SUMMING UP & HINDSTRUM’S CRUSADE July 28, 2013

As I sit here in an Amherst, NY (just outside Buffalo) coffee shop writing the last entry in this year’s GTE blog, I am struck by a few things.

1) Things have gone so quickly. People have asked if we have done touristy things in the cities we have been in.  The truth is that our schedule didn’t leave too much time for much of anything other than driving and doing the blog.  There is so much to do back in Michigan - moving out of my office, prepping for classes, and finishing up alumni stuff (the Roeper Alumni Service Corps’ Week of Service & the Barnes & Noble/Roeper Book Celebration) that we ready couldn’t spend much time on the GTE.  After we celebrate Linda’s father 91^st birthday here in the Buffalo area today, we head back for a crazy-busy August.

2) Linda Pence is simply unbelievable.  She just makes everything work.  Seeing what needs to be done, she goes about taking care of it quietly with good humor and grace. She cringes when I thank her in public so please don’t tell her I’m writing this.

3) The alums we have met still love and feel close to the school.  They consider the time spent at Roeper to be life-changing and they are very, very grateful for being able to go there.  Maybe, everybody who has or is going to Roeper should take a minute and convey their gratitude to the parents who sacrificed so much to keep them there.  And, if you are contact with some of the teachers that gave you so much, maybe a little “Thanks” to them would be appropriate also.  Lastly, please consider how you might be able to give back.   From being a mentor in RAMP to working during the RASC Week of Service in mid-August to talking to a Roeper high school kid about a college they are interested in and you are knowledgeable about to coming back to talk to the current community to sending in your opinions, updates and memories for publication in the Roeper Alumni News to contributing to the annual fund and more, perhaps you can thank those that did so much for you by paying it forward.

4) We were impressed by the wisdom and eloquence of the alumni who took part in our discussions.  Please take a few minutes and look back at the blog summaries.  Then write to me with what you got out of reading them.

Here is what struck me: 

* The alums always thought of Roeper as their school.  They “owned” their educations, their school and their community.  By being given choice, by being encouraged to speak out, by being given responsibility and being treated with respect they were not objects to be acted upon but partners in running the school and the community.

* Many gathering participants spoke about social justice and how the value of making a better society was never far away.  The growth of the individual was important but never just for its own sake but for the betterment of the Roeper and greater communities.

*Roeper was a “lab” experience in which the idealistic values of the Roeper Philosophy were never meant to be espoused and then put on the shelf but referred to and lived by.  Discussions about ethics and their application were constant.

* No one thought Roeper was perfect.  There have been over the years serious shortcomings but always people would come back to our ideals and try better to live up to them.

*Society needs people who question, are skeptical and who possess critical thinking skills. Roeper has helped people develop these abilities but could do better.

*We need folks who feel secure enough to be able to talk to, learn from and work with others.  It seems like people in the general society are now too unprepared or scared to be able to do these things.

*Roeper needs to continue to give students opportunities to grow in confidence.  From having a sense of safety to having adults who are supportive to giving kids control and ownership of their educations and community to providing appropriate challenge we help develop people who go into the world feeling confident and empowered.

*If you want citizens to believe in democracy, you have to have them in a school and community where democracy and shared-decision-making are real.

*Technology has much to offer Roeper in better living up to our Philosophy.  Students can break down walls and connect to the outside world via technology.  They can pursue their passions and learn so much more.  But the technological change can’t simply be imposed from “a-high.”  Students and teachers need to be involved with any planning, implementation and assessment of any use of educational tech.

This is what I got out of reading the blog.  But please, take some time and read it yourself and come up with our own conclusions.

HINDSTRUM & HIS MISSION:  As we camped for 2 nights and a day at the beautiful Cranberry Lake in the Adirondacks, we finally relaxed.  It would have been almost perfect except for the mosquitos and a restless Hindstrum.  Reading, meditating, hiking and canoeing are not exciting enough for our furry friend. For a while he acted as a lifeguard but became bored with that since no one was considerate enough to drown.

Then the solution came to us.  We told Hindstrum that mosquitos were tiny birds and we gave him his ax (please don’t tell the California authorities we violated his parole condition by letting him have his favorite tool of destruction). 

Out into the night he went.  We heard the screams of the mosquitos all night.  We actually felt a little bad for what we had done but not much.  In the morning, he staggered back to camp with the tiny scalps of millions of bugs.  Apparently, he had killed all the mosquitos in northern New York State.  He was exhausted and slept for 24 hours and we could sit reading without being swarmed by little blood-suckers.

Then, we hit the road and travelled to Buffalo.  The GTE is mostly done except for our trip home tomorrow.  Hope you enjoyed reading the blog.

Positive comments made be sent to emery.pence@roeper.org.

Corrections and negative comments should go to linda.pence@roeper.org. 

AMHERST, LENOX & INTO THE WOODS

 July 25, 2013

After 2 days of camping and tent swimming in Townsend, MA (see the last blog for the soggy details), we hit every back road in central and western Mass to get to Lenox, home of UMass and Laura and Tom Roeper.  

Laura is a part-time faculty member at U. Mass., artist and writes a column for Preview Massachusettes Magazine while Tom teaches Linguistics at the university and is a world-renown expert on a whole lotta’ things that I don’t understand. Hindstrum suggests you look up information on recursion.

We had some last minute cancellations of Roeperians who couldn’t attend so only Tom, Laura, Ruth Weizenbaum, Linda and I attended but that meant more delicious food for us.  Sweet corn almost straight off the stalk, a beautiful salad from Laura and the best and most unusual pizza from Antonio’s (not to be missed if you get within 100 miles of Amherst).

