John Cooper School Inclusive Communities


Published on

2.5 Hour Session for The John Cooper School at The Woodlands, TX. Identity Development, Cross Cultural Communication, and Anti-Bullying Resources combine to assist the community in creating inclusive communities in the classroom, in the hallways, and beyond.

Published in: Technology, Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Introduction - name, school, job, why
  • Requests and FYI: Theory overview only, but ask questions if unclear, please hold examples for example section. Everyone’s experience will be different so it is ok if not everyone can relate to everyone else’ personal experience. Will not get to every theory in depth nor will we be able to share all experiences. Goal is to introduce for further study and gain enough examples to apply. Resource materials: available in hard copy and electronically through website.
  • Strand structure: activity, theory, application, break Goals: information, conversation, activity for experience and to use in classroom and/or professional development. Requests and FYI: Theory overview only, but ask questions if unclear, please hold examples for example section. Everyone’s experience will be different so it is ok if not everyone can relate to everyone else’ personal experience. Will not get to every theory in depth nor will we be able to share all experiences. Goal is to introduce for further study and gain enough examples to apply. Resource materials: available in hard copy and electronically (USB drive, computer desktop, email). Please take only hard copies you know you will use so we can be as green as possible.
  • Diane Finnerty, Heartland Center for Critical Democracy
  • Understanding Youth: -“inordinate amounts of energy cannot be invested in a few ‘tough students.’ at the cost of educational quality for the larger whole.” Slippery slope! Where do you draw the line? -Adolescence is a social construction. -testing boundaries = students implicitly asking what kind of person they should be, what friends they should have, in what or whom to place trust, what kind of world they should make -In writing the life story, no one is a solo author. We are coauthoring the student’s stories, as they are coauthoring ours. -Should we as educators think of our work with youth in a more relational terms? With which students? All of them? Every day? Is this possible? If not, how do we choose? -Lev Vygotsky - interpsychological development - children’s cognitive development is shaped by the access they have to the thinking of other people’s lives. Educators need to make thinking as transparent as possible so students can choose to connect with it, contest it, or reject it. Zone of Proximal Development - aim at the higher end of zone to achieve maximal learning
  • • Notice who is in the room and who is not • Notice what it feels like to be cheered • Notice places where it is difficult to stand proudly
  • Groups of 3 1 minute per person Take the full minute, even if you can’t fill that minute Stop after 1 minute, even if you are not done --- All-Group Discussion Afterwards
  • Parallel, Regressive, Crossed, Progressive, Symbiotic
  • CCC - comparison of communication styles and norms across several cultures ICC - what happens when communication occurs between two or more people from different cultures Face Negotiation Theory - different cultures communicate with/without consideration of “face” - self-worth, self-respect, pride, etc. Conversational Constraints Theory - different cultures have different words/modes depending on roles (gender,hierarchy, age, etc.) Expectancy Violation Theory - different cultures have varying norms around what to expect in communication exchange, as well as different responses in how violation of those expectations are dealt with. Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory - different cultures communicate differently in situations where roles and norms are not necessarily familiar. Communication Accommodation Theory - different cultures adapt to varying degrees depending on circumstance and relationships. EXAMPLE: Face: “I have two tickets to the school auction for you if you’d like. I’d be pleased if you would join us.” “I know the auction is expensive and you may not be able to afford them. If you need assistance, please don’t hesitate to tell me.” Constraints: US Mainstream has “hello as greeting for all.” Korean has 3 levels, informal, casual-formal, and formal. Use of terms communicate respect and role in any relationship hierarchy. Expectancy: God Bless You, Thank you, You’re welcome Anxiety: Big conference or group gathering - Standing around on the outside or taking up space in the middle of the room Accommodation: When in Rome do as the Romans do. Doesn’t anyone speak ENGLISH around here?
