As a rabbi and professor of rabbinic literature, I am naturally drawn to interpreting texts. The best moments are when these texts come alive and inform my life (inshallah). I have long been intrigued by an ancient text attributed to a pre-rabbinic figure from the first century BCE (Before the Common Era – rabbis did not emerge until after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 CE). The text reads:

Joshua ben Perahia said, “Find a teacher for yourself, and acquire a colleague, judge every person favorably” (Mishnah Pirke Avot 1:6).

This triplet of good advice requires some explanation. Find (or “make,” which is closer to the Hebrew original) a teacher for yourself might also be translated that you should make someone your “master.” In the Hebrew text the word for teacher is Rav which can mean master, as well as being the root of the word rabbi. In other words, choose a rabbi to study with and to follow.

Next, we are taught to acquire a colleague. Most likely this means someone to study with, but it also can mean someone who you can share a meal with (that is to say, you trust that his food is kosher or halal). In general, it is a blessing to have good colleagues.

The final piece of advice, while commendable, seems on the surface to be disconnected: Judge everyone favorably. Might it refer to choosing a teacher or your study-buddy?

I will come back to what I think this text means, but first, I want to consider a text from the Torah, which commands: Love your neighbor as yourself (Lev 19:18). This text, too, seems straightforward, until we wonder how do we “love” on command? Some commentators assume this means that you would care about your neighbor’s finances as you would your own. A small minority of others, I am embarrassed to say, have construed this to mean that you need only love your neighbor who is like yourself. This implies that the commandment is limited to only loving other Jews!

Indeed, there is a rabbinic text from the second century that might be construed precisely this way – it is alarming:

In the Mishnah (Yoma 8:7) we read about a case where a wall falls upon someone on Shabbat. Now uncovering a pile of rubble is a forbidden labor on the Sabbath. But the Mishnah of the second century CE seems to make an exception: If there is doubt whether he was there or not there, if there is doubt whether he was alive or dead, if there were doubt whether he was a Jew or a non-Jew – then one removes the rubble.

The text is clear that to save a Jewish life, one may violate Shabbat, as saving a life takes precedence over all other commandments. But we must ask: whose life? Does this only apply, God forbid, to saving a Jew? This one of those famous “difficult texts” that we stumble over in interfaith dialogue. When we compare “our best” to “their worst” during dialogues, such difficult texts are stumbling blocks. We all have such texts. And until we learn to dialogue by proudly sharing our best with their best, we will stumble.

My teacher 45 years ago was a man in his eighties, Rabbi Saul Lieberman. He was widely regarded as the foremost authority on the Talmud in his generation. He once told me the story about taking a Shabbat stroll with a colleague from Columbia University, Prof. Morton Smith. Now it happens that Morton, although many years my elder, was my teacher but also my colleague and my friend. He had been ordained an Episcopal priest early in his career, and he loved to tweak the supercilious pieties of religion. Morton was also an expert in rabbinic literature. As the story goes, Morton Smith and Rabbi Lieberman walked past a building site on Broadway when Morton asked my rabbi, “Prof. Lieberman, if that wall fell on me now during the Sabbath, would you save me?”

On the face of it, this was a serious challenge to what might have been understood as the law of the Mishnah. A strict reading might have required Prof. Smith’s body to remain under the rubble until Shabbat ended. But Prof. Lieberman replied in an instant, “Why Morton, of course I would save you! And then, I would go home, consult my tomes of Jewish law, and find the correct reason for having done so.”

Actually, it would not have been very hard to find a legal authority. As we mentioned above, saving a life certainly would take priority over Sabbath law. That’s what the Mishnah is trying to teach us. But would it apply to saving a non-Jew? Both Lieberman and Smith knew perfectly well that the Torah explicitly teaches, You shall not oppress the stranger. You must know the heart of the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt (Exodus 23:9). And if that wasn’t clear enough, the Torah commands, You shall love the stranger, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt (Deut 10:19).

Indeed, the Mishnah and other rabbinic literature bend over backward to assure that Jews have good relations with their non-Jewish neighbors (the word used is Shalom) and require that Jews greet non-Jews, care for their poor, mourn and bury their dead, offer condolences, care for their animals, midwife their births, heal their sick, much as would be done for other Jews.

What I learn from the story of my teacher Rabbi Lieberman and my colleague and teacher Prof. Smith is that teachers and colleagues who are NOT Jewish require us to confront, and solve, our tradition’s difficult texts. Interaction with the other, collegiality, even friendship, to say the least of discipleship, require us to love one another as we would ourselves.

My teacher of New Testament, Father Raymond Brown, offered an example from the Catholic tradition. Prof. Brown took scrupulous care in carefully teaching Gospel texts, lest other priests or their parishioners might learn anti-Semitism from those ancient texts. Christianity had a long and sorry history of enmity towards the Jews. Anti-Semitism had been the norm for almost 2,000 years. But in the aftermath of the Holocaust, Christian teaching radically changed. As Pope Francis said in March, 2019, “I stress that for a Christian any form of anti-Semitism is a rejection of one’s own origins, a complete contradiction.”

We take care to find the right teachers. I am blessed to have such teachers and to have made good colleagues in the Muslim world, as well. This is not surprising as the Holy Qur’an teaches,

O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other. Verily the most honored of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you (Qur’an 49:13, after Yusuf Ali).

In the Hadith of al-Nawawi (Forty Hadith, no. 15): we learn that on the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should speak good things or keep silent. Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should be generous to his neighbor. Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should be courteous and generous to his [travelling] visitor.” This is reported in Bukhari and Muslim.

In other words, this Hadith seems to teach a tradition similar to that of the Torah and the rabbis. Further, al Nawawi teaches (ibid. no. 13): on the authority of Abi Hamza Anas bin Malik, the servant of the messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) from the prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) who said: “None of you [truly] believes until he loves for his brother what he loves for himself. ” This is also reported in Bukhari and Muslim.

These Hadith traditions emphasize that what is true for Jews is true for Muslims. We must learn to love one another and want what is best for our brothers and sisters of the other religion, much as we would want for ourselves.

Now we know that despite these teachings, there are Jews who hate Muslims and Muslims who revile Jews. Thank God / Al hamdulillah, that we have teachers who clearly teach against this tendency. Our master, Hocaefendi Fethullah Gülen stated:

“A crucial step in healing the sick mindset that leads individuals to kill people out of hatred or other reasons is for every individual to acknowledge the dignity of every human being, to respect them as a work of art that was created by God and to inculcate this perspective in the minds of our youth.”

If we all come from our common ancestors Adam and Eve, Hocaefendi Gülen seems to say to us, then every person shares the same human dignity. No one can say, “My ancestry is better than yours.”

A couple of months ago, I had the wonderful privilege of meeting with Hocaefendi Gülen at his home in rural Pennsylvania. We drove there from New York City, but were warned that Hocaefendi was tired and might not spend more than a few minutes greeting us. As it turned out, we were honored to share an hour of discussion with our teacher. By the end of the meeting, I had found for myself another “rabbi.” I was thrilled to meet this revered leader, a man near in age to my rabbis of old. But I was utterly astounded by the act of humility with which he welcomed me. Hocaefendi Gülen rose from his chair and said, “Rabbi, please sit here in my place.” Had I traveled hours only to experience his hospitality and humility, it would have been a lesson well learned.

But I was privileged to engage further in a wide-ranging conversation on how we might confront anti-Semitism and Islamophobia. As with all good teachers, the conversation and Hocaefendi’s questions have continued to turn over in my mind since that extraordinary meeting.

What can we do to better relations between Muslims and Jews? Here are some suggestions I have learned in my nearly three decades of Jewish-Muslim dialogue.

First, as the Holy Qur’an teaches, we should meet and “know one another.” A good example of how this is accomplished is through the organization the Sisterhood of Salaam / Shalom (https://sosspeace.org/ ). Or we can arrange visits between Mosque and Synagogue. (see http://mideastweb.org/muslim-sermon_cg.htm ). We can celebrate our festivals together (see http://nyc.muslimjewishsolidarity.org/). Here, the Hizmet movement has excelled in arranging interfaith Iftar dinners during the Holy month of Ramadan (e.g https://hizmetnews.com/24889/interfaith-ramadan-iftar-dinner-held-in-montville/#.Xg9tJLpOmEc ).
 