Thanks to the Roepers for their hospitality including Tom taking us on a long bike ride around the sights of Amherst.

Ruth taught at Roeper in the early 1950’s before moving to California with her husband Joe Weizenbaum who became a famous pioneer in artificial intelligence and professor emeritus at MIT.  Ruth is an amazing, amazing lady who has discovered the Fountain of Youth in keeping busy with political and environmental causes.

Our conversation started as usual with me asking what kind of people, values, beliefs, and skills does our society need and how does and should Roeper help these folks and attitudes develop.

Ruth started off strongly by stating that we need people to believe in and practice democracy.  The school needs to constantly be based on democratic principles.  Having to always refer back to the idea that everybody in the community needs to be involved in making the decisions necessary to running the school helps students learn how to think and act democratically.

I mentioned that at Tom’s grandparents’ school in Germany, Marienau, all students and teachers had an equal vote in the major decisions of the school.  A lot of time and energy were needed but think of the lessons taught.

Tom followed by saying that the students need involvement in working on real political, economic and social issues.  He recounted how the U.S. Supreme Court once ruled that corporal punishment was legal.  Roeper students held discussions on the issue, got a petition together, and sent it to the Supreme Court.

Ruth agreed and said that students need a combination and interplay of theory and practice.  The classroom mostly teaches theory (although it can be conducted democratically) and then extracurricular activities such as political clubs, internships, guest speakers and field trips can be “lab” activities to flesh out the theory.

Tom recalled how his parents never acted towards people who had different beliefs with malice or anger.  By a pragmatic, emphasis on gradual conversion they managed to bring the community along as Roeper took some radical (for the time) steps.  George and Annemarie never hid their political views and never pretended that the Roeper should be some sort of neutral body.  From opposing the Vietnam War openly to integrating the school to instituting the open classroom they were bold but never strident.  Their long-term, “eyes-on the-prize” approach accomplished a lot.

Tom  thought that people had faith in his parents and through dialogue people were able to grow enough to push beyond their comfort levels.

Both Tom and Ruth suggested that ethical discussions need to be a strong part of the curriculum.  Not preaching but posing challenging and thought-provoking ethical questions would help develop people better equipped to deal with ethical dilemmas in real-life.  All of us agreed that we need everybody in the Roeper community to reflect on and discuss our basic values through consideration of real problems and issues.

I mentioned to Tom that I have been in contact with his daughter Maria who is still in association with an organization that works, mostly on the college level, against sweatshop-produced apparel if it is made under unfair, unsafe and environmentally damaging conditions.  Maria thinks Roeper would be a good pioneer high school to get involved with this movement.  And, it would be what the experts call a “bad thing” to have Roeper, with our history and values, support sweatshops.

We moved on to how Roeper does teach its values so well.  Ruth thought that one key is that our humanistic, democratic values are manifested starting with our youngest children.  After years of living in a Roeper way, people are changed for life.

Tom said his mom always said that the young were the heart of the school.

Ruth ventured that it was important that parents were a strong and involved part of the community.  In this way, parents absorbed the Roeper Philosophy and could work hand-in-hand with the staff to help the kids learn its lessons.  She also said that a strong sense of community creates a sense of safety and support so students could take risks and grow.

Tom spoke of how adults made themselves available to the students personally.  George used to do lunch room duty so the teachers could have lunch together.  Not only could the staff develop as community of learners in this way, George and the kids had time to get to know each other.

Tom mentioned that learning can always occur outside the classroom.  We used to have buses transport kids all over the metro area and on those buses, the older kids help the younger by virtue of official authority but also via informal moral authority.

This got Tom talking about how the Roeper experience helped the adults grow.  This ancillary impact was best illustrated by the story of how in the late 1960’s, Pontiac had conflict over the busing of students for integration.  The community was torn by violence and bitter arguments.  Roeper had five white lady bus drivers who spoke out in their community for peace, reconciliation and a chance for integration to work.  They had seen black and white kids get along on their buses and at school and they knew it could work.

I asked what Roeper did to further integration.  Tom and Ruth agreed it was the moral leadership of George and Annemarie.  They tried to get as many staff members as possible who were people of color and they always strove to break down barriers.

Tom recounted how people who at other schools would be marginalized (bus drivers, custodians, clerical help, etc.) had close relationships with kids and were involved with responsibilities and activities that gave them importance and status in the community.

Ruth remembered that one time she heard a speaker make a point that may seem obvious but for some reason, it really resonated with her and has become a strong principle in her life:  One person cannot live by him or herself.  People are social beings.  We all are dependent and we all are part of a community.

I added that many people today give no credit for what others individually and communally have done for them.

Ruth suggested that we need more discussion about family, society and community.

I said that even when we talk about people working to improve the world we focus on individual responsibility and action.  People not only need to recycle they need to organize, work for legislation and educate others regarding recycling.

HOW CAN TECHNOLOGY HELP US CARRY OUT THE ROEPER PHILOSOPHY?

Ruth started us off discussing this question by stating her fundamental belief that you need to support kids in their pursuit of their passions.  If tech can help with this, we should use it.  She mentioned that MIT has all of its courses online available for anybody to learn.

She continued with stating that people can share via technology what they have learned. If people can teach others they feel a sense of validation and empowerment.  Also, tech has a great ability to draw people out.       