  • Dimensions of Variability look at where cultures lie along a continuum between modes of communication. No one dimension explains all facets. Individual-Collectivistic: higher value is placed on the individual or the community and collective. Individualistic cultures tend to have a certain freedom and directness of language, whereas collectivistic cultures tend to have role or in-group based language and social expectations. Low context-high context: communication is either entirely dependent on the words or dependent on a complex matrix of words, nonverbal signals, relationships, and roles. Masculinity-Femininity: NOT about “how men typically” or “women typically.” Rather, communication is either typically for accomplishing tasks or typically for building relationships. However, masculinity-femininity also deals with gender issues at the cultural and individual levels - how gender roles are distributed in a culture. Low Uncertainty-High Uncertainty: Uncertainty Avoidance is the degree to which members of a culture try to avoid uncertainty. High uncertainty avoidance cultures low tolerance for ambiguity, higher levels of anxiety and energy release, need for rules and absolute truth, less tolerance for people or groups with deviant ideas or behavior. Low uncertainty avoidance cultures have lower stress levels and weaker superegos, accept dissent and take risks” Vertical-Horizontal: Power Distance is the extent to which the less powerful members of institutions and organizations accept that power is distributed unequally. Members of high power distance cultures accept power as part of society, and stress coercive or referent power. Members of low power distance believe power should be used only when it is legitimate and prefer expert or legitimate power. Cultures have varying mixtures of dimensionality. Russian culture, very collectivistic and horizontal, is also masculine, low context, and low uncertainty. EXAMPLES: Gender: US Mainstream “I want to ask for a favor.” Many Native American cultures long conversation of how things are, and inquiries about family and well being before asking anything of desire or need. Certainty: Chinese Proverb “Add legs to a snake after you have finished drawing it.” US Mainstream equivalent “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”
  • Personality Orientation: factor like MBTI Personality types Individual Values: Idiocentrism and allocentrism Self construal: Does one consider oneself a unique and apart individual from others in the community or an element of an interdependent community? Individual Socialization: What was actively taught by parent/role models/peers/society? What experiences has the person had in terms of positive or negative socialization? Cultural norms and rules. These can be dynamic and specific to a time and place. Dangerous to look at cultural identities and assume the whole picture of the person’s communication style is known. Although CCC helps reveal generalities and patterns, there are too many individual factors to make these general patterns universal. EXAMPLE: As an unmarried Korean American woman and immigrant, there are many assumptions that can be made about my communication. However, there are factors like my being an INFP, strong values around doing the right thing, my being an interdependent person who likes to read the context to fit in or fit the need, socialization around being heard when I am assertive or even abrasive, and the fact that I function as a teacher of children in US Mainstream culture, I go closer or further away from those assumptions.
  • • IO/ID - trace cycle of oppression using women and leadership and communication. “sugar and spice” and “snips and snails,” women too emotional, women poor leader IO: women feel the need to “masculinize” herself through clothes, demeanor, and speech. ID: men feel the necessity to speak or lead in meetings. Rewards: “She’s got balls.” “What a real man.” Punishments: “She’s a bitch.” “He’s a pussy.” Negative impact for everybody: people cannot behave with complete freedom. • Stereotype Threat - Joshua Aronson. Took work of Claude Steele further (sidebar: Claude Steele now doing work to go beyond into impact of white people on stereotypes of whites being bigoted). Impact of stereotype threat on tests. I - Test 1: trying to figure out if this is a good test. No performance differences between AA and whites. Test 2: tests intelligence. Often a reflection of academic performance and indicator of future success. Achievement gap appears. II - both groups told test is just to see if it’s a good test. Test 1: no achievement gap. Test 2: boxes to declare race. Achievement gap appears. III - Test 1: all women and all men math tests. No difference. Test 2: all women except one man. Gap appears. Add another man. Gap gets bigger. IV - All white male engineering students taking a math test. Test 1: high achievement. Test 2: we’re trying to figure out why Asians do so much better on these tests. Scores drop. • Accumulated Impact - We know as educators what accumulated impact is “what time is it?” “what time is it?” “what time is it?” 1st few times no big deal. Then annoyance then irritability then anger. Kid 20 doesn’t know your experience and reads the situation as “you’re such an angry person.” when in reality there has been so much happening leading up to that point. You may be able to curb your response at times, but often, we can’t help