We can also study to learn about one another. I recommend a book jointly published by the Jewish Theological Seminary and the Islamic Society of North America: Sharing the Well: A Resource Guide to Jewish-Muslim Relations (www.jtsa.edu/sharingthewell ). And, of course, we must protect one another and fight Islamophobia and anti-Semitism by standing together SHOULDER TO SHOULDER (https://www.shouldertoshouldercampaign.org/ ).  Both the Jewish and Muslim traditions demand that we work for social justice and righteousness (e.g. feeding the hungry: https://www.denverpost.com/2012/11/18/muslims-jews-gather-at-denver-mosque-to-help-feed-the-hungry/ ).

Now that I have shared what I learned from loving my neighbor, the non-Jewish other, the Christian or the Muslim, I have a new understanding of the text I quoted at the outset of this article.

Joshua ben Perahia said, “Find a teacher for yourself, and acquire a colleague, so that you will learn from them to judge every person favorably” (Pirke Avot 1:6).

Rabbi Burton L. Visotzky
Director, Milstein Center for Interreligious Dialogue Jewish Theological Seminary, New York

I experience these feelings all the time. That’s why I am a bad teacher, I suppose. I talk a lot about good things, and then I fail to practice these good things. It is embarrassing to be among people when you have so many flaws in your life, despite the many gazes focused on you. But this horrible state is exactly the same state that led to the discovery of my famous theory of education.

It all started on a sunny, July morning at school. I was lost in my own thoughts, and suddenly the director dropped in to instruct me on how to be a good teacher. For every single suggestion of his, I had my own objections, and in the end, I convinced him that I was doing the right thing but that the students had something wrong with them. Of course after he left, I mumbled to myself, “I know I am the one doing something wrong! But, do you have to teach me about my wrongs this way?”

This was the moment things started to precipitate in my mind.

The word “mindset” does not imply a static state. Rather, it refers to a set of behaviors with a certain goal. Therefore, it is like a steady motion. Changing a mindset means a change in behavior, hence the first law of education:

“A mind is set unless a teaching is exerted on it. This is called mental inertia.”

This law was first treated with a little bit of hostility, because it was counter-intuitive. Think about how children learn for a moment: you must tell them the same thing over and over, in the hopes that they will do it as instructed. If you don’t tell them every single time, they won’t do it, even if it is required – e.g. brushing their teeth, having a bath, turning off the lights, putting away their clothes, etc.

These examples imply that an action must be taught every time. But the first law I put forward says that if a person is doing something, they are going to keep doing it unless they are acted on by another person to teach them otherwise. In other words, if you tell your children to brush their teeth before going to bed, they should be doing it thereafter.

This was a major obstacle I had to overcome. If the children were not continuing the action they were once told to, they must have been acted upon by another teacher; one who was preaching they go in the opposite direction. And, if it is not the parents doing that teaching, then who is it?

After a long depressive and contemplative period, I was struck once again by the same notion. Just like a mindset is not a static concept, a mind is not static, either. It is dynamic, and it interacts with its surroundings. As a result, the mind forgets. Therefore, the more dynamic a mind is, the higher is its tendency to forget. This explained it all! In natural settings, a learned force is always opposed by a forgetting force. This is why the effect of the teaching fades away after a certain time.

From this, it follows that if you could isolate a mind and prevent its interaction with other things, it should exhibit the behavior outlined in the first law. In fact, it is exactly what has been observed in history among those who seclude themselves in a cave or monastery in the hopes of attaining certain spiritual aspects. It is also the same phenomenon observed at boarding schools.

With the first law firmly in place, I felt the need to express the thoughts I went through in a separate statement. Real life settings were all about the co-presence of various teachings, and a person would exhibit a mindset according to the net effect from all of them. But, what was strange was the fact that people who shared the same conditions – i.e. received the same teachings – were affected at varying levels. Some would both gain and lose a behavior very quickly, whereas others would gain the same behavior very slowly, but after learning, would not lose it very easily. This property was part of their character, and remained constant throughout their lives. I summarized these findings as the second law of education:

“A mind changes according to the sum of all teachings exerted on it. The ratio of the sum of the teachings to the net change is called the stiffness of that mind.”

Due to my success with the first law, the first half of the second law was accepted. But I cannot say the same for the second half. It implied that a person who exhibits less change after a lesson has a stiffer mind, whereas a person who exhibits more change after the same lesson has a less stiff mind. Of course, people did not welcome this thought – because it was true!

How do I know? Hah! I just read it. People’s minds were stiff towards my first law already; why should they not be stiff towards the second? After all, this is their inherent property. I told them this fact as bluntly as I am telling you. They did not accept it.

Later on, when assessing this situation on my own, I was once again faced with my “bad teacher” memories. Why was it that every time I tried to teach something, it was received with a negative reaction? And why, when I am talking about a fact of the mind, am I the first one to ignore it?

Once again, I found myself in that depressive-contemplative mode. As I educated people, I became ignorant of what I just taught! Wasn’t it supposed to be that knowledge increases as you share it? Perhaps yes, but there was a catch! More people knowing the same thing did not imply more acceptance and practice. In fact, as I was teaching something, I was consuming the will power that could otherwise be used to practice it; as I was sharing knowledge, my attachment to it decreased…

But why?

It was discomforting and ironic that, at the same time as I taught people wisdom, they secretly taught me ignorance towards that knowledge. Was this it? Was this mutual teaching what intrigued me all along? Wasn’t it that after sharing my ideas, I had to work on my own mind in order to recover from that reciprocal teaching? Maybe I was learning something from people as I taught them, and I had to un-learn it.

With these thoughts in mind, I formulated the third law of education:

“When a teaching is exerted on a mind, there is a reaction from the learner to the teacher. This is called the teaching-then-ignoring principle.”

When I shared my third law with others, it was simply ignored. And that convinced me of its correctness, because I started to ignore their ignorance. It didn’t matter whether others accepted my ideas or not. For me, witnessing their real life confirmation led to a total conviction (i.e., mental inertia), which brought an unparalleled power and comfort. I was like Galileo, who once uttered, “the Earth is orbiting the sun, whether you accept it or not.”

In a time of darkness and ignorance, we must challenge our preconceived notions, seeking answers in education and trust.

It is another season of service. Our love-filled hearts are longing for Joseph but as desolate as Zaliha,^[1] and we are crying the lamentations of Jacob. Yet, we are waiting for glad tidings to arrive soon to open our eyes and lift our feelings.

It is impossible not to feel the pain of our people when we witness their heart-breaking state while being dragged along under the debris, destructions, and disasters of these dead, dark years.

Now please go! Go and visit all those countries that share a similar fate! I am sure you will not be able to come back without feeling painful sorrow for them! From the biggest cities to the smallest town centers; from the most crowded urban areas to the most remote villages; there are countless places that have been suffering under the dominance of ignorance and social problems. This combination is like a vortex that swallows whole communities – and sometimes whole countries. In these countries, you will witness such serious social, spiritual, and economic sicknesses. They were not healed in the first place and became chronic, and now they have become incurable.

Among all these, however, the most irremediable illness is ignorance. Ignorance is such a chronic disease that it corrodes an entire nation and gnaws away at our existence. Ignorance is the deprivation of knowledge; it is the inability to define proper goals in accordance with the acquired knowledge; it is a life deprived of Truth and righteous thinking. Ignorance has been a calamity that has existed in every time period. As has been the case with every nation, it is necessary to dry out this stagnant swamp, illuminate the minds of the masses with knowledge, guide young people to a proper and sound state of thinking and historical awareness, and prevent the negative trends that conflict with the quintessence of humanity; otherwise it will be impossible to remove ourselves from the crises this illness causes. We will find ourselves in a vicious circle.   

Was it not ignorance that caused us to fail to cultivate our fertile lands, to foster the growth of crops and fruits on our lush plains, to benefit from our gushing rivers? Was it not ignorance that turned our paradise-like world into ruin? We have lived completely unaware of our beauties and treasures, which are like the gardens of Eden; we have not been able to reap the benefits from our fields or from our minerals. Worst of all, by drowning ourselves in the illusion that we were not capable of doing anything with our own resources, we sacrificed our hope and willpower. And ignorance, which slowly ruined our people’s abilities, has reached its darkest depths today…

In this new era, at a time when scientific and technological thinking have rapidly developed and a flash of hope appeared, indicating that we could be pulled through these calamities, people have been drawn into another vortex: completely overwhelmed and dazzled with an inferiority complex, some assumed that crushing national awareness and conscience, destroying moral values, and shedding our high virtues was the only way to reach the level of developed civilizations. They’ve committed serious blows upon our national spirit and identity instead of embellishing the hearts with faith and equipping the minds with science and wisdom, which would bring prosperity to every corner of the world with art and trade.