We temporarily moved out of talking about tech as Tom mentioned he has his students do a one-minute essay at the end of each class to summarize what they had learned that day.  Ruth mentioned the advantages of peer-to-peer editing and small group work.  Linda mentioned how each of this year’s 7^th grade science students had to design a creature to match a certain environment and explain how that hypothetical animal was adapted to survive in that environment.  Then they worked with our high school Comparative Anatomy students to analyze their work.

We got back into technology when Tom opined that however valuable online or Skyped relationships are, we should remember that face-to-face human relationships are stronger. He also suggested no matter if we are talking about  online or “real,” we need to have as much respect, equality, and “walls broken-down” as possible.

Tom thought that technology might help bring out quieter, shy kids who don’t usually speak out in the traditional classroom.  He thought that reticent students might not be as big a problem at Roeper with its small classes and an atmosphere of safety and respect.

Ruth added that students can easily pursue an interest via chat rooms and blogs.Tom told us that at his university, you can tell who is online at a particular time and thus can easily reach someone if they are.

I mentioned that someone at the Boston gathering told of studies that suggested that student engagement with new forms of technological instruction trails off as the novelty wears off.

Ruth suggested that the motivation to learn and succeed is the most important in any kind of education.

Tom agreed and said those who are already motivated with take advantage of the new tech learning opportunities.

Linda said that already her students instantly look things up but what they need is practice in evaluating the validity of the huge amount of information so readily accessible.

Tom stated that critical thinking needs to be directed at the internet. 

Ruth added that some young people she knows are not very critical of information found online.  This information is believed as fact way too easily.

I closed by talking about what others at previous GTE gatherings had recommended.  That any adoption of new educational technology practices involve students with the planning, implementation and evaluation of those practices.

ONTO LENOX:   Thursday morning found us eating more delicious food.  Laura made us buckwheat/blueberry pancakes before we had to drive an hour to have “Second Breakfast” with Bonnie and Leonard Schemm who are vacationing in Lenox, MA.

Bonnie is Roeper's current Publication Master & Development Office Associate.  They are alumni parents of Jeremy and Nick Schemm.  Readers of this blog may notice something unusual about the photo below.  Linda who usually avoided getting her photo taken by always being the photographer was thwarted by a helpful passer-by.

They thought we were just getting together for a simple meal.  Although the breakfast at The Haven was amazingly good (thanks to Marcia Ruff for the recommendation), that wasn’t our focus.   Our secret plan was to have another discussion so I could write even more for this blog.

In response to what our society needs, they volunteered that collaboration is essential.  Right now, it seems like people are not working with each other because they don’t hear each other or are not willing to compromise.

They suggested more practice in critical thinking is needed.  But then they really got going when they talked about how students need to learn how to learn.  People need to identify problems, pose relevant questions and devise and implement strategies to find out.

Students need to be able to recognize and use the resources around them.  This includes the human resources.  If one looks among others not as threats but as learning resources, one values and supports t others. 

If people can do what  Bonnie and Leonard recommended in the last two paragraphs, they will be able to go beyond what is already known.  They can be confident enough and skilled enough to transcend what they already have been taught.  They will become life-long learners.

Leonard compared his experience in public school (he was a band and music director) to Roeper.  At Roeper people are not judged so much by age or other superficial measures but by who they really are, know or can do. Leonard also emphasized the intrinsic value for all students of learning to make, follow through on and evaluate choices. The development of this skill for his boys starting with free choice and becoming increasingly more long term and diverse as they grew threw school was key to their success and independence.

We ran out of time as Bonnie and Leonard were going down New Sharon for an afternoon matinee of a play and we had to travel for a while before stopping to write this blog. 

Lenox is the home of our sister school, the Windsor Mountain School.  Started by Annemarie’s parents and run by her mom and brother until it closed in the mid-1970s, it was a treat for Linda and me to tour it as we had seen it many times via the movie ACROSS TIME & SPACE and through family photos.

Left - View from the front.

Below - View from the back of the building.  Hindstrum loved the beautiful grounds of what is now the Boston University Tanglewood Institute and listening to the young musicians playing.  He wondered if he could get a scholarship based on his ability to whistle through acorn caps.

 As we left Windsor Mountain we journeyed to spend quiet moments at the cemetery where George is buried and Annemarie’s ashes will be interned next year.  The stone on the left is for Annemarie’s parents, Gertrude and Max Bondy and the middle one for a cousin. 

Annemarie will rest with George on the right.

Right now, I’m sitting in a Glen Falls, NY,  Starbucks before we head for two days of camping on Cranberry Lake in the heart of the Adirondacks. 

We will celebrate Linda’s father 91^st birthday on Sunday in Buffalo.

BOSTON & INTO NEW ENGLAND

BOSTON GATHERING & NEW ENGLAND WANDERINGS

On Sunday, July 21, the home of Michelle (Efros), David Fox and one great kid, Leo Fox, was the scene of a Roeper gathering.  I am not even Leo’s grandparent and I can tell you this toddler is officially a “Cutie,” “Sweetie,”  and “Smartie.”

In attendance were:

Rand Barthel, ’74.

Sevan Ficici , ’82, with wife Hasmik Vardanyan

Beth (Kellogg) Prince, ’91, with husband Brett

Debbie (Lipson) Feldman, ’74,  with husband Steve

Deidre Wade, ‘87

Arthur Ensroth, ’68 (finished at Cranbrook since we didn’t have a graduating class until 1969) & wife Barbara

Michelle (Efros) Fox, ’95.   

Linda Pence as chief organizer, photographer, videographer and official memory person.                       Emery Pence as pretty face and moderator.   