but respond from the accumulation. Example: AA “You’re so articulate” Obama brought to national discussion. Example: Asian Americans “Where are you from?” • Code/Mode Switching - Because of our cultural identities and socialization, some of us can dress, speak, and be the same way from home to work to friends to clubs to whatever. Others of us have to adopt different modes and codes every time we enter a new situation. Example of teacher who sees student in “the outside world” and noticing tremendous difference. Question: what is the unsafe/unwelcoming culture of the classroom that forces the student to so drastically code and mode switch? PRIVILEGE • Fish Seeing the Water: Ask a fish what water is like and it will not know what you’re talking about. Ask a land-dwelling animal what water is, and it will tell you lots “it’s cold, it’s wet, I can’t breathe in it, this is how you move in it, etc.” White people sometimes say “I have no culture.” Not true. Just fish not seeing the water. Important to understand the culture of dominance so that we can understand how it does not treat some people fairly. • Normal versus Good: What happens statistically frequently is called “norm.” We have a tendency to interpret this as “normal” which has a value judgment associated with it. We then extend normal into good. When someone sneezes, the norm in this culture is to say “bless you.” We then consider this “normal.” Then we judge people who don’t say “bless you” as being rude or uncaring. Not necessarily. When we expect people to speak or behave in certain ways, we need to examine whether we are expecting these things because it’s the norm or because it’s good. • Intent versus Impact: In privilege, we sit in the luxury of concentrating on the intent more than impact. What we say and do can hurt or oppress, but we sometimes dismiss it citing that we “didn’t mean to.” ANALOGY: If you’re driving down the street and you accidentally run over someone’s foot, you’re going to leap out of the car. “I’m so sorry. Are you okay? Are you in a lot of pain? Can I get you to a hospital?” Imagine how ridiculous it would be if we got out of the car and said “I didn’t mean it. It can’t be THAT bad. Aren’t you exaggerating a bit rolling around on the ground like that? I didn’t do it on purpose, so I don’t see what the big deal is.” Yet this is what we do sometimes when someone tells us about an impact our words or actions have on them. Impact that is just as if not more painful than physical injury. We need to stop and listen and acknowledge when these things happen and work to stop and undo the accumulation. EXAMPLE: My walking down the street and asking a struggling man who was missing his arms below the elbow is he “needed a hand.” My intent was trying to be helpful, but impact was probably anger or pain. I need to own it.
  • A common dichotomous descriptor of communication is direct and indirect communication. Indirect communication assumes that people understand the meaning without having to tell everything. It tones down unpleasant aspects of the message by using convoluted language and metaphors. Pros - gentler to the listener, honors relationships, lyrical. Cons - open to several interpretations, takes time, requires listener to pay attention to the message under the message. Direct communication makes everything explicit. People using this mode of communication tell you exactly what mean in a direct and assertive fashion. Pros - clear, understand the words and understand the message, efficient. Cons - can be abrupt or alienating to the listener, does not take into account relationships or context. What is an occasion you now know to be true, about an interpersonal conflict that really had to do with differing cross cultural communication?
  • 1. Stereotype - A preconceived or oversimplified generalization about an entire group of people without regard for their individual differences. While often negative, stereotypes may also be complimentary. Even positive stereotypes can have a negative impact however, simply because they are broad generalizations. The stereotypes we hold form the basis of our prejudices. 2. Prejudice - A conscious or unconscious negative belief about a whole group of people and its individual members. When the person holding the prejudice also has and uses the power to deny opportunities, resources or access to a person because of their group membership, there is discrimination. 3. Discrimination - Prejudice plus the power. Discrimination can take many forms, including racism, sexism, heterosexism, ableism, ageism, etc. Many acts of discrimination build up over time, perpetuated against one relatively less powerful social group by a more powerful social group, lead to a group of people being in a state of oppression. 4. Oppression - The systematic subjugation of a group of people by another group of people with access to social power, the result of which benefits one group over the other and is maintained by social beliefs and practices. Because oppression is institutionalized in our society, target group members often believe the messages and internalize the oppression. 5. Internalized Oppression - The "buying into" the elements of oppression by the target group. When target group members believe the stereotypes they are taught about themselves, they tend to act them out and thus perpetuate the stereotypes which reinforces the prejudice and keeps the cycle going.
