comment! We would love to hear about them.
Sounds like a great exercise for teachers!
Thanks Mack!
As true facilitators we live in a world where our self-worth is dependent on others improvement. Setting low expectations is the worst lie an educator can share because learners will not work to their potential. This has a direct correlation to our students not learning what is necessary for success in and out of the classroom. Using rubrics individually, in groups and as a classroom community helps optimize our students’ full potential. Learning is an on going asset so setting the correct expectations individually, in groups and in the classroom community will scaffold the learning goals and objectives. Therefore, the foundation is solidified to continue growing and prospering on prior knowledge. For the low expectation teachers, I truly hope somewhere along your journey you recognize the mistake you’ve made.
Thanks Amy,
Putting students first MUST be the priority. These teachers knew this, but sometimes with the pressures of work goals can be lost sight of. EnTeam’s discussions can re-orient groups. The district coordinator who asked us to hold the event had some goals to discuss. I’m sure they had talked about the issues many times before, but but playing with the ideas in a game and then talking about them directly, they were able to dig deeper into underlying causes. Often there are gray areas in the way we are evaluated. In this instance, the teachers involved in the workshop were able to air concerns and then talk about solutions. Individuals are usually willing to work together in a game but when it comes to dealing with their work and everyday lives, it is harder to find buy-in.
Are we measuring overall academic improvement or improvement on paper? EnTeam measures cooperation between individuals, forcing drawing out necessary conversations.
Very interesting! Teachers are not all that different from students, and I can imagine student groups doing the same thing (underachieving the first round so they can improve). Students have become quite adept at playing the “school game” in which they want the teacher to tell them what they want, and then they find a way to meet the teacher’s requirement, which usually doesn’t equate to learning. What a great opportunity to discuss motive, purpose, and effort – and tie it to Carol Dweck’s work on fixed and growth mindsets!
Thanks Cindy,
Yes, we often find EnTeam games provide a safe place to talk about deeper issues. Initially the subject in this case was on honesty within the context of the game, moral decisions, etc. Then it quickly opened up into the real matter being discussed, teacher evaluations, pressure to meet goals, and what lengths are acceptable and honest in meeting these goals. We were able to talk about sharing ideas between teachers, networking, and utilizing the resources teachers already have at their disposal.
Cindy,
You are right about the student groups as well. They are very concerned about achieving goals and doing well in the game. When EnTeam facilitators point out a strategy that may or may not be fair we simply bring up whatever the issue is objectively and let students decide how to handle it. This is exciting when diverse groups of students are playing the game together. Students from one school unite intellectually with students from another school on the issue and work out some addition or change to the rules for the betterment of the group.
Melinda Bower FRSA (Originally posted on LinkedIN, Teacher’s Lounge group)
Very interesting article. I find that people generally find a way to reconcile the cognitive dissonance they feel when they are working in a culture which expects them to compromise their morals. If you can’t, you might become unemployable in some areas. Those of us who want to work in an ethical way should probably leave and set up our own schools and businesses, but how do we compete with those who are able to embrace the unethical and appear to be “Outstanding” at what they do?
Thanks Melinda,
Yes, it can be tough to be honest when co-workers are making unethical decisions and appear to be a stronger teacher on paper through test results. That’s why this discussion was such a tremendous opportunity. The teachers in the room had probably all dealt with this issue on some level and reconciled things in their own mind. When intentionally falsifying achievements in a simple game and asking others to do the same, the conversations really got interesting. It was a chance for teachers to first deal with the issue in a low pressure scenario (building towers in our game), and then have a meaty conversation about the real issues in the district.
When the sneaky practice is uncovered and made visible to all the teachers in the discussion the “right” thing to do is obvious. I hope more teachers can have a chance to face temptations together.
The educational climate is ripe for this type of thinking. Sad, but true. Timing is right for these conversations. Thanks for the article.
Melinda Bower FRSA (Originally posted on LinkedIN, Teacher’s Lounge group)
That is if it is a temptation and not an expectation driven by management…
Tom Evans
Melinda,
Your original question points to the exodus of teachers from several public school districts in and around St. Louis: “Those of us who want to work in an ethical way should probably leave and set up our own schools and businesses, but how do we compete with those who are able to embrace the unethical and appear to be “Outstanding” at what they do?” I think, if a teacher wants to truly benefit their students and they feel other staff are essentially cheating, it will take great moral courage, but having discussions with staff will have to happen. Granted, it will look like you are calling out a coworker if you do this at a staff meeting where the principal or other administrators are present. Fortunately, when we had this meeting there was a district level employer present, but all of the staff felt comfortable with this individual. Sometimes it pays to bring in a third party. At the same time, it’s not like we went into this event wanting to have a moral discussion. I simply noticed this issue arise in the game and pressed the issue realizing it was prevalent in the district as well. I am grateful the teachers were ready to talk.