Children and Good Work

by Susan Larson

Very young children appear to embrace Good Work with greater enthusiasm than their older classmates.

That was one of the surprising conclusions of my recent Sonoma State University Master’s project, “The Peace Crane Project: How Children Can Be Inspired To Do Good Work.” The project’s mission was to: (1) create an environment and provide guidance for children to do good work, (2) provide stimulus and assistance for children to develop their innate artistic abilities, (3) offer an environment and guidance for children to develop their social consciousness, 4) teach children to express their feelings through art-making and (5) honor the extraordinary contribution to world peace by Sadako Sasaki.

This project first saw light in my kindergarten classroom at the Santa Rosa Charter School for the Arts. As a way to pay tribute to victims of 9/11, kindergartners decorated giant pre-folded origami cranes and wrote reflections responding to the prompt, “My wish for the people of the world is…”

The success of the kindergarten 9/11 peace crane art exhibit inspired me to expand this activity to my fourth-through-eighth grade art specialty classes. By folding and decorating origami peace cranes, these older students added their artistic voices to a Japanese tradition that was over one thousand years old. Completed peace cranes became part of a year-long traveling exhibit that ended in Japantown, San Francisco on International Peace Day, August 6th.

To enhance their understanding of the peace crane symbolism, children studied the activism of Sadako Sasaki, who was two years old when the U.S. dropped the atomic bomb in Hiroshima. Sadako used traditional crane-folding as a way to heal spiritually. She died from leukemia at age twelve. Her activism and bravery encouraged children globally to work together for world peace and inspired my inquiry: “How can children learn to do good work?”

The kindergartners hurled themselves into this project with triumphant abandon. Moreover, their responses were drawn from the heart: concerns about wellness, safety and personal responsibility. Examples: “My wish for the people of the world is for more fireman to help out.” And “My wish for people of the world is bread for everyone.” But eighth graders played back “pop” media-inspired slogans, such as “Peace out!” and “Have a great day every day!”, short-circuiting their hearts. One could chart a descending line of joyful participation, from the kindergartners’ eagerness, to the eighth graders’ conditioned reflexes.

Seiko Fujimoto, international peace activist and Hiroshima bombing survivor, told me, “Children are the hope for peace because their minds are still clear. When children ask for peace it ís different than when adults ask for peace. Kids care more and have more ideas for peace.”

The Peace Crane Project was finally about fusion. For nine years in elementary and middle school, we teach our students about numbers and dates and places. Then on weekends some of the students go to church, temple or synagogue to address their spiritual selves. The twain rarely meet. The project sought to join the two worlds, to help children get in touch with their better angels, to open their lives to the possibility of wonder.

I emerged from this project with a profound sense that children come to earth with a built-in need to do good things for others. Before grown-ups show them all the things they cannot or should not do, they see things purely. They cherish their connection to others and are happy making others happy.

Google and Goldman

by Margot Locker

At least until the spring of 2010, two lines of work have been particularly seductive for ‘the best and the brightest’—the graduates of our leading colleges and universities. One professional option has entailed work at the cutting edge of the technology sector—for Facebook, Apple or Google. Complementing Silicon Valley, the other option has been to work on “The Street”—in investment banking, hedge funds, or some other branch of the financial industry.

One attraction, of course, is the possibility of making a lot of money, preferably soon. While the salaries may not be exorbitant, the possibilities of options, bonuses, or “striking it rich” are patent: many young adults dream about becoming the next Marc Zuckerberg, founder of Facebook, or the next John Paulson, the trader who made billions shorting the mortgage market (technically, collateralized debt obligations).

How does one think about these career choices with respect to the execution of GoodWork™? As defined by my colleagues and me, the good worker embodies three qualities. He/she is technically Excellent: knows what to do and how to do it in the sector under consideration. The good worker is Ethical: thinks about what is the right thing to do, not just for oneself and now, but for the broader society and in the long run. Finally, the good worker is Engaged: likes the work, looks forward to it, finds meaning in it.

While I don’t have expertise in either field, I will assume that those who are recruited for these sectors—Google or Goldman for short—know what they are doing. In terms of good work, they may be deemed Excellent. They are informed and thorough students; they work hard to master material; they can pass the formal or informal tests that are posed by potential employers; and, thrown into a new situation, they are able to make sense of it, ask the right questions, finish the task expeditiously and move on to the “next next thing”.

But good work does not depend exclusively on excellence. One ceases to be a good worker if the work loses interest, on the one hand, or if one cuts ethical corners, on the other. With respect to school teachers in demanding urban settings, there is the risk of burn out. While they may still be excellent and ethical, these teachers find the job demands too difficult and eventually they become disengaged. Only those who have ample collegial support systems, or very strong religious or idealistic principles, are able to remain as engaged good workers. In the case of many professionals, the desire for fame and fortune—especially Warhol-like fame and Trump-style fortune—can come to ‘trump’ ethical considerations. Every day in the press, one reads about compromised or unethical work on the part of doctors, lawyers, professors, or engineers.