  • Real or Alleged Identity or Characteristics - A preconceived or oversimplified generalization about an individual without regard for the whole and complex person. A person’s various identities are shaved down to “jock,” “sissy,” “geek,” “goth,” “slut,” “weirdo,” etc. These generalizations may be based on real aspects of the person or wholly made up by rumors and assumptions. These generalizations, when examined to the core, are often based on the person’s race, gender, class, ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, ability, or age. The generalizations we make form the basis of our assumptions and stereotypes (prejudice). Assumptions, Stereotypes, and Labeling (Prejudice) - A conscious or unconscious negative belief about a whole group of people and its individual members. When the person holding the prejudice also has and uses the power (physical power – stronger and bigger, social power – friends, popularity, good reputation) to deny opportunities, resources or access (to friends, social occasions, self esteem) to a person because of their real or labeled group membership, there is mistreatment, rumors, and exclusion (discrimination). Mistreatment, Rumors, and Exclusion (Discrimination) - Prejudice plus the power. Discrimination can take many forms: isolating, hitting/tripping, verbally harassing/teasing, taking/hiding things, spreading rumors, sending hurtful emails, and more. Many acts of discrimination build up over time, perpetuated against one relatively less powerful social individual by a more powerful social individual or individuals, lead to condoned and widespread bullying and harassment ( oppression). Condoned and Widespread Bullying and Harassment (Oppression) - The systematic subjugation of a group of an individual by another group of people with access to social power. The bullying is widespread, performed by people who didn’t dislike the person in the first place. There is a silence from most everyone that seems to make this bullying okay. This condoned and widespread bullying benefits the non-bullied over the bullied and is maintained by social beliefs and practices. Because oppression is accepted by the peer community, the target individual often believes the messages and gives in to self blame and shame (internalized oppression). Self Blame and Shame ( Internalized Oppression) - The "buying into" the elements of oppression by the target individual. The bullied person starts to believe the stereotypes they are taught about him/herself, and he/she starts to accept the discrimination and oppression passively. Bullied people blame themselves for what is happening, feel ashamed of themselves, and even act out in the way their peers expect them to be and thus perpetuate the stereotypes which reinforces the prejudice and keeps the cycle going.
  • Boys • Male Stereotypes & Homophobia • Physical Power • Worst Labels for Boys: Sissy, Fag, Wimp • Bully = Physical & Athletic Size and Power • Bullied = Smaller, Weaker • Social Collective = Gangs, Athletic Teams • Physical Abuse and Overt Aggression • Outliers of Victims = Powerful Boys of Color, Empowered GBT Boys • Signs of Cry = Fantasy Lone Wolf, Extreme Sports Girls • Gender Bias & Homophobia • Social Power • Worst Labels for Girls: Mean, Ugly, Dyke • Bully = Physical Beauty & Social Power • Bullied = Non-Mainstream Beauty, Few or No Friends • Social Collective = Cliques • Emotional Abuse and Relational Aggression • Outliers of Victims = Generalist Girls, Empowered Girls of Color • Signs of Cry = Isolated Damsel in Distress, Eating Disorders, Cutting Signs of internalized victimization can be different - boys: risky behaviors and physical pain risking activities like extreme sports and dangerous skateboarding. Girls: cutting
  • Lots of descriptors and models, this is one (another example is adapted Riddle Scale or Scale of Homophobia developed by Dorothy Riddle) Denial - What difference? Isn’t everybody supposed to be the same? Defense - I’m not saying you’re bad or anything. I do it this way because… Minimization - So THAT’S how you do things. Isn’t that charming/interesting/unusual? Acceptance - This is how you do things, and it is valid, though different from how I do things. Adaptation - This is how you do things, and this is how I do things, and this is how we do things when we’re together. Integration - This is the valuable element of how I do things and the valuable element of how I do things. Together, we can come up with a way of being that benefits us as individuals and as a group.