In a way, this second type of ignorance has been even more destructive and caused greater danger. The previous ignorance melted away when confronted with knowledge and science, but this next-generation ignorance has been able to penetrate everywhere, purporting to spread in the name of knowledge and civilization. It has been approved and applauded by everyone. While the previous ignorance turned the world into ruins and brought joy only to those who like darkness, the ignorance that emerged later swept away all virtuous qualities, including spiritual nobleness, selflessness, and altruism. It left the masses dumbfounded.

Nevertheless, mentors and educators who have undertaken the role of building the future will wage war against these two types of ignorance. They will, and must, spare no effort and no legal means to elevate people to an era of enlightenment. In order to achieve this, it is essential to announce a mobilization of culture. We must turn all parts of our world – from homes to schools, coffeehouses to barracks – into learning centers. A general mobilization should be launched against ignorance, thoughtlessness, artificialness, and unawareness of national culture and merits; while decisions made under preconceived opinions should be criticized. Answers should be sought in science and scientific research; a new and fresh perception should be acquired.

There is no doubt that the forerunners of this blessed duty can only be teachers and educators – fortunate educators who treat their students in a wholesome manner, caring for both their physical and moral attributes. They must consider the human position and relations within the universe as a whole. They must inspire and invigorate their hearts in line with the purpose of their creation. They must be teachers who grasp the physical and metaphysical worlds as two sides of one reality!

Yes, denying the physical aspects of the human, as is the case in some monastic ways of life and some forms of mysticism, and considering the human with only his bodily and physical aspects, as in the case in some philosophical systems, has proved harmful to humankind.

Is it at all possible not to realize that humankind is an exceptional being, who holds a prominent position within the whole universe and is charged with very sublime missions, and hence, is a candidate for various ranks and positions?

How can a creature, who possesses an ability to benefit from all kinds of science and knowledge, who is granted the capability of intervening in events, who is equipped with skills to perceive, comprehend, and accept all types of beauty, who can distinguish many types of delights and pleasures, and who is insistently longing for “eternity,” be without a duty and ongoing future? Regarding the human as a being who is without any duty or responsibility, and thereby deprived of an endlessly long and happy future, means to lower this estimable being to the level of most primitive creatures; to deny all their physical and mental abilities and emotions; and to push him or her to the most bitter and stressful path and turn their world into misery. I do not know whether any other cruelty or grievance could be bigger than this!

A real teacher and a true mentor is the fortunate person who teaches his or her students – who have been sent to the world with limitless possibilities – the righteousness and unerring ways of thinking. A real teacher invigorates their emotions, triggers their eagerness and willpower, and elates their spirits. A real teacher wipes out all darkness and iniquities that block students’ ways, and delivers them towards luminescent sources. In due time, everything touched by these blessed, trustworthy, and truthful teachers will gain the highest value; things regarded worthless will become like gold; the most darkened souls will reach the dawn; individuals who are completely bound to serve their carnal desires will explore and discover their own souls and become kings of their selves.

How blessed are those teachers who devote themselves to guiding, certifying, declaring, and manifesting the truth through all disciplines of science! Who follow their pupils in every stage of their development and always carry the vigor of elevating their students to the level of real humanity! Who sometimes become tense as a lightning bolt, but soften and calm down into gentle beams of light, illuminating the hearts and minds of their students!

^[1] Zaliha is the wife of the prominent person in Egypt who bought the Prophet Joseph (pbuh) as a slave. According to the story, both in the Qur’an and the Bible, she fell desperately in love with Joseph and tried to seduce him, yet Joseph rejected her at the cost of being imprisoned for many years. Her name is not recorded in the scriptures; however, she is popularly called as Zaliha in Islamic sources.

It is essential for people who work internationally or in multicultural settings to familiarize themselves with implications of cultural differences. Hofstede’s model can be used as an excellent guide for educators who are aiming to operate more effectively in different parts of the world.

We live in a world of diverse cultures. It is crucial to understand the implications of cultural differences in order to be successful in such a diverse world. Hofstede, Hofstede, and Minkov (2010) in their book, “Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind: Intercultural Cooperation and Its Importance for Survival,” present a detailed overview of culture and its dimensions, as well as why intercultural cooperation is vital for a brighter future for humanity. The purpose of this essay is to review the model of culture presented by Hofstede et al (2010) with a focus on educational considerations. As intercultural encounters in schools can lead to confusions, it is especially critical for educators to understand the implications of working in diverse educational settings.

According to Hofstede et al. (2010, 6), culture is the collective mental programming of our minds, much of which is acquired during our childhood when we are open to learning and assimilation. The first 10-12 years are when we are most receptive and when we unconsciously absorb what our environment presents us, which ultimately becomes our mental program (Hofstede et al. 2010, 9). Culture can be inferred by the patterns of how we think, feel, and act (Hofstede et al. 2010, 11). It is reflected in all areas of life, from family and school, to organizations and politics, and is an important aspect in explaining why countries differ in many ways.

Culture has multiple layers (Hofstede et al. 2010, 8-9). Rituals, symbols, and heroes of a country represent the outer layers of culture that are visible practices and that can change relatively easily as compared to values. At the core of the culture lie values that constitute the relatively constant layer of culture. Values relate with broad tendencies to things such as “good-evil,” “clean-dirty,” “rational-irrational.” Values shape the institutions of a country, such as families, education systems, governments, and laws (Hofstede et al. 2010, 23-24). Institutions are vital in shaping the future of a country. For example, culture and institutions can explain why some countries develop and others remain underdeveloped, or why some countries are ruled by authoritarian regimes as opposed to democratic ones.

Six dimensions of culture identified by Hofstede et al. (2010, 29-38) can be stated as:

power distance,
collectivism versus individualism,
femininity versus masculinity,
uncertainty avoidance,
long-term versus short-term orientation, and
indulgence versus restraint.

These dimensions can help explain certain prevalent characteristics in a nation or society. For example, power distance can be associated with the use of violence in a country’s domestic political system and the existence of inequality; individualism can help explain national prosperity and social mobility between social classes; femininity and masculinity can have an impact on both parenting, laws, and even the amount of humanitarian aids; whereas uncertainty avoidance is associated with religion, and long-term orientation with national savings rates. Indulgence versus restraint concerns human desires such as enjoying life and having fun.

Since culture affects us in every level of society, it would be a complex task to try to explain all aspects of it. Therefore, the rest of this article focuses on culture as it relates to education along the first five dimensions, which have been shown to have an association with certain educational outcomes as presented by Hofstede et al. (2010). The approach followed by Hofstede et al. is neutral (2010, 25). Hence, both individualistic cultures and collectivistic cultures, for example, can have advantages and disadvantages, therefore one should not be perceived superior to the other.

The first dimension “power distance” (Hofstede et al. 2010, 53-86) represents how inequality is expected and accepted by the less powerful members of a society. In large power distance societies, where inequality is the norm, children are expected to be obedient to their parents as well as teachers. There is a relationship of dependence, and the elderly are treated with respect. In an educational setting, which is teacher-centered, teachers are regarded with respect and even fear. In such cultures, students stand up when teachers enter the classroom and they show respect for the teacher even outside the classroom. The teacher dictates the communication pattern by deciding who speaks when. There is a strict order in the classroom. The educational quality is dependent on the teacher, who is seen as the guru or “the wise one.” High power distance countries are mostly Asian countries, Eastern European countries, Latin countries, Arabic-speaking countries, and African countries. In low power distance cultures, on the other hand, education is student-centered. Students and teachers are expected to treat each other as equals. Students are expected to take initiative and shape their own growth paths towards being independent individuals. Students can intervene while the teacher is talking; they are expected to ask questions; they can criticize or challenge the teacher intellectually, and are not expected to show respect for the teacher outside the school setting. In low power distance cultures, two-way communication is vital to a student’s success. Examples of low power distance countries are German-speaking countries, Scandinavian countries, Baltic countries, the United States, Great Britain, Australia, and New Zealand.