                             

The crazy heat wave had broken some so we enjoyed a lively discussion in the backyard after a lot of socializing in the house.  As usual at a Roeper gathering, people who didn’t know each other soon were acting like long-lost friends.  Linda was overjoyed to see some people she hadn’t seen in years.  If I haven’t mentioned it lately (& I just love mentioning it), next year will mark Linda’s 40^th year at Roeper.

I posted the questions:  “What kind of people does society and the world need?”   “What kind of attitudes, values and skills do we want people to have?”   Then I muffed it and asked “How can Roeper  produce people like that?”  People quickly (rightly)  jumped on the word “produce.”    Roeper helps people find their own way; the words were barely out of my mouth before I knew I had mis-spoken.  Roeper people are serious about words and ideas and not shy about mentioning when they disagree.

Michelle started us out.  As a middle school science teacher in Newton, MA, she is keenly aware of the importance of scientific thinking in society and she finds that too many people today are distrustful of science and do not understand the scientific method.  Students need to learn a framework for making claims, finding evidence and doing careful reasoning based on that evidence.  People need to know how to make an argument and be able to analyze their own arguments and those of others.

Debbie (seen on the left with husband Steve) added that too many people are so relativistic that they don’t even acknowledge the existence of facts.  It was déjà vu as Paul Rabe in Philly made precisely the same argument a few days ago.  Reasoned discussion stops as soon as people say  “That’s just your opinion”  as opposed to countering with data and/or arguments.   People stake out a position and then hang onto it for dear life as opposed to adjust their thinking when confronted with new info.

Sevan continued that there seems to be a lack of societal trust in science; the idea that valid research that can be verified and repeated can provide answers and can be the basis of societal action. 

Below is Sevan and wife Hasmik (Linda was so excited to see Sevan that she couldn't hold the camera completely still)

Deidre suggested that it  is a matter of integrity and intellectual honesty.  People need to have “Congruence” (I had mentioned Keith Cornfield’s short essay on  what we now need is “congruence” or people walking the walk – living their values instead of just paying lip-service).  Deidre thought that being honest with one’s self is hard but necessary before one can be honest with others.

Deidre featured on the left.

I should have said (but didn’t as I was scribbling like mad) that the Roeper Philosophy of self-actualization in a communal context (people growing with the help of others for the benefit of the individual and the community) needs people capable of self-awareness, people respectful of others enough to genuinely listen and learn from them and a safe environment so both of those can develop.

All I said to the group was “How?”    “How does, or more accurately for you  Roeperians from years past, how did Roeper help you develop into a deeper thinker and a more intellectually honest person?”  Or a better question yet, “How should Roeper do these things?”

Deidre replied, “Modeling.  The adults around us showed us how to talk to each other, engage in nuanced dialogue and explore even sensitive, challenging topics in a safe and meaningful way.”

Rand added that it was obvious that people respected each other.  “Respect” defined as acknowledging the differences between people, withholding judgment until one has really heard others and changing one’s position when appropriate.  Authentic dialogue was the norm.  

On the right is Rand, Debbie, Steve & Em.

Rand continued that what people need is the ability to bring to the surface one’s own basic (& sometimes hidden) assumptions.  If a person can identify his or her assumptions he or she can better understand their own thinking and can engage in more meaningful dialogue.  If we don’t develop this ability in most people in our world, the planet is in serious trouble.  (note from Emery:  what Rand is describing is what Richard Paul, Sonoma State University. Center for Critical Thinking and Moral Critique, describes as “Third-degree critical thinking” –the willingness and ability to analyze one’s own thinking.

Deidre added that questioning was always encouraged at Roeper.  It was safe to question others and one’s self.

Arthur remembered that it was comfortable to be interested in learning.  It was the norm to think about and talk about a wide variety of subjects.  Students who at other schools felt like oddballs because of their intellects and interests felt at home and comfortable at Roeper.  One learned to accept one’s personal strengths and recognize areas in need of work. Below is Brett, Beth and Arthur.

Deidre and others suggested that we need to learn how to better listen to others. 

Rand said that we need to develop the belief that a person can always learn from others.

Sevan said that noncomformity needs to be accepted.  

Beth responded that during her years in high school at Roeper she and friends intellectually agreed with Roeper allowing and even encouraging nonconformity but it was sometimes difficult knowing how to act to be accepted in the group and still be true to herself with public school friends.   She didn’t like her outside-of-Roeper friends thinking of us as that school for weirdos.

Someone (maybe Art) said that he just wouldn’t have friends outside of Roeper who didn’t understand Roeper acceptance and celebration of diversity (all kinds of diversity). 

I recounted how in the mid-2000s before we had our own gym, we had visiting students and parents coming to the Birmingham campus to watch games in our gym.  One Roeper student leader was appalled by the posters, drawings, cartoons, text, etc. on the outside of the lockers (there is no policy of prior restraint on what could be posted on a locker but one had to engage in dialogue with anyone offended).  This student wanted us to “clean” up and restrict such locker postings.  Other students countered we had to be who we were and they had heard visitors express envy for our ability to be so open.

Deidre told how she gained a certain authenticity and openness from her experiences at Roeper and found others in the outside world respectful and appreciative of that genuine confidence.  If you are comfortable with yourself, others notice and are amazed.

Debbie said that she did have some transition problems because she just assumed that everybody was as gifted as were her peers at Roeper.  She adjusted because she had a lot of practice learning how to get along with people and figuring out where others were coming from.