  • Mental Model - How we understand our world and how it works. Our brains are designed to do it. Ladder of Inference - constantly happening, and when unchecked, forms a mental model that may or may not be true. Give handout example REAL EXAMPLE: Parent calls me in for a meeting about concerns. “You are a very mean teacher, and my daughter cannot approach you for any help.” “She said that you won’t help students unless you make an appointment.” “You told her that she needs to tell you three days in advance if she wants any help from you.” Observable data. Student comes up night before a week-long assignment is due and says she does not understand the assignment. Unfortunately, I have another appointment and cannot help her in that moment. I remind her that she has had a week to ask questions, and though unfortunate that circumstances worked out this way, she can avoid this situation by looking over the assignment early and asking for help earlier so that we have some options for appointments. “Imagine if you asked for help three days ago - I could have had so many options for appointments to get you the help you need.” Tools of Action helps us check assumptions earlier in the process and avoid conflict or erroneous beliefs.
  • • Non-Verbal Communication – breakdown of some major categories of non-verbal communication as well as some differences you will find across different cultures. • Cultural Value Differences – some differences in cultural values around categories like relational and temporal. These differences can sometimes lead to major miscommunication and conflict due to value judgment. • 7 Criteria for Values – useful in thinking about values and value systems. I personally believe that TRUE values are never bad, but we tend to judge others based on their value PRIORITIES. The 7 criteria reminds us what makes a value a value and hopefully steers us clear of believing them invalid for someone else. • Values Definition Table – several values and basic definitions. I have found this table useful in values clarification exercises and conflict resolution for the sake of verbalizing what is at the root motivation of actions and statements that lead to conflict. (The last two documents are part of something I developed for an ethics primer for middle school and high school students. If interested in more, please go to . Though the organization is biomedicine focused, the primer is very cross-curricular.) • Yin-Yang Telephone – Direct and Indirect Communication • Whispers – Distractions and Internal Monologues of Intercultural Communication • Left Column Communication – Separating the actual observable data and internal thoughts, feelings, interpretations, and inferences. Includes theory, example, and blank form. • Non-Verbal Violation – Activity designed to demonstrate the discomfort and offense caused by conflicting nonverbal cues and norms. Wonderful activity developed by a fantastic facilitator, Stella Ting-Toomey. • Communication Exercises – I developed this series of communication activities to kick off my school’s all-school anti-bias programming. They are activities designed to demonstrate one-way and two-way communication, importance of objective and careful listening, dialogue and debate (supportive and defensive forms of communication), and intercultural communication and conflict. They were developed for 6th-8th graders, but I have used these exercise with adults with minor adjustments and deeper reflection questions. • Effective Interventions – Material I used in my classroom to give students some tools around interrupting offensive remarks, jokes, and slurs. You may find it a little puerile to use with adults, or you may find it a resource accessible to anyone. No matter what, I hope you find it a useful talking point for people looking to apply oppression, privilege, and power understanding to everyday situations. • Growing As an Ally – A complementary piece I used with “Effective Interventions” to give students tools around being an ally rather than, well, the self-righteous jerks they were being with each other at times. Gives thinking and doing points for folks eager to enter the world of allyship. • Book: Kiss, Bow, or Shake Hands by Morrison and Conway. Although meant for the business traveler, this book makes a handy resource for looking up general customs and norms of several countries. Use with caution, of course, that you are using it as an FYI starting point rather than an idiot’s guide to intercultural communication.