The second dimension of culture is “collectivism and individualism” (Hofstede et al. 2010, 89-133) and relates to the role of the individual versus the role of the group. Most of the world’s population lives in collectivist cultures and individualist cultures are the exception. Examples of countries with individualist cultures include the United States, Australia, Great Britain, and Canada. Examples of collectivist cultures include Latin American countries, Pakistan, Indonesia, South Korea, and China. Collectivist cultures are “we” oriented whereas individualist cultures are “I'” oriented. The in-group and out-group distinctions are starker in collectivist societies making them more exclusionist as compared to individualist cultures that are more universalist (or inclusive) with respect to the larger society outside one’s moral circle. In collectivist cultures, children grow up in extended family settings whereas in individualist cultures children grow up in nuclear families. In collectivist cultures, the purpose of education is to get a good paying job that can benefit the extended family whereas in individualist cultures the purpose of education is to facilitate children to become independent and stand on their own feet. In collectivist cultures, loyalty to the family is central to one’s life and there is a dependence relationship between family members. On the other hand, healthy individuals in individualist cultures are supposed to leave home after they become financially independent.

In an educational setting, students from collectivist cultures show a tendency to not speak up. This is because the student sees herself as part of a group, and feels no need to speak up unless the rest of the group makes her speak. In such cultures, the teacher needs to take the initiative and call a student by name to help her speak. Also, in collectivist cultures students tend not to speak up in larger groups without the teacher’s presence, especially when there are strangers. The remedy for this tendency is to divide the group into smaller sizes to increase participation. Due to strong in-group and out-group identities in collectivist cultures, students tend to form subgroups based on their ethnic or clan backgrounds. Therefore, it is a challenge to form groups based on task assignments in collectivist cultures as compared to individualist cultures where task assignments determine formation of groups. Furthermore, in these cases, students expect to see preferential treatment from the teacher if they share the same background. In individualist cultures, such a treatment is seen as nepotism and treated as immoral. This is in contrast with collectivist cultures that perceive it as immoral if the teacher does not exhibit preferential treatment for his or her kin.

In the individualist educational setting, students expect to be treated as individuals and in an impartial manner without any discrimination. Students can easily form groups, discuss issues or differences openly without worrying about losing face, and can also confront each other. In contrast, in the collectivist educational setting, the teacher needs to deal with a student as part of an in-group, not as an individual. Collectivist cultures avoid confrontations and conflict, as students feel a need to save face and not to be ashamed.

In individualist cultures, learning is perceived as a life-long process that should continue after school and throughout one’s whole life. The focus is on how to learn rather than knowing how to do certain tasks. The aim of education is to prepare the student to become an individual in a society that is composed of other individuals. Thus, it is critical to teach students to learn how to deal with the surprises of life that cannot be guessed beforehand. On the other hand, in collectivist cultures, the focus of education is to prepare an individual to become a good group member. Therefore, students are given virtues and skills on how to do things and how to fit into the tradition of the in-group. Education is a one-time process that is attained during youth and does not continue later in life. In the individualist society, diplomas and certificates are regarded as individual accomplishments that foster one’s self-respect as well as feeling of achievement, and help to enhance one’s economic capability. In the collective society, diplomas and certificates bring honor to the individuals and their in-groups such as the family, and are regarded as tools to engage with higher status groups such as becoming a member of a rich extended family through marriage.

The third dimension of culture, “masculinity and femininity” (Hofstede et al. 2010, 135-184), is related to the prevalence or desirability of assertiveness versus modesty in a society. A society can be characterized as masculine when emotional gender role differences are apparent. In other words, men are supposed to take responsibility outside the home and be assertive, tough, and financially oriented; whereas women are supposed to take responsibility at home by being the caretaker of all, modest, kind, and tender. These stark distinctions get blurry in more feminine cultures where both men and women tend to take on the role of the compassionate caretaker of the family. Scandinavian countries like Sweden and Norway are examples of feminine cultures, and Latin American and Eastern European cultures are examples of masculine cultures.

In masculine educational settings, students strive on showing themselves off and competing openly with classmates. Failure is hardly acceptable, which may even lead students to commit suicide. Competitive sports are taken very seriously. Job choice decisions by students are mainly based on a student’s perception of availability of career opportunities. A teacher’s brilliance and student success are the most important criteria in evaluating teachers. Boys tend to get priority in education. Women generally teach younger students, whereas men teach at the college level.

In feminine educational settings, success is something that one keeps to oneself and assertive behavior is mocked. Displays of smartness and excellence easily induce jealousy. Failure is a minor issue and is not cared about as much. Competitive sports are only extracurricular activities that do not carry much importance. Job choices are made based on a student’s interests. A teacher’s social skills and student’s social adaptability are the main criteria for evaluating teachers. Both boys and girls are educated using the same curricula. Both men and women can teach young children and college students, since roles are mixed.

The fourth dimension, “uncertainty avoidance” (Hofstede et al. 2010, 187-233), relates to the society’s degree of tolerance of the ambiguous and the unpredictable. As human beings, we have to live with the fact that the future is uncertain. This dimension shows itself in the form of a need for rules and is expressed through nervous stress or anxiety. Examples of high uncertainty avoidance cultures include Greece, Portugal, Guatemala, Uruguay, Belgium, and Russia. Examples of low uncertainty avoidance cultures include Jamaica, Singapore, Sweden, and Denmark.

In the classroom setting, students from strong uncertainty avoidance cultures may prefer highly structured learning with clear objectives, clear timetables, as well as detailed assignments. Accordingly, accuracy should be rewarded, such as in the case of finding the one correct answer to a problem. Students expect the teacher to be the expert and respect teachers who use cryptic academic language. Students do not disagree with their professors. Students are more likely to attribute their success to luck and circumstances. Parents are occasionally brought in by teachers into the classroom, but they are almost never consulted as the teacher is always the expert.

On the other hand, students from weak uncertainty avoidance cultures do not prefer too much structure. Instead, they favor open-ended problems with vague objectives as well as broad assignments without timetables. Students from such cultures do not hesitate to disagree with instructors and they still respect them even if they admit that they do not know the answer to a particular question. Students are more likely to attribute their success to their own achievement. Teachers actively involve parents in a student’s education and ask for ideas for enhancement.

The fifth and final dimension of culture, “long-term versus short-term orientation” (Hofstede et al. 2010, 235-274), relates to the importance of future rewards. It can be observed in the form of “perseverance and thrift” in long-term oriented cultures and has been associated with economic growth in East Asia. Short-term orientation can be observed more in the form of giving precedence to virtues related to past and present, such as respect for tradition, protecting face, and meeting social obligations. Examples of long-term oriented cultures include China, Honk Kong, Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea. Examples of short-term oriented cultures include Egypt, Nigeria, Puerto Rico, and Ghana.

In short-term oriented cultures, the main work values include freedom, rights, achievement, and thinking for oneself, whereas in long-term oriented cultures, the main work values include learning, honesty, adaptiveness, accountability, and self-discipline. Math scores are strongly correlated with the long-term orientation of a culture (e.g. East Asian countries) as measured by the TIMMS (Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study – an international comparative test of math and science scores). Also, math and science scores are highly mutually correlated. This suggests that learning and teaching are culturally conditioned. This difference of scores across cultures can be explained by the differences in the encouragement of self-enhancement that reduces children’s interest in self-improvement activities like education. Accordingly, in such cultures, people seek positive information about themselves, and dismiss negative information. One needs to admit that he or she needs self-improvement and that takes a culture which encourages admitting such a deficiency. For example, Asian students in the United States are more likely to attribute success to effort and failure to lack of it.

Apart from the dimensions of culture, intercultural encounters can have important implications both between migrant or refugee students and local teachers, as well as expatriate instructors teaching in a foreign country to native students (Hofstede et al. 2010, 393-395). Hofstede et al. (2010, 395) suggest that the teachers should learn the language of the students (rather than expecting students to learn their language) to be able to overcome cultural barriers and be more effective in teaching in a culturally relevant manner. Information should be fit into a cultural framework to be meaningful. Therefore, culturally adequate translation is a very valuable art, as what is considered to be important in one language does not necessarily translate into another language meaningfully.