Michelle brought up an interesting Roeper problem.  When a person grows up in a school, it can be hard to reinvent one’s self.  If you are in a high school of 1500 or a college of 25,000 or if you move to a new community, you don’t have to deal with people who knew you in Stage I when you spit crumbs on people.  I didn’t (but should have) point out that the acceptance and tolerance of the Roeper community for folks to lead their own lives helps offset that.

Rand thought we should move onto the topic of the rat race.  He learned at Roeper to ask “Why bother with competition for its own sake?”  Why not focus on developing and pursuing one’s own goals and passions – more internal motivation and less external.

We agreed that kids should be aware that some “game-playing” and compromising might be necessary to achieve certain goals.  We discussed how various Roeper alums have successfully navigated the “after-Roeper world although it can be tough.

This lead into a really interesting discussion with many of those present mentioning that they, at times, didn’t challenge themselves.  In subjects or areas not of interest, they didn’t push themselves as hard as they might have.  Michelle talked about how she focused on math and science at Roeper and in college realized she had missed something by doing so.  Deidre agreed she had gaps in her knowledge.  All agreed there were plusses to allowing students to take control of their educations as they came out of Roeper feeling confident to be able to be managers of their own educations and lives.

Linda and I noted that what is supposed to happen depends on one of the pillars of the Roeper Philosophy – healthy, strong relationships. If a student has trust in and close support of an adult or adults that know him or her well, the student will not fall through the cracks, will be more well-rounded, and will take risks to go beyond the student’s comfort level.

Linda mentioned that students are now encouraged to develop their own questions, their own rubrics of success and their own assessment to compliment what the teachers do.

My gut feeling is that Roeper is doing more to make sure kids don’t fall through the cracks and that we do better balancing out the Roeper education without losing the most important values of the Roeper Philosophy – students should own their own educations, pursue their passions and come out of our school feeling confident and empowered.

TECHNOLOGY: HOW TECH CAN HELP ROEPER STUDENTS BETTER OWN THEIR EDUCATION, MASTER THE SUBJECT MATTER & PURSUE THEIR PASSIONS.

I threw the question out about the promise and challenge of new educational technologies.

Michelle who teaches at the high-achieving public school district of Newton was ready for this question as I have been publicizing what the discussion questions for the gathering would be. This is a question close to her heart.     She said we must realize that the kids today are digital natives and that they are very different from students from just a few years ago.  They won’t connect to teachers and their pedagogy if it isn’t tech-based.

She continued that the Roeper Philosophy of student ownership and empowerment can be enhanced by new tech developments. A student can go more at his or her own pace.  There are more opportunities to pursue individual passions and interests.  The walls between school and the outside world can be lowered.  She recounted how her 8^th grader science students have benefitted from her Earth and Space unit being partially online (using a variation of the flipped classroom concept).  After the students viewed videos and resources outside of school, she follows up with small discussion groups of 8-10 kids at school.  She finds that students who are quiet in a regular class are more willing to respond online.  Many kids are more excited and more comfortable online.

Sevan wasn’t completely buying it.  As techie as he is, he wonders if technology hasn’t become a barrier to better interpersonal relationships.  Aren’t people using technology to hide from each other, engaging in pseudo-communities?  Shouldn’t they learn to work with each other face-to-face?

Michelle pointed out that she used a combo of traditional, face-to-face and online activities.

Beth mentioned MOCCs and other online college courses.  Roeper students and others could take subjects that Roeper, no matter how flexible and accommodating, just couldn’t offer.

Arthur worried that many 16 year olds might not really know what they should take but might opt for what is a parochial interest instead of going for well-roundedness and challenge.  I think my words about Roeper needing healthy relationships between students and adults applies here.

Deidre mentioned research shows that interest and commitment towards online learning does lessen.  Having to invest the energy and time to attend a formal educational setting might better serve a student feel committed to learning.  I wonder if the Hawthorne Effect might be in play here.  This principle states that most experiments will increase positive effects at first as participants are aware of the “experiment.”  In addition, the novelty will temporarily increase “buy-in.” In many cases, the level of positive effects will lessen.   However, this does not mean that true improvements will fail to make lasting effect.

We all agreed that somehow we need to acknowledge and use new technologies without losing what we already are doing well via traditional education practices.

I mentioned that Roeper has avoided, for both good and bad, many new educational advances.  We have avoided dead-ends and fads and let others test things out.  But we have also lagged behind.  Now is time to take the best and leave the rest. And as other participants at other gatherings have stated:  New practices need to have both teacher and student participation in the planning and implementation.

Sevan noted that online education could have economic advantages.  Could we make money by using new technologies to offer a Roeper education to the many people who can’t have it now. Sevan strongly felt that intrinsic to our mission to educate thinking, socially conscious, global citizens is the mandates to establishment many more schools with the Roeper philosophy of education.

Someone (my notes fail to say who) wondered if technology could spread Roeper.  Is anybody looking into offering a Roeper education online? This lead to a larger discussion of there being any way the values, practices and/or culture of Roeper could be shared with the world.  Many alums don’t live in Michigan so their kids can’t go to Roeper.  Many gifted kids are suffering from not having a challenging, accepting learning environment.

I explained how George and Annemarie never wanted to spread Roeper too far ((such as franchising) so as to lose control and so as to perhaps dilute quality and essence.  But Annemarie towards the end of her life was miffed that there were Montessori Schools everywhere but not Roeper Schools everywhere.  I think our message and Philosophy are nuanced and complicated and not easily duplicated.  We are anything but formulaic but wouldn’t it be wonderful if somehow more kids could benefit from a Roeper kind of education?