  • John Cooper School Inclusive Communities

    1. 1. The John Cooper School Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Seattle Girls’ School Stretching the Inclusive Boundaries: In the Classroom, In the Hallways, and In the Community Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    2. 2. About Seattle Girls’ School Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee ( Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    3. 3. Goals <ul><li>Gain a basic understanding of culture </li></ul><ul><li>Understand how various dimensions of identity feed into cultural competencies </li></ul><ul><li>Examine how cross cultural communication, power, and privilege affect relationships and success </li></ul><ul><li>Identify positive steps toward inclusive communities - individually, interpersonally, and institutionally </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    4. 4. Agenda <ul><li>Cultural Competencies </li></ul><ul><li>Dimensions of Identity and Culture </li></ul><ul><li>Cross Cultural Communication </li></ul><ul><li>Power, Privilege, and Difference </li></ul><ul><li>How Youth “Practice for the Real Thing” </li></ul><ul><li>Tools and Next Steps </li></ul><ul><li>Resources </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    5. 5. Cultural Competencies <ul><li>Everybody has some competencies </li></ul><ul><li>No one has all competencies </li></ul><ul><li>Competency is unattainable, competencies are </li></ul><ul><li>Competencies are individual, fluid, situational, and contextual </li></ul><ul><li>THERE IS NO ONE ANSWER </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    6. 6. Dimensions of Identity and Culture This model of identifiers and culture was created by Karen Bradberry and Johnnie Foreman for NAIS Summer Diversity Institute, adapted from Loden and Rosener’s Workforce America! (1991) and from Diverse Teams at Work , Gardenswartz & Rowe (SHRM 2003). Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    7. 7. <ul><li>• Stand proudly for your group </li></ul><ul><li>• Stand for as many groups </li></ul><ul><li>within one category </li></ul><ul><li>as applies to you </li></ul><ul><li>• If you are not standing, </li></ul><ul><li>cheer and applaud </li></ul><ul><li>the people who are </li></ul>Exercise: Up-Downs Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee National Coalition Building Institute, Seattle Chapter, “Building Bridges Workshop,” Adapted by Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    8. 8. Debrief: Up-Downs <ul><li>How did it feel to stand and claim your identities and experiences? To be applauded for them? To applaud others for their identities and their experiences? </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    9. 9. <ul><li>Identity Frames </li></ul><ul><li>Intractability </li></ul><ul><li>Co-Authorship of Identity </li></ul>Identity Development and Schools Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    10. 10. Break Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    11. 11. <ul><li>What is it? </li></ul><ul><li>How is it Different from Intercultural Communication? </li></ul><ul><li>CCC Theories </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Face-Negotiation Theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Conversational Constraints Theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Expectancy Violation Theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Anxiety/Uncertainty Management Theory </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication Accommodation Theory </li></ul></ul>Cross Cultural Communication Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee ( Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    12. 12. <ul><li>Individual - Collectivistic </li></ul><ul><li>Low Context - High Context </li></ul><ul><li>Masculinity - Femininity </li></ul><ul><li>High Uncertainty - Low Uncertainty Avoidance Avoidance </li></ul><ul><li>Vertical - Horizontal </li></ul>Dimensions of Variability Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee ( Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    13. 13. <ul><li>Personality Orientation </li></ul><ul><li>Individual Values </li></ul><ul><li>Self Construal </li></ul><ul><li> - Independent </li></ul><ul><li> - Interdependent </li></ul><ul><li>Individual Socialization </li></ul><ul><li>Cultural Norms and Rules </li></ul>Factors that Influence Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee ( Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    14. 14. Cultural Value Differences Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee ( Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    15. 15. Identifiers, Power, and Communication <ul><li>Internalized Oppression/Dominance </li></ul><ul><li>Stereotype Threat </li></ul><ul><li>Accumulated Impact </li></ul><ul><li>Code/Mode Switching </li></ul><ul><li>Fish Seeing the Water </li></ul><ul><li>“ Norm” “Normal” “Good” </li></ul><ul><li>“ Intent” versus “Impact” </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee ( Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    16. 