Moreover, differences in cognitive abilities need to be considered by teachers working in foreign cultures (Hofstede et al. 2010, 394). We learn fundamental things according to the demands of our environment while growing up. Therefore, we become better at things that we often do and that are important to us. Learning abilities including memory power emanate from cultural patterns of a society. For example, in China the visual nature of the script develops the pattern recognition abilities while imposing rote learning on students. Another complication arises from use of irrelevant material in classrooms. Some concepts that may be relevant in some countries may not apply in others. For example, organizational behavior concepts in wealthy countries may be irrelevant in poor countries. Finally, intercultural issues can emerge from institutional differences that create varying expectations in relation to the educational process and the role of different parties. Examples include the pay and status of teachers, whether the students served are from elite families or whether the educational system is elitist, and the role of the state in dictating the curriculum (Hofstede et al. 2010, 395).

In sum, culture is a complex concept with multiple dimensions. Cultural differences are a fact of life. It is essential for people who work internationally or in multicultural settings to familiarize themselves with implications of such differences. Hofstede et al. (2010)’s cultural model helps us understand this complex phenomenon, and can be used as an excellent guide for educators who are aiming to operate more effectively in different parts of the world.

Reference

Hofstede, Geert, Gert J. Hofstede and Michael Minkov. 2010. Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw Hill.

A question can be defined as any sentence that has an interrogative form or function (Cotton 1988). Asking and answering questions are among the most common human behaviors we experience in many different areas of our lives (Samson, Syrowsky, Weinstein, & Walberg 1987). For instance, as mentioned in Sahin and Kulm (2008)’s study, questions have been used for many purposes such as provoking students and making them listen carefully, analyzing their thoughts and thinking critically. Moreover, the questioning method serves to initiate discussion and review material. Unsurprisingly, research has found that classroom talks are dominated by teachers’ questions (Redfield & Rousseau 1981). Indeed, teachers use anywhere from 35 to 50 percent of their instructional time posing questions (Cotton 1998). Thus questioning is a common and pivotal teaching skill which needs special attention for maximum benefit. Additionally, the type of questions teachers ask and how often these questions are posed to students also needs examining.

Question types

The questioning method has been a well-studied topic in education for centuries because it has been thought to be a good measure of a teacher’s quality (Stevens 1912). Therefore, a number of studies have taken place to examine the types of questions asked by teachers. Even though different categorizations have been set out in various researches, it is possible to see that there are several types of questions studied most and these include: higher-order, open-ended, divergent, evaluative, lower-order, factual, convergent, closed, and procedural questions. But when looked at these questions closely, it is possible to group them under two categories, probing and factual, based on the answers you expect from your students. The first group of categorization might include higher-order, open-ended, divergent, and evaluative question types under probing since all those question types require students to think deeply, provide wider responses, and justify answers. Indeed, Sahin and Kulm (2008) found that probing question was like the first group of question types requiring the following:

• Asking students to explain or elaborate on their thoughts
• Asking students to use prior knowledge and apply it to the current problem or idea
• Asking students to justify or prove their ideas (p. 3).

Examples of probing questions include:

1. How do you know that these fractions, 3/7 and 9/21, are equivalent?
2. Why do you agree with your friend?
3. How do you know that your answer is right?
4. What if you were in his shoes, what would you do to stop him from stealing?
5. If you were the President of the United States, would you liberate Libya? Why or why not?

The second group consists of lower-order, convergent, closed, and procedural questions that require students to recall specific facts and provide short answers. Sahin and Kulm’s (2008) study described indicators of factual questions which was very similar to the second group of questions:

• Asking students for a specific fact or definition (Vacc 1993)
• Asking students for an answer to an exercise
• Asking students to provide the next step in a procedure.

Examples of factual questions include:

1. What is the definition of a ratio?
2. When is the Independence Day of America?
3. What do you get when you divide 16 by 4?
4. Do you agree with him?
5. How many blue chocolate candies do you have in your M&M bag?

In practice, 60 to 80 percent of teachers’ questions are factual and around 20 percent of them are probing questions according to Cotton (1998). So it is important for teachers to be knowledgeable about those questions types.

How to develop questioning skills

Cotton (1998) found that teachers’ questioning method was the second most used teaching skill after lecturing in K-12 education. This is an interesting finding because even though it is used widely in teaching, research shows that teachers receive little training on how to ask, what to ask, and when to ask questions and how much time they need to wait after they pose a question. For instance, Sahin (2011) found that training or workshops on questioning was not a common practice in Texas. Four teachers said that they never took a course or a workshop specifically focusing on questioning and wait time. Interestingly, they said that they still used different questions to teach what they teach. When they were asked how they developed their questioning skills, they attributed it to watching and observing a good teacher as the number one technique to learn how to ask questions.

Another common method to learn how to pose questions is going out in the field and working in a classroom with real teachers and students as described by a middle grades mathematics teacher:

When I was an undergraduate, the time in the classroom, the classroom experience, going out in the field, being in the classroom with actual teachers and helping them out, seeing how they are doing it. You pick up things and you get exposed to different strategies in the classroom. So, I think, having the exposure in the classrooms is very beneficial because you are taught a lot with a lecture at A&M or at any college but real life exposure out in the classrooms with real kids, what kind of questions kids are asking and how they are responding to the questions, I think, is very helpful (Sahin 2011, 39).

Also the importance of workshops on questioning techniques and wait time cannot be ignored since teachers tend to and are encouraged to attend workshops regularly to grow and become better teachers. But Sahin’s findings illustrate that teachers cannot locate a specific workshop on questioning. There was only one teacher who said that she attended a workshop on teachers’ questioning method in her fifteen years of teaching. So, trainings or workshops on different teaching skills should be organized and teachers should be highly encouraged to attend a certain number of professional development workshops each school year.

Wait time

Questions and wait time are two sides of the same coin. As a coin cannot be valid without one of the sides, questioning techniques will not be successful without sufficient wait time. More precisely, you may ask quality and timely questions to your students but it will not extract learning unless you provide them with enough time to absorb and process the question and produce an answer. Cotton (1998), in her review on questioning and wait time, defined wait time as “the amount of time the teacher allows to elapse after he/she has posed a question and before a student begins to speak” (p. 5). Interestingly, research shows that the average wait time teachers allow students to generate response is one second or less (Rowe 1974). Naturally, no one can expect students to understand a question, process it, and formulate a response in such a short period of time.

Increasing a wait time of three or more seconds is an immense improvement for better responses and eventually for more effective student learning. Studies such as Cazden (2001) have revealed that three or more seconds of wait time help students give longer responses, provide better responses with more evidence of learning, further elaboration, encourage more questioning, and added engagement with increased student-to-student and student-to-teacher interactions. This is why it is crucial for teachers to go through trainings to develop proper wait time habits encouraging further student learning.

The use of questioning skills in daily life

Scholars, religious leaders, and/or prophets can be categorized as teachers as well since they are in a position to communicate to people certain things by lecturing, preaching, or posing questions. In that sense, Socrates was not alone in his use of questioning techniques to teach something or convince someone about a misunderstood value. The following story presents an excellent example of a well-constructed questioning method with enough wait time. In the story, Turkish scholar Said Nursi talks about how wrong or exaggerated fear can make one’s life unbearable:

An important man (may God’s mercy be upon him) was afraid to travel by boat. One evening, we went to Galata bridge to take the ferry to Eyup. He did not want to get on, saying that he feared he would drown. When I asked him how many boats were in the Golden Horn, he replied that there might be as many as one thousand. When I asked him how many boats sank each year, he replied usually one or two, and sometimes none. I made this analogy: “Since a year has 365 days, your chance of drowning is 1:365,000. Why does such a small chance scare you?” I asked: “How much longer do you expect to live?” He answered: “Maybe 10 years; I am old already.” I continued: “As there are 3,650 days in 10 years, your chance of dying today is 1:3,650. But since we do not know when we will die, you could die at any time. So repent and weep! Write your last will and testament!” Seeing the truth in my words, he got on the boat even though trembling. (Nursi 2007, 401-2)

In the example, Nursi uses a series of questions to help a person overcome his fear of boarding a boat. In this example, Nursi achieved a couple of things through questioning: first, he asked a series of (factual) questions to help the person determine his underlying beliefs about death. Nursi formulated this information in such a way to show the man how small the possibility of a boat sinking was through a set of factual questions. He posed each question cleverly and effectively to help the person realize how his feelings of death were exaggerated. Also, Nursi gave his addressee enough time to think about the questions, use prior knowledge and apply it to a current problem or situation. He did not rush him to give answers. Moreover, the information Nursi obtained was not something that his addressee did not know, rather it was a tool to help the person overcome his fear of death when boarding a boat. In a short period of time, Nursi persuaded the person that his fear was needless through the use of a questioning technique combined with adequate wait time. As Myhill and Dunkin (2002) stated, “Just like a good barrister, a good teacher knows how to use questions for maximum impact” (p. 8).