We did have a discussion of what is essential to Roeper.  What has to stay at Roeper or it isn’t Roeper?  

Sevan explained his kids attend a school where uniforms are required, something he can’t imagine at Roeper.  But he didn’t believe a lack of dress code was a “make-or-break” requirement for Roeper.  

I asked how many called their teachers by their last name or both.  

There were those in the group that totally did one or another (depending on years attended) and those that attended during years when some teachers required last names and some first names.  Perhaps, it boils down to why a decision is made and how it is made.  If the community can refer back to the Philosophy, apply it to a particular question and then in a communal, shared-decision manner decide on something, then it will be Roeperian.

AFTER BOSTON INTO THE RAINS:  

On Monday after breakfast with Michelle and that uber-adorable Leo, we headed for Salem to look for more Linda family history. 

Here is an excerpt  from our discussion with Hindstrum:

Hindstrum:  Where are we?

Emery:  In Salem, Massachusetts looking for Linda’s aunt’s house.  There it is now.

Hindstrum: Another big house in the family?  Let me guess.  Someone sold it and I don’t have any legal claim to it.

Emery:  That’s right.

Hindstrum:  Didn’t those ancestors believe in stewardship?  Why didn’t they have any regard for future generations of squirrels?

Hindstrum:  Why does every house say “Witch” on it?   “Witch House.”  “Witch Museum.”  “Witch Dry-cleaning.”

Emery: About 220 years ago, there were people accused of being witches here and they were hanged.

Hindstrum:  What’s a witch?  Is that a witch?

Emery:  That's actually not a witch but someone who played an annoyingly perky witch on TV.  She always married someone named "Dick" but no one can remember which was witch.   Anyways, a witch is a person who supposedly has magic powers and can fly around on a broom.

Hindstrum:  If they fly they probably are birds and should be hung.

Emery:  They weren’t birds and weren’t witches and didn’t fly or have magic powers.

Hindstrum:  Then why were they hung.  

Emery: Hard to explain.  Here’s a copy of Arthur Miller’s THE CRUCIBLE.  Read it. Ponder upon it.  Remember it.   You would be surprised how often people get scared and do violence to people out of  fear.

We took a quick trip to the beach by Nahant (north of Boston and south of Salem).  We had to leave quickly because of  Hindstrum freaking out about the sea gulls and our not letting him have his hatchet.

After Salem and my taking a wrong turn which resulted in a lot, a lot, a lot of north Boston suburb driving, we went to Townsend, MA (near the New Hampshire border) for camping for a couple of  days before the Amherst Gathering on Wednesday at Tommy’s Roeper, 6:00-8:00 PM, 123 High St.

Things went well until apparently God forgot his promise to not flood the Earth again.  3-4 inches of rain  last night and this morning and our tent had its own swimming pool.  So while I am typing up this blog, Linda is back at the state park doing her magic to get us ready for sleeping, not swimming tonight.  I think even Linda is having a hard time as it just keeps raining.  Here she comes now and she announces “Mission Accomplished.”    

Next blog will probably be posted Thursday.                                                                  

NYC GATHERING & ON

NYC GATHERING  & BIG APPLE REFLECTIONS:

Thanks to alum Alex Alberstadt and husband Ken we had a great place to stay in Manhattan.  Her place is on East 85^th St about two blocks from Central Park, just a few steps from the Met. Museum of Art.  From there we could get to the Arsenal in Central Park (64^th St. and 5^th Ave) or we have a short 10 minute drive to Eric Peterson’s Park (formerly known as NYC’s Randall’s Island Park).  Being a rube from the sticks in the Mich., I was expecting problems driving and parking and we had neither (except for an insane wait getting to and thru the Lincoln Tunnel).

Anyway, as I told Alex, she should open a B & B and get out of corporate law as she is friendly, generous, flexible and sociable, attributes more helpful in the hospitality industry.

On Thursday morning we went out to Randall’s Island (East River between Harlem, the Bronx and Queens).  What a place!  The temps were brutal but the breeze off the water kept us comfortable.  Our tour director, Eric Peterson (formerly manager of Roeper School in the 80’s and 90’s, apprenticed to Mariann Hoag) gave us maps and took us on a 2 hour golf cart tour of this most unusual park. He brought us lunch to boot.  One of the park features that Eric is justifiably proud of is a thriving urban garden that is used in a variety of ways including teaching kids about nutrition. 

Below we have a photo on the right of Eric, Hindstrum and me in front of a rice garden while below left is a shot of our furry friend trying to talk to a topiary squirrel with little success.  From this experience he has concluded New Yorkers are rude and brusque.

At 6:00, Roeperians  started to drift in to the Arsenal.  We decided to have it  inside rather than on the roof terrace (amazing views of the Central Park Zoo)  because as one of the Arsenal employees  said, “It’s crazy hot up there.”   Later after the gathering when it had cooled to the low 90’s, Eric took some people up for a look-see. 

We had people from the 70’s through 2012.  Some were very local while others came in from 2 hours away in New Jersey and Conn.   We had:

Hannah Lawrence

Todd Baker

Sara Porter

Alex Alberstadt

Eric Peterson

Claire Schwartz

Carolyn Wember & husband Peter Kowalski

Victoria Shaw and husband Luc Faucheux

Stephanie Fried and husband  Mike Bifolco                                                                                                                                                    

Saul Hansell

Beth Zick

Erik Burbulla

Jenni  Gibb Kilmer

Jen Hansell and husband Fred Baumgarten

And walking in and surprising us greatly, Mary Kay Glazek , who just happened to be in town visiting grandson Teddy. The fact that she was in NYC with a 110 degree heat index instead of sitting on the shore of her Lake Michigan place truly shows grandma love.