16. Discussion: Cross Cultural Conflict <ul><li>Think about a conflict or misunderstanding which you now know to be at heart a cross cultural communication difference, a cultural value difference, or an identity and power dynamic. Using some of the terminology introduced, discuss with a partner or group of three what was going on to cause the conflict or misunderstanding. </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    17. 17. Break Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    18. 18. Bullying and Bias Repeating Cycles Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    19. 19. Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    20. 20. Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    21. 21. Gender, Bias, and Bullying <ul><li>• Gender Stereotypes & Homophobia </li></ul><ul><li>• Source of Power </li></ul><ul><li>• Worst Labels </li></ul><ul><li>• Who Bullies? </li></ul><ul><li>• Who is Bullied? </li></ul><ul><li>• Social Collective </li></ul><ul><li>• Abuse and Aggression </li></ul><ul><li>• Outliers of Victims </li></ul><ul><li>• Signs of Cry </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    22. 22. Shared Language, Shared Goals <ul><li>Target = Bullied </li></ul><ul><li>Agent = Bully </li></ul><ul><li>Bystander </li></ul><ul><li>Path of Least Resistance </li></ul><ul><li>Ally </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    23. 23. Empowering the Bystander <ul><li>Many bullying and anti-bias curriculum centers around agents and targets. Why not address the 60-70% who are bystanders? </li></ul><ul><li>Empowering bystanders keeps the focus away from blaming the targets or agents. </li></ul><ul><li>Empowering bystanders gives you a chance at creating a new path of least resistance. </li></ul><ul><li>Create a mass of empowered allies and shift the balance of power. </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    24. 24. So What? Now What? Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    25. 25. Developmental Model of Intercultural Sensitivity (DMIS) Schematic Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    26. 26. Assumptions and Interpretations <ul><li>• Mental Models </li></ul><ul><li>• Ladder of Inference </li></ul><ul><li>Belief </li></ul><ul><li>Conclusions </li></ul><ul><li>Selective Data </li></ul><ul><li>Observable Data </li></ul><ul><li>• Tools of Action </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee ( Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    27. 27. <ul><li>Classroom Instructional Approaches </li></ul><ul><li> - Instructional Design </li></ul><ul><li> - Instructional Variables </li></ul><ul><li> - Student-Teacher Interactions </li></ul><ul><li>Contextual Features and Classroom Environment </li></ul><ul><li> - Classroom Management </li></ul><ul><li> - Classroom Climate </li></ul><ul><li>Classroom Assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Critical Self Assessment </li></ul><ul><li>Distinguishing Behaviors </li></ul>What Inclusive Teachers Do Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    28. 28. <ul><li>“ To be culturally effective doesn’t mean you are an authority in the values and beliefs of every culture. What it means is that you hold a deep respect for cultural differences and are eager to learn, and willing to accept, that there are many ways of viewing the world” </li></ul><ul><li>Okokon O. Udo </li></ul>Cultural Effectiveness Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    29. 29. Final Questions or Comments? Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    30. 30. Presenter Information <ul><li>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee </li></ul><ul><li>6th Faculty and </li></ul><ul><li>Professional Outreach </li></ul><ul><li>Seattle Girls’ School </li></ul><ul><li>2706 S Jackson Street </li></ul><ul><li>Seattle WA 98144 </li></ul><ul><li>(206) 709-2228 x 219 </li></ul><ul><li>[email_address] </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    31. 31. Identity Resources <ul><li>• Carlos H. Arce, “ A Reconsideration of Chicano Culture and Identity” </li></ul><ul><li>• Atkinson, Morten, & Sue, “ Racial/Cultural Identity Development Model (R/CID)” </li></ul><ul><li>• Mindy Bingham and Sandy Stryker, “Socioemotional Development for Girls” </li></ul><ul><li>• Vivienne Cass, “ Homosexual identity formation: Testing a theoretical model” </li></ul><ul><li>• William Cross, Shades of Black: Diversity in African American Identity” </li></ul><ul><li>• Anthony D’Augelli, “ Identity development and sexual orientation: Toward a model of lesbian, gay, and bisexual development” </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    32. 