Which brings me to the young persons who want to work for Google or Goldman (or perhaps both!). Whatever attracts these individuals initially, it is clear that, once hired, they have joined a very exciting enterprise. At Google, they are developing the technology and technological applications of the future, and are even granted a day a week to focus on their own projects. At Goldman, they work along side the best and the brightest to analyze business and financial opportunities and to make the ‘best bet’—the decision that will result in additional riches for the company, and for themselves.

To borrow the terminology of my colleague Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, working opportunities within Google or Goldman are rife with the possibility of ‘flow’—that pleasurable psychic state where skills and challenges are in mesh. The problem with the state of ‘flow’ is that it is distinctly amoral: one can have flow equally in resecting a tumor, climbing a mountain, or cracking a safe. I submit that the flow opportunities at these cutting edge companies are so alluring that they risk undermining sensitivity to ethics, rendering one prone to ethical violations.

However, engagement need not occur at the expense of ethics. Until 1999, Goldman Sachs was a partnership. Partners did well, but they had an investment in the long term growth of the company and in the preservation of its excellent reputation. And so, no doubt with some exceptions, workers at Goldman Sachs behaved in an ethical manner. But once the company became public traded, and once the power began to flow to the traders, Goldman’s ethical muscle became flabby.

Google’s motto is “Do no evil”—an injunction to watch what one is doing, morally, ethically, and legally. There have been ethical lapses at Google; indeed some of the firm’s policies of advertising, and of sharing of data, have been widely criticized. Yet Google has not always taken the easy solution. Confronted with evidence that China was censoring websites and spying on the digital footprints of dissidents, Google made the difficult decision to stop working in China and to direct users to the uncensored Hong Kong site. In this instance, I would argue, Google has taken an ethical stance—one that would not necessarily have been taken by companies with a different ethos or companies with eyes glued to the next quarter’s profits.

Fifty years ago, there was a common view of American newspapers. In this view, it was too bad that the New York Times was controlled by the Sulzberger family, and the Washington Post was controlled by the Graham family. Better that these firms become publicly held companies, not subject to familial whims. In retrospect, of course, the opposite has been the case. Today, virtually the only widely respected newspapers are those that remain under family—as opposed to public traded—names. Apparently it matters whether and how your name is being used.

In this respect, there is an interesting distinction between Google and Goldman. While Google is public traded, it remains in important respects the fiefdom of founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin. Their imprimatur remains strong. In contrast, Goldman is no longer under the directorship of individuals who are integrally connected to the past and the conscience of the company. CEO Lloyd Blankfein may be sincere in believing that the firm is doing “God’s work” but few would argue, any longer, that it is doing good work.

Lay It on the Table

by Bill Bussey

I attended a fairly small public high school that graduated roughly two hundred or so kids every year. One of the more memorable moments at my graduation came as a result of a well-intentioned classmate, who, in honor of our departure, followed through with his regrettable urge to re-write the lyrics of Simon and Garfunkle’s “Bookends”. The Vienna Boy’s Choir are the only folks I can think of who could manage this tune, which, incidentally, possesses all the celebratory joy of Leonard Cohen at the dentist. Nobody could sing it. Nobody wanted to sing it. We didn’t even bother to mouth it. Most folks used the moment as a bathroom break. Another notable juncture occurred later when the seemingly endless awards’ portion overlooked me. They gave out awards for every possible character trait or career choice. Everybody received at least three scholarships or commendations, even the kids who had dropped out. To endure this, I convinced myself that what I was witnessing was really a raffle.

The end of the year for graduates is understandably pretty much all about them, but to be honest, sometimes we all can lose perspective down the final stretch. Any student who gets accepted into Nobles (many do not) and then successfully navigates the Sisyphean demands required to maintain their place in this school (not everyone makes it through) should realize that their diploma is in itself an honor. I cringe a bit on those rare occasions when I hear folks mutter that their son or daughter got the shaft because someone else got the nod. Anything beyond a Nobles diploma really shouldn’t be expected. Yet, I do expect every graduate to take the time and effort to express their appreciation, whether it be to classmates or faculty members, for all that they have been given. Truthfully, every student should do just that every year whether they are graduating or not.

But often it’s the parents of graduates who get overlooked in the waning weeks of the school year—mostly by their own children who are rushing happily from one celebratory event to another. In a perfect world, the run up to graduation would include a Mardi Gras of sorts in which the parents of Class I students could be given a well-deserved tip of the hat for all they have done. To be fair, there are moments at various events prior to graduation that parents get their due. That said, it is unrealistic for us to expect our seniors to fully appreciate all the anxiety, heartache, and sleepless nights that came with our unbridled joy in raising them. Nor can they completely understand how their departure leaves our world in some ways just a little less than what it was. But at this crucial transition it is imperative that each of you carve out a quiet moment with your soon-to-be-graduate and share with them in no uncertain terms everything that they have always meant to you, how they always will, and how that being their parent has been the greatest gift that you have ever known. Lay it on the table and give your child both the means and the moment to do the same.