In conclusion, teachers’ questioning skills are one of the primary and most influential set of pedagogical skills in use in classrooms. Therefore, teachers should be trained in order for them to become knowledgeable about what to ask and how to ask. Additionally, teachers should know that they should wait at least three seconds after posing a question for more effective student responses and understanding. Teachers’ questioning skills and wait time should complement each other for better outcome. Colleges, districts, and schools should seek ways to improve both prospective and in-service teachers’ questioning skills.

References

• Cazden, C. B. 2001. Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Cotton, K. 1998. Classroom questioning. North West Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved from http://www.learner.org/workshops/socialstudies/pdf/session6/6.ClassroomQuestioning.pdf
• Nursi, Bediüzzaman Said. 2007. The Letters. NJ: Tughra Books.
• Myhill, D., & Dunkin, F. 2002. What is a good question? Literacy, 8.
• Redfield, D. L., & Rousseau, E. W. 1981. A meta-analysis of experimental research on teacher questioning behavior. Review of Educational Research 51, 237–245.
• Sahin, A. 2011. Teachers’ awareness and acquisition of questioning. (Manuscript submitted for publication).
• Sahin, A., & Kulm, G. 2008. Sixth grade mathematics teachers. Intentions and use of probing, guiding, and factual questions. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 11(3), 221-241
• Samson, G. E., Strykowski, B., Weinstein, T., & Walberg, H. J. 1987. The effects of teacher questioning levels on student achievement. Journal of Educational Research 80, 290–295.
• Socrates.(n.d.).Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socrates
• Stevens, R. 1912. The questions as a measure of efficiency in instruction: A critical study of classroom practice, Teachers College Contributions to Education, 48, 95. New York: Columbia University, Teachers College Press.
• Vacc, N. N. 1993. Implementing the professional standards for teaching mathematics: Questioning in the mathematics classroom. Arithmetic Teacher, 41(2), 88–91.

Every human is precious with a special quality, and there are quite many of them at specialist schools. It is just a matter of being able to see that potential within every person, and be appreciative of

When I was requested to complete one of my practical teaching experiences at a specialist school,¹ I was worried. At the time, I was enrolled at a university to become a teacher, expecting to teach only at mainstream schools. The fear of unintentionally hurting the feelings of handicapped people in general was a big concern for me.

I prepared myself for the difficult task ahead. I was certain that this experience was going to be quite different to what I had previously encountered in regular schools, but what I experienced from the first day was beyond my imagination. I was surrounded with little children who could not see, hear, talk or walk. Normally, lunch time would mean kids running around and jumping with joy. It wasn’t like that here. Instead, there were a lot of students on wheelchairs, some walking slowly from one part of the room to another, some just sitting quietly, and some crawling on the floor. As I was watching them, I noticed a little boy approach. He crawled next to me and then patted the floor. I interpreted this as him asking me to sit next to him, so I kneeled down and said “Hello.” He reached over and gave the toy he was playing with to me and then crawled away slowly. For a brief moment I held the toy in my hands looking around confused. I did not know what to do.

Mike² was one of the four students in my class. He was visionally impaired. He could not walk either hence had to use a wheelchair. What was so lovely about Mike was his responsiveness; he would respond to everything, even to a question directed at someone else or to a conversation other people were having. Mike was one of the triplets; according to my mentor “he was the unlucky (!) one.”

Sam was another student also with limited vision. Some days he would surprise us by recognizing the person who walked in through the door; however, most of the time, he could not see objects that stood right in front of him, often tripping over them. Walking was also a difficult task for him; his teachers were teaching him how to use a cane. He was a popular boy at school. He would talk to everyone and most importantly, he would never forget them. His parents were considering enrolling him into a different specialist school due to his exceptional memory and fast learning skills.

Shane was the third student who could not speak. He was also using a wheelchair. Teachers were working vigorously to teach him how to use a machine that would assist him with his speech and also how to operate an automatic wheelchair.

Lana was the last student of the class who had difficulties with walking. In order to walk she needed support or had to use a walking stool. She displayed signs of timidity next to strangers, yet her friendliness towards the three boys in her class was remarkable. She would constantly talk to them and attempted to walk towards them. She was very responsive to some of our questions, but not to everything. If you insisted on a response, she would place her head on the table and start to ignore you.

Eating was an issue for both Sam and Shane; they had to be given some kind of a special formula instead of regular food. The formula was made up of a milky substance and it satisfied their hunger. It provided them with all the necessary minerals and vitamins that they could not receive from regular diet. Although teacher-aids would come at certain times to give the students food, it was not to satisfy their hunger; rather, it was to give them the opportunity to experience different tastes.

Everything in this school was new to me, so I was extremely cautious with everything I had to learn. Teachers and staff seemed to be very nice and talkative to the children. Initially I could hardly even talk to the students. If they had a question, I would reply with a smile. With each passing day, I grew confident. Before long, I was like their regular teachers who constantly talked and laughed with them. I began to assist my mentor by moving students around with wheelchairs.

The friendship and the relationship students had with one another were genuine, pure and innocent. They were just like other children; thinking about toys, playing games, and more importantly, cherished the love they received from family and friends. They had wants, needs, fears, likes and dislikes just like you and me. The importance of being able to “see the person, not the disability” meant a lot to me.

At this school each student had a machine called the “Big Mac.” The teacher (my mentor) would record information about students’ day at school and parents were also expected to record issues relevant to home. Every day, these Big Macs would travel to and from home with the children. The teacher and parents would listen to them. Shane had to use a more advanced machine called “FL4SH” to help him with his speech. He had to press a button with his head to indicate what he wanted to say. Every day Shane’s mother recorded news and jokes on this machine. During my entire time there, she recorded a message almost every day. My mentor would describe Shane’s mother as the best parent she had ever seen. It was at this school, I realized the sacrifices both parents were required to give and how much they should all be applauded for it.

Normally, it took students a long time to learn my name. I believe it is due to the difficulty of its pronunciation. However, at this school, the time it took for the students to learn my name was quite shorter than any other schools I went for placements. Mike was the first to pronounce my name… He would repeat my name so many times that it would be impossible for those nearby not to memorize it. I tried desperately to reply to all of his calls, but it was an impossible task.

Sam was a Sesame Street fan like any other child; his favorite toys were a vacuum and a car that had the pictures of Elmo and the Cookie Monster on them. He carried these toys wherever he went. He would hug, kiss and talk to them. One day, he began to say things like, “Rukiye the vacuum is sad” or “the car is crying!” I asked him, “Why Sam?” He replied, “Because, they can’t talk.” I smiled and suggested, “Why don’t you teach them how to talk, Sam?” I encouraged him to continue talking and to tell them “don’t be sad, don’t cry, be happy.” He never forgot this conversation. He began to repeat the words “don’t cry, be happy” to his toys, whenever he was next to me. I just loved the way he taught the vacuum how to talk. He would say “don’t cry vacuum, you can talk now” then he would press the “on”’ button, to which the vacuum would respond by saying words like “Hello.”

Sam’s birthday was another memory I would never forget. It was his ninth birthday. The following day, my mentor asked Sam to talk about his birthday to his classmates. He told everyone that he and his brother were sharing the same party due to having birthdates that were not too far apart. He continued talking about blowing candles and everyone clapping. He concluded by saying “Then I went into my room.” When my mentor asked follow-up questions like, “did you stay in your room after that?” and “didn’t you enjoy the party Sam?” rather than answering the question, Sam continued to describe the cake, candles and the singing of the “happy birthday” song. I was saddened by the story of Sam’s birthday party. I tried to contemplate how it must feel to not be allowed to attend your own birthday celebration. My mentor assumed that it was to prevent Sam from screaming loudly as he always did when he became over excited.

One day, I witnessed Sam’s unique emotional state with my own eyes. He was crying, constantly stomping from one place to another as he violently smashed and threw toys around. Even his favorite toys were amongst the victims. His sickness triggered this lovely boy to go through such a drastic emotional transformation.