32. Identity Resources <ul><li>• Erik Erikson, “Eight Stages of Man” </li></ul><ul><li>• J. E. Helms, Various Publications on Racial and Ethnic Identity Development </li></ul><ul><li>• Jean Kim, “Processes of Asian American Identity Development” </li></ul><ul><li>• James Maricia, “Four Ego and Identity Statuses” </li></ul><ul><li>• Suzanne Kobasa Ouellette, “The Three C’s of Hardiness” </li></ul><ul><li>• Jean S. Phinney, “Ethnic Identity in Adolescents and Adults: Review of the Research” </li></ul><ul><li>• Ponterotto & Pederso, Preventing Prejudice </li></ul><ul><li>• Maria P. P. Root, Various Works on Multiracial Identity </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    33. 33. Identity Resources <ul><li>• Patricia Romney, Karlene Ferron, and Jennifer Hill, “Measuring the Success of Diversity Directors in Independent Schools” </li></ul><ul><li>• Pedro Ruiz, “Latino/a Identity Development Model” </li></ul><ul><li>• Chalmer E. Thompson and Robert T. Carter , Racial Identity Theory </li></ul><ul><li>• Alex Wilson, “How We Find Ourselves: Identity Development and Two Spirit People” </li></ul><ul><li>• Christine J. Yeh, “The Collectivistic Nature of Identity Development Among Asian-American College Students” </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    34. 34. Communication Resources <ul><li>• “ Stereotype Threat” by Joshua Aronson </li></ul><ul><li>• Brenda J. Allen, Difference Matters: Communicating Social Identity </li></ul><ul><li>• William Gudykunst, Cross-Cultural and Intercultural Comunication </li></ul><ul><li>• Milton Bennett, PhD, Intercultural Communication Institute </li></ul><ul><li>• “ Non-Verbal Communication Across Cultures” by Erica Hagen, Intercultural Communication Resources </li></ul><ul><li>• </li></ul><ul><li>• Thrive! Team Dynamics </li></ul><ul><li>• history.htm </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    35. 35. Anti-Bullying Resources <ul><li>Joshua M. Aronson, Ph.D., “Improving Achievement & Narrowing the Gap,” Learning and the Brain Conference, Cambridge, MA, November 2003 </li></ul><ul><li>Roy Baumeister, Case Western Reserve University, Various Social Psychology Experiments on the Effects of Social Exclusion </li></ul><ul><li>“ Cycle of Bullying,” North Central Educational Service District, </li></ul><ul><li>Joe Feagin, “The Two Faced Racism.” White Privilege Conference . Springfield, MA. April 2008. </li></ul><ul><li>Kevin Jennings, GLSEN (Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network) </li></ul><ul><li>Allan G. Johnson, Privilege, Power, and Difference . </li></ul><ul><li>Tara Kuther, “Understanding Bullying,”, </li></ul><ul><li>Michael Thompson & Kathy Schultz, “The Psychological Experiences of Students of Color,” Independent School Magazine, </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    36. 36. Anti-Bullying Resources <ul><li>“ 101 Ways to Combat Prejudice.” Anti-Defamation League </li></ul><ul><li>Beatbullying Toolkit for Teachers, </li></ul><ul><li>Hafner, Lauren. “Bullying Report: How are Washington State Schools Doing?” Safe Schools Coalition . December 2003 </li></ul><ul><li>“ House Bill Report - SHB 1444, Washington State” Bully Police USA </li></ul><ul><li>“ Ten Ways to Fight Hate.” Teaching Tolerance </li></ul><ul><li>“ Washington State School Safety Center.” Office of Superintendant of Public Education </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    37. 37. Gender Specific Resources <ul><li>JoAnn Deak, Ph.D., Girls Will Be Girls: Raising Confident and Courageous Daughters </li></ul><ul><li>Pooja Makhijani, Under Her Skin: How Girls Experience Race in America . </li></ul><ul><li>John Medina, Talaris Research Institute, various studies on early gender differences in competition and play and “Love Lab.” </li></ul><ul><li>Mary Pipher, Ph.D., Reviving Ophelia: Saving the Selves of Adolescent Girls </li></ul><ul><li>Rachel Simmons, Odd Girl Out . </li></ul><ul><li>Rachel Simmons, Odd Girl Speaks Out . </li></ul><ul><li>Harriet R. Tenenbaum, “Gender Achievement Motivation,” Learning and the Brain Conference, Cambridge, MA, November 2003. </li></ul><ul><li>Rosalind Wiseman, Queen Bees and Wannabes: Helping Your Daughter Survive Cliques, Gossip, Boyfriends & Other Realities of Adolescence </li></ul><ul><li>Naomi Wolf, The Beauty Myth. </li></ul><ul><li>Naomi Wolf, Promiscuities . </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (
    38. 38. Miscellaneous Resources <ul><li>• Karen Bradberry and Johnnie Foreman, “Privilege and Power,” Summer Diversity Institute, National Association of Independent Schools, 2009 </li></ul><ul><li>• Po Bronson and Ashley Merryman, Nurture Shock </li></ul><ul><li>• Kevin Jennings, GLSEN (Gay Lesbian and Straight Education Network) </li></ul><ul><li>• Allan G. Johnson, Privilege, Power, and Difference </li></ul><ul><li>• Johnnie McKinley, “ Leveling the Playing Field and Raising African American Students’ Achievement in Twenty-nine Urban Classrooms,” New Horizons for Learning, mckinley.htm </li></ul><ul><li>Michael J Nakkula and Eric Toshalis, Understanding Youth. </li></ul>Rosetta Eun Ryong Lee (