Our discussion didn’t seem to have enough time; we didn’t even touch on the question of how technology could help us better fulfill our educational mission and live up to our philosophy.  We concentrated on the questions of “What kind of people do we need in our society and as workers.  What kind of folks will best build our future?”    “What does or should Roeper do to help prepare students to be those kinds of people?”

If you look at the names of the people who attended and took part in our discussion, you can see why I was hard pressed to keep up with my notes.  I apologize to the participants if I omitted anything or mis-summarized.

Eric P. starts us out by stating we need curious people – folks not afraid to ask questions, challenge, find out, and take risks.  He thought Roeper should continue doing what it did when he was there – offering lots of different experiences and variety.  He advocated not nailing everything down so outcomes were pre-determined; the adults need to be brave enough to let the kids take at least some control.  Students should be allowed to pursue their own desired lines of inquiry.

Jen Hansell wants to make sure that Roeper kids do not become smug and not open to learning because they think they knew it all.  She thought that was a bit of a possibility with the students she knew in the 70’s and 80’s.  What is funny is later other folks mentioned just the opposite in that kids at Roeper while intense were “available for learning” and did have a willingness to open their minds.  I suppose one way to reconcile those two thoughts is to say that gifted people if not shepherded properly could turn close-minded because of their intellectual gifts and intensity.

Mary Kay recounted how her son David, ’95, before leaving Roeper always thought that the feminism critique that our society shut down women so they were reluctant to speak out was disingenuous and overblown.  When he went to U. of M., he was shocked to find that women really didn’t speak out and were subtlety pressured into second class academic citizenship.

Sara Porter thought that although her parents get some credit for her strength, she credits her Roeper upbringing for her ability to feel and act strong despite societal pressure on her as a woman.

I asked how Roeper taught those lessons.  She responded that a basic respect was always there:  “we are all equal.  We are all worthy of respect. “   As Saul Hansell wrote back in the 70’s or 80’s and we have put on t-shirts and bumper stickers  (except  we had to remind him on Thursday that he had, indeed, penned the following):  “No one too small to contribute nor too big to listen.”

On the right, Alex, Sara, Eric, Em & Erik

David Glazek's (via MKG) assessment of U. of M. being a less-than-positive setting for women to be strong was backed up by the many female Roeperians at the gathering who had attended that university.

To answer my continued-to-be-asked question regarding how Roeper produces strong, empowered people, Claire responded that the education at Roep was always open and therefore, kids could take it over, at least to some degree, and make it theirs.  That experience gave one a sense of possibility and confidence.

Victoria agreed and noted the role of independent study by which a student could pursue a passion or area of interest beyond the proscribed curriculum.

On the left is Luc Faucheux, Victoria & Em

Beth opined that having a bunch of smart kids together helped.  They were just smart, they were interested in learning.  Finding out for its own sake was emotionally important.  Standards were high but they were standards growing organically from having bright, interesting people working together not standards because some administrators or state mandates imposed them from a-high.  Beth said it seemed less about competition and more about learning.  There was so much support from adults and other students.  People really believed that failure was not so much about not living up to external standards;  failure was not taking advantage of the many opportunities to grow.

On the right is Mary Kay, Eric and Beth

Eric commented  that teachers used humor (which appeals to the gifted mind) to give perspective and balance.  S.S. teacher Kate Millett used to tell a sixth graders upset over a not -perfect test score, “Oh well, your life is mostly will be over with grades like that.”

I ventured that it sounded like everybody was saying that Roeper is a community of learners, adults and students teaching and learning from each other.  The group agreed heartily and told me to write that down and I did.

Mary Kay expressed the idea that the teachers model that community of learners idea.  She told how current teachers, Max Collins (Social Sciences), Michelle Stamler (Photography), Jamie Lyons-Eddy (math), Jamie Benigna (Chem) and  Andrew Blechman (Physics)  have formed a summer book club to read a thought-provoking book on statistics and the inter-disciplinary connections of stats.   This demonstrates how Roeper teachers are always learning and learning together.

Saul ventured that education was at Roeper and should be everywhere “rigorous.”  It should challenge assumptions, make people sweat, cause cognitive dissonance and lead to growth.  It should be worthy of students’ time and energy. He continued that people need to be fearless in this rapidly changing, crazy world.  They need to believe that answers can be found and problems solved.  This way of thinking doesn’t get paralyzed by dreams of perfection but supported by accepting messiness and moving on.                      Below is Saul and Jen H.

Alex said that there was a whole set of expectations and assumptions supporting a sense of safety to speak out and take chances.

Jen H. said there was always time to fool around and play with learning. 

Victoria contributed that freedom and choice was always empowering.

Alex brought up that Roeper was so small that one couldn’t hide. In addition, there were so many different ways to engage that a person could always find some comfortable avenue for growth.

Claire expressed the idea that the emphasis was less on fitting in a box than on pushing the envelope.  “Expansion not limitation” was the mantra when she was at Roeper and she hopes it will always be that way.  There should always be the freedom to try out new things and pursue what one thinks is worth pursuing.

Mary Kay recounted how one summer she had a summer study group on James Joyce and ULYSSES at her home.  No grades. No college credit.   But students, parents, staff members and alums all showed up to work and work hard.  Such effort was based on people wanting to learn.