On another occasion as we were waiting for the other students to arrive, Lana asked me to bring her a book. She imitated her teacher and pretended to read the book to Sam and me. She repeated the words “you can walk, he said; I can walk, she said” on every page. I wondered why she concentrated on these particular words. Was it because of the difficulty she experienced while walking? Perhaps, in her own way, she was expressing her desire to walk.

Observing these lovely children helped me realize how little we are thankful for what we have. We have so much, yet often we fail to display our gratitude. We often compare ourselves to those who are more fortunate, rather than thinking about those who have much less. If we are disappointed about not having the latest shoes, shouldn’t we remember Shane, Mike or Lana, who could not walk? If we complain about not having the best eye color, shouldn’t Sam or Mike be remembered, who could not see? If we cannot be bothered to talk with our family at dinner, shouldn’t we remember Shane? Because no matter how much he wanted to say a simple sentence like “I love you,” he was not able to.

It was my last day at this specialist school; a place I initially had doubts about attending. I bought each student a toy, and showed them how it lit up when shaken. That day, moments before I left the class, my four students chanted, “Rukiye…Rukiye… Rukiye!” They had made up a song with my name. As I pushed Mike’s wheelchair towards his bus, he was still shaking the toy madly as he shouted with joy, “Rukiye, Rukiye look, I’m lighting it, I’m lighting it!” I wondered if he really saw the lights. I was extremely sad to leave them, but I had completed the requirements of my placement. I can never forget these lovely students. Their smiling faces, especially Mike’s shy giggles and Lana’s loud laughter are still echoing in my ears.

About a month had passed when I went back to the school for a short visit. I was curious as to whether the students would still remember me. It was heart-breaking not seeing Lana and Shane there because they were away that day. Sam and Mike were having their snacks; the usual, cheese balls for Sam and sandwiches for Mike. Mike did not say my name which he repeated so many times before. Instead, he smiled and giggled as I spoke to him. This was enough to cheer me up; it seemed as though he recognized my voice. My mentor asked, “Sam who is this?” To which he responded “Rukiye” with a huge smile. I spoke with Sam for a while and then said a last “goodbye” to both, as their teacher-aid took them outside for recess. During our short conversation, Sam did not forget to update me on the mood of his car: “Rukiye, car is crying… don’t cry car, be happy!” Eventually, the students may forget me. But one thing is for certain, I will never forget them…

Notes

1. In the Australian school system, institutions that provide education to disabled students are known as “Specialist Schools.”
2. Names of students have deliberately been changed for privacy reasons.

I know You say

There is no compulsion in religion

But I don’t want this freedom

Any longer

You can have it

And me as well

Only teach me to count

One and one and one is one

And gather up the world’s phone-books

So You can read me

All of Your beautiful names.

Jacob Winkler is a spiritual teacher and creator of the website www.glorytothehighest.com.

You see, Auntie Kristina (that’s what a girl with manners should call her) was a friend of my family. She had visited us more times than I could count, but I had never been allowed to visit her, because her husband was unwell (and, I thought, probably couldn’t stand noise). They had no relatives in town. Their only daughter had married and moved to a distant city. So they lived alone in our small town, where everyone else had been there since Adam. It seemed to me that as outsiders they really appreciated the friendship of my parents. Also my father would fix any electrical appliance that broke in their house, free of charge. I guess Auntie Kristina and her husband loved my father like the son they had never had.

Auntie Kristina had the strangest ability to mend clothing like no one else could. She could patch a hole or sew a tear so that it was no longer there, as long as you had extra fabric. You couldn’t detect where a patch had been, even with my grandpa’s glasses on. Ask my mom if you don’t believe me.

So, I was ready to sprint toward her house when my teacher delivered her final instruction. “Be careful. Don’t drop the trousers anywhere. They are very expensive. And,”-that’s when my heart froze-“tell her these are your father’s trousers.”

You might have asked why, but I didn’t. I knew the reason. Auntie Kristina had stopped doing this kind of work for quite some time now. She had turned down such requests lately because the job put a strain on her aging eyes. But there was only one person she wouldn’t turn down: a dear friend asking a favor. And that was my father. If you wonder how my teacher knew that, then I suppose you’ve never lived in a small town full of gossip.

Yes. I knew it was a lie, but after having had this same neurotic teacher for 3 years, a teacher who had pulled my hair in first grade for writing crooked letters, I knew better than to say no.

I lowered my head and dragged myself out of the school. As I watched my shadow slide over the stones on the dusty road, I tried to think of a way out. The first scenario that played in my head was telling Auntie Kristina the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

“Auntie, my teacher sent me with a pair of trousers which have two holes, one big and one small on the left leg. These trousers belong to my teacher’s brother-in-law, who is our ambassador in some far away country and who burned them accidentally during a reception. (No, I am not making anything up. I overheard my teacher talking to her assistant during recess.) Since these trousers are far too expensive to throw away and since it is very, very important that the representative of our glorious country doesn’t go around with holes in his trousers, would you kindly repair them, please?”

She would politely decline and I wouldn’t blame her. Why strain one’s eyes to save the fancy pants of a careless diplomat?! However, this kind of answer would spell disaster for me. I abandoned this scenario and switched to the next.

I would go to her house; pretend I had knocked till my knuckles hurt, then turn back to tell my teacher that the seamstress wasn’t home. My teacher would believe me because: number one, I hadn’t lied before, and number two, she believed that the child who could lie to her had not yet been born. (She told us this herself, but if you can keep a secret, I will tell you-she is wrong. Two of my friends lied to her once, and they didn’t even flinch when faced with her lie-detecting stare.)

Anyhow, I would try, if it would end my misery. Yet, I knew like two plus two equals four that she would send me again the next day and then the next until I found the seamstress home. Chances are she would send another envoy with me after the second attempt. Then, I would have to convert that classmate into an accomplice, which was about as easy as swallowing a bull.

As I swallowed my saliva and wiped my sweaty forehead I realized that I had arrived at Auntie’s house. Standing in front of her door with my fist raised to knock, I couldn’t think of a way out of this dilemma: Shall I lie to my teacher or to Auntie Kristina? To tell the truth, the first seemed a lesser wrong but with greater consequences. I would have the same teacher for another two whole years.

I knocked twice, wishing hard that Auntie Kristina had moved to another city without letting anyone know, or had gone to see her daughter long enough for his Corpus Diplomaticus to go back to that far-away country. Have I told you that I am not that lucky? Well it’s time you knew.

Auntie Kristina opened the door with a big smile that made me blush to the tip of my ears.

“Hello Auntie! My parents send their regards to you. My father’s trousers need some repairs.” My voice trembled like I was begging for food. “Some extra fabric is in the bag.” I handed the bag to her with shaky hands. As soon as Auntie saw the shiny, high quality pants she looked at me over her spectacles, perplexed. She inspected the holes and fell silent. The longer the silence lasted, the hotter my face got. Auntie Kristina, who probably knew how many fillings my father had in his mouth, could quite easily guess that my father, a modest electrician, would more likely land on the moon than own those fancy trousers. I lowered my head and waited for a shame-on-you slap but instead I got:

“O.K. Come and pick them up tomorrow.”

Tomorrow? I was worried. I will have to go through all this again my mind protested.

“Yes, “she said. “I don’t have time today.”

“Tell your parents I said hi,” she reminded me. I nodded. You would expect me to take a deep breath once she closed the door, right? Instead I felt like I was choking and there was only one way for my lungs to get air: let the tears that were knotted in my throat flow. And I did. I didn’t care who might be watching. I hated my teacher. I detested her mindless brother-in-law. I loathed pant-burning cigars. I hated myself. I was a bad girl. I was a liar. I continued to cry to my heart’s content, until my eyes were dry and I could breathe again.

The next day my teacher’s face brightened up when she examined the repaired trousers.

“Unbelievable!” she exclaimed. “One thousand witnesses are needed to prove that there was a hole in these pants.” She turned to me with a smile and said, “Well done.” Her praise, rare as rain in the desert, didn’t make me at all happy this time. In fact, it inflamed my guilt which was burning holes inside me. All I could do was to wait for the flame to die out.