What are your thoughts during this graduation season?

Can We Trust Goldman Sachs?

by Howard Gardner

Goldman Sachs is widely acknowledged to be a leader in its field and has certainly been successful by most commonly applied criteria.  But it has to decide what business or profession it is in.  If it is just a business, whose goal is to make as much money as possible for partners and shareholders, then it needs to make that clear. “We will do anything legal that we can,”–and, implicitly, cut as close to illegality as we can without crossing the line.

But if it claims to be socially responsible, if its partners claim to be professionals, then it has to apply much stricter standards to its own actions and take full responsibility for the consequences of these actions.  By most accounts, so long as Goldman Sachs was a partnership, it behaved in a professional manner and was justifiably respected for its behaviors. But it is clear from recent events in the post IPO period, that it is strictly a business, one that aims to make as much money as possible, by any and all means, including ones that involve deception of its customers.

Goldman Sachs does not need a new strategy or a new public relations gimmick. If it wants to become a respected firm, it needs to alter fundamentally its hiring, its training, its reward systems, its accountability, and its transparency. Absence a new leadership, with a wholly different set of ethical standards, that won’t happen– even if the firm claims to be doing “God’s work.”

Visit Washington Post Blog for additional perspectives.

Link: http://views.washingtonpost.com/leadership/2010/04/

Inspiring for Change: GoodWork for Mexico’s Children

by Yael Karakowsky

My name is Yael Karakowsky; I am from Mexico and have been a preschool teacher for the last 3 years. I often ask myself how many “dreamers” are out there … doing everything they can, walking that extra mile, never missing a chance and always seeking to do a little bit more. I consider myself a fighter, a dreamer and sometimes … a person that expects more than what is actually possible. Being a good citizen and a dreamer in Mexico can be a little hard, since we are dealing with a society full of contrasts. This could be even harder when you are working with children and pretending you can inspire them to change the world, since “children are the future”.

Mexico is a beautiful country full of welcoming, warm-hearted and family-oriented people who love to be surrounded by family and friends with high moral values. So then, what is wrong with this picture? The fact is that we always pretend to be the “perfect family” (everything happens behind closed doors), we love shortcuts and easy things, labor is cheap and there is a high lack of education. At the same time we face serious economic issues: money is concentrated in approximately 13-17% of our population, while according to some estimates, 40%-60% of the population lives below the poverty line (OECD) and 60% households are below 6 minimum salaries. This added to the actual economic worldwide situation ends up in educational backwardness, unemployment, sickness, and much more. All this results in: a) very successful parents – in business – with no time for their children; b) parents that have to work hard – many times in more than one job, since labor is cheap and not well valued; or c) unemployed parents that may end up sending their kids to work.

In Mexico, while schools can be doing great efforts, the entire society strives to keep on the traditional path – grow up, study something ‘good’ for your future, get married and have kids. It is rare to find someone who finds the time to actually analyze his future, his professional career and goals, as well as someone who wants to be a responsible parent, as opposed to just wanting a child. Years ago we faced authoritarian and chauvinistic families – women were supposed to stay at home and educate children, the father was the economic support and his word was the law at home. Children were not allowed to ask, listen or talk at every time. There were unlimited rules and “because I say so” was the last and -never under discussion- word. I wouldn’t dare to say that we are not chauvinistic anymore, but I do think that the Mexican society as many others, has passed to the total permissiveness, dragging a high lack of values. Since everyone is a parent and there is a high rate of unemployment, passion in life is lost and it is hard to transmit or inspire. So, many could have the opportunity to study a career, but as said before, there is a high lack of passion in each person’s own life and goals.

This is what I mean by saying there are great contrasts. Children may have the opportunity to attend good schools, but they would be dealing with ambivalence when facing a very different reality in their daily lives, at home, and when dealing with the entire society. We can inspire children to think and analyze, but if parents and outsiders act differently, stop their initiatives and get the same results, children will be affected and our future, too.

As school leaders, we should go further. We should involve parents, students and the entire society. It would be only this way in which we can make an effort to make it as a whole and not just as part of a change. Children should face real dilemmas and start analyzing, thinking and resolving them by themselves. We should encourage new generations to break with the established, to live instead of pretend, and inspire while doing so.

So,are we probably focusing too much in the results, without analyzing the way and the procedure it takes in order to get there? We are probably either:

-Too worried to teach, to educate, to set a good example… that we are missing our own goals, our own happiness, which could be a good option to follow in order to be able to reach what we are looking for and transmit and inspire others to do the same.

Or,

-Too immersed in ourselves, trying to get the results we are looking for; the child we are expecting to have, the medals on our shelves, and the “perfect society” … that we are forgetting how to be human, how to connect with children and with ourselves?