Stephanie said that Roeper teaches you how to understand and accept people.  Diversity is based on people accepting who they are themselves so they are ready and able to not just tolerate others but revel  in and gain from others.  Such understanding is critical in the modern workplace.  People are going to encounter and have to deal with a lot of difficult, quirky people and if you have gone to Roeper, you will know how to best take advantage of what such folks have to offer.  She said that the misfits and outcasts she encounters in her workplace today are valued by her because she learned to positively view and utilize the misfits and outcasts of Roeper that didn’t seem so “misfity” and “outcasty” once they came to Roeper.   A co-worker will say something like “That Sam is a weirdo” and Steph can authentically respond “Maybe a bit but I love him because…”

Below is Stephanie and husband Mike:

Hannah said it is a matter of recognizing the strengths of people which comes from being comfortable enough in oneself to be receptive and not threatened.

Eric added that not having class ranking and stuff like that helps.  Since Roeper-thinking is nuanced and precise our community doesn’t say “Smart, smarter and smartest” but recognizes all sorts of talents and gifts so people value the contributions and abilities of almost everybody.

Mary Kay recounted how one of her sons (let’s just use the name “Chris” to protect his identity) came home to talk about another student.  This “Chris” was always the type of person who learned easily.  He came home to talk about another student.  Let’s call him “Olesh.”  “Chris” wasn’t dismayed by “Olesh’s”  freaky-smartiness in math and simply said  “I’m good at math but Olesh has ‘math-imagination.’   Think about the comfortability and insight necessary for a kid to say something that.  I hope that Roeper can take some credit for some of both.

Alex said one key is the reliance on collaboration and cooperation.  Solving the problem and accomplishing the goal were the foci not so much the gaining of individual fame or glory.

Todd chimed in that he came to Roeper in 6^th grade and found such an atmosphere of support that contrasted  greatly with his previous school atmosphere.  He found people humble and appreciative of the skills and talents of others.  People seemed open and receptive partially because it was useful and helpful to have strong and accomplished people around.  He also appreciated that other people could understand and appreciate him.

Alex added that Roeper always seemed to remember the ethical component in making decisions.  Referring to principles not resorting to expediency as the default position.

Victoria chimed in that everybody always knew that education involved ethics.  Problems were opportunity for growth.  Disputes were good practice for conflict resolution.

We had to quit because of time but as we did, someone (I don’t remember who) excitedly ran up and exclaimed “We didn’t talk about social justice; it is the basis of the school.”  Good point.  Maybe we need to have a NYC Alumni discussion group meet or an online forum convene to talk about the role of social justice in our community.

Eric took a group up to the roof where no one melted and all enjoyed the spectacular view of the zoo.  We scrambled to clean up so the nice Arsenal folks could go home.  Eric Peterson was wonderful as usual.  Of course, the person who took charge cleaning up, organizing and packing was the same person who always makes these things work and I have to thank Linda again for all she does quietly, quickly and with grace.

ON TO CAPE COD:  We zipped out of the City in a flash with no traffic.  I swear people must exaggerate the problems with parking and driving in NYC.

Before, we knew it we were in Norwalk, Conn where some of Linda’s 19^th century ancestors lived.  We visited historic Lockwood Mansion, a huge Victorian masterpiece estimated to have been built for about $400 million (in today’s dollars) in 1864-68 by Linda’s great, great grandfather LeGrand Lockwood.  The docent and the mansion historian were thrilled to talk to Linda especially since she could shed light on one of the family portraits on display since she grew up with it in her grandfather’s home in Buffalo before it was donated.

Unfortunately, we told Hindstrum about the family history connected to Lockwood House and LeGrand’s fortune.  Although we told him that the family money was gone and the house sold out of the family due to the Gold Crash of 1869, the machinations of Cornelius Vanderbilt and the early death of LeGrand, he got it into his little brain that he had a claim on the house.  We only got him to leave when we told him that the house had a serious infestation of birds (ala a Hitchcock movie); Hindstrum hates birds. In any event, we left before the police or Animal Control arrived.                                                        

We aren’t going to mention to Hindstrum that another branch of Linda’s once owned a big chunk of Orange County before losing it.  He is already squirrel non-grata with Disney since last year’s dragon incident.

Fortunately, most folks staying on the Cape were not camping so we have a quiet spot to stay in Shawme-Crowell State Park.  Although, any kind of driving is crazy.  Compared to Cape Cod, traffic in NYC is light.  When we get finished working on the blog (where else – Starbucks), we are going swimming in the ocean but the 2 mile drive should take about an hour. 

On the right, Hindstrum seeks to share his banana/acorn smoothie with any available beach chick while we work on this blog.  

Hope to see you soon at either:

BOSTON: On Sunday, July 21 from 4:00-7:00 we will be at the home of Michelle Efros Fox, '95, 18 Frances St., Needham, MA 

WEST CENTRAL MASS.  Tom and Laura Roeper will host all available Roeperians at their home on Wednesday, July 24, 6:00-8:00 PM.  149 High St., Amherst, MA
For those in Mass., please feel free to come to both gatherings.  Actually, any Roeperian who comes to multiple GTE events will be lauded, honored and mentioned.

If you need to get a hold of us the day of an event or while we are on the road between July 6-July 25,  please call Linda at 248-318-0386 or me at 248-943-3256.

If by chance you are in Mass., Vermont, NH or upstate NY and want to get together but can’t make the Boston or Amherst gatherings, we might be able to arrange something.  Give us a call.