Three weeks later, when the fire of my guilt had somewhat subdued, something happened that blew the ashes away and exposed the embers. It was the day of my older sister’s wedding. As I was busying myself, getting into everybody’s way, I heard Auntie Kristina’s voice greet my father. I jumped out of my skin and hid behind my bedroom door. Peaking through the keyhole, I saw her hand Mom a wrapped gift for my sister. Only for a split of a second did she scrutinize the outfit my father had on. Although it was his best gray suit, it stood a hundred light-years away from those fancy trousers.

She smiled at him and proceeded to the sitting room. She sat on the sofa exchanging pleasantries with both my parents while her coffee was being made. I glued my ear to the wall so that I could hear and started to reconstruct the puzzle of their conversation from what I could hear. When she asked where I was, suddenly finding a hiding place was more urgent than hearing what she had to say next. If I knew one thing about my mother, who stuck to the rules of manners like no other, it was that she would be looking for me in no time. It is considered rude for children to not greet guests, especially when the guests deigned to ask about them. I wasn’t mistaken. Mom rushed into my bedroom calling my name. I was sweating in my closet, hiding among racks of clothes. Did Auntie tell? Is Mom angry? Am I in trouble? I wondered. I could sense she was annoyed and impatient. Somebody called Mom from the kitchen with urgency so she stopped looking for me. I stayed inside until I heard Mom thank Auntie for coming and say goodbye.

I couldn’t spend my whole life inside a closet, so finally I decided I had to come out. On my way to the front yard, Mom called: “There you are! Here, take this. It’s from Auntie Kristina. She said you are a good girl,” Mom related with satisfaction. I don’t know why, but parents are really happy when their children are praised. “Isn’t she a nice lady?” Mom asked. Without waiting for my answer she hurried to greet another guest standing at the door. My mom had placed a bag of candies in my hand. My eyes welled up, but I pushed the tears to the corners. Something that felt good was happening inside me. The holes of emptiness were being patched. My soul was being mended.

“Yes,” I whispered to myself. “She is a nice lady, and the best seamstress of all.”

Mirkena Ozer is pursuing MA in women studies at the University of Georgia, Atlanta.

Original Article: Mak, G.K. & Weiss, S., Nature Neuroscience 13, 753 (2010).

Motherhood or maternal recognition is well characterized by associated brain plasticity during both early development and adulthood. Unlike motherhood, paternal-offspring recognition and its related brain plasticity is poorly understood. A group from University of Calgary designed a set of experiments to test whether father mice can recognize their own infants once they’ve reached adulthood. They exposed adult males to their own and genetically unrelated infants for 2 days. The fathers were tested for adult offspring recognition six weeks later. Assay compared the time spent by the fathers with their own and unrelated offsprings. Results showed that although the father mice show similar parenting behavior toward both sets of infants (own and adopted), they only recognize their own pups as adults. Paternal recognition is associated with increased prolactin (a hormone primarily associated to lactation), mediated neurogenesis in the olfactory bulb, and hippocampus, a major component of mammalian brain. These newly generated neurons are important for the formation of socially relevant olfactory memories. Authors also found that the fathers must physically interact with the infants in order to recognize them later. This is confirmed by some control experiments in which fathers are only allowed to see, smell or hear infants through a wire mesh barrier which was not sufficient to induce neurogenesis. One of the socially relevant benefits of paternal recognition of the infants as adults is to avoid incest interactions which cause inbreeding depression.

2- Recently revealed hideous effects of smoking on children

Original Articles: Brion, M.J. et al., Pediatrics 126, e57 (2010) & Kwok, M.K. et al., Pediatrics 126, e46 (2010).

Smoking is bad for our health, but apparently it may also have subtle, yet far-reaching consequences on our children according to two recent studies. The first study reports that mothers who smoke during pregnancy are more likely to have children with psychological problems. A related study presents evidence that babies who develop in the presence of second-hand smoke (from their fathers) may develop weight problems. Dr. Mary-Jo Brion of the University of Bristol tells “Babies exposed to smoke (in the womb) may be prone to rule breaking, such as lying, cheating, bullying, and disobedience in later years” and adds “To some extent it is somewhat surprising that … maternal smoking may also directly impact child behaviors from exposing the fetus to tobacco in utero.” The other study suggests that smoking around expecting mothers (even when the mother herself is not smoking) also affects the child: higher childhood weight appears to be clearly correlated with paternal smoking. “To protect their children, fathers should avoid smoking from conception onward,” says Dr. Mary Schooling of the University of Hong Kong. Furthermore, smoking mothers should not be too surprised to see their children “disobey” when they tell them not to smoke.

3- Exposure to certain wavelengths of light resets the body clock

Original Article: Gooley, J.J. et al., Science Translational Medicine 2, 31ra33 (2010).

With the introduction of high-tech gadgets into our lives, our daily functions have changed drastically. As opposed to old-fashioned bed-time reading of an “actual” book made of paper, we fiddle with our iphones or ipads or notebooks or channel surf on our bedside TVs before going to sleep. A recent study revealed that exposure to certain wavelengths of light, such as those from laptops or TVs, would negatively influence our circadian rhythms (daily rhythmic activity cycle) by resetting our body clocks (e.g., keeping us awake when we should be sleeping). The feeling of sleepiness at night time is triggered by the secretion of a hormone called melatonin. It had been known that exposure of blue light to the eye’s photoreceptor system located in the ganglion cells suppresses the melatonin secretion, therefore stimulating alertness. In their recent work, researchers at Brigham and Women’s Hospital showed that green light exposure of a different cell population on the eyes – cone cells – also resets the body clock by suppressing melatonin secretion. The senior author of the paper, Dr. Steven Lockley, said in an interview that “we need to think about the entire spectrum of light when designing light therapy or lightning designs to boost alertness or induce sleepiness.” The moral of the story is to be more vigilant about our interaction with fancy electronic gadgets at night if we want to have a healthy and relaxing sleep.

4- Poor teachers may impede good students

Original Articles: Taylor, J. et al., Science 328, 512 (2010).

Scholars know that educational environment, including both tasks and the social environment of a classroom, affects children’s achievement just as much as genetic factors. But the teacher plays a main role, because the quality of the educational environment depends on teachers’ performances. A new study underlined the importance of qualified teachers and how they can make a difference in education. The researchers examined the influence of teacher quality by studying 280 identical and 526 fraternal twin pairs in the first and second grades in different Florida schools representing a diverse environment. Identical twins share 100 percent of their genes and fraternal twins share half, and some of the twins were taught by the same teacher but some were in different classes. The researchers used an Oral Reading Fluency test which is based on how many words in a paragraph a child can accurately read in a minute in order to assess the reading skills of children. The researchers recorded the reading scores of students in the beginning of the semester and at the end of the semester, and they followed the students’ improvements during the year. To measure teacher quality, they used the scores of twins’ classmates. By studying twins’ groups, researchers were able to eliminate some other factors such as genetics and socio-economic conditions. According to the findings, the teachers played a role in “moderating” students’ achievements, and they helped the students to grow to their full potential. When teacher quality is very low, genetic variance is constricted, whereas, when teacher quality is very high, genetic variance blooms. As the study’s lead author, Jeanette Taylor, said “Better teachers provide an environment that allows children to reach their potential.”

Chaos Theory

Over the last fifty years Chaos Theory has evolved as a new science which assumes that the natural order is irregular, discontinuous and erratic (Gleick, 1987). Newtonian physics implies that there is a rational order to everything, that we can predict the events of any system if we are able to plug in enough variables. The idea behind “chaos theory” is that we can predict what systems might do, but we cannot be sure. Everything exists as a series of possibilities.

Since the beginning of the twentieth century several other sciences have evolved that have sought to solve the problems in prior models. For example, the theory of relativity eliminates the illusion of absolute time and space. Quantum mechanics eliminates the Newtonian dream of controllable measurement processes, as well as the fantasy of deterministic predictability. Chaos theory, the third new science, embraces irregularity as a norm. Scientists from different fields have begun to observe the regular patterns within the irregularity of the natural world.

In the old views of nature, notes Gleick (1987), it was held that simple systems behave in simple ways while complex systems imply complex causes. In the new view, it is believed that simple systems give rise to complex behaviors and complex systems give rise to simple behaviors (Snyder, 1995).

The new science of chaos centers around two points. The first is the exploration of the hidden order that exists within the chaotic systems. The second is the study of how self-organization emerges from chaos (Hayles, 1990).

The three principal conditions for a chaotic system are: (1) that it operates in a non-linear way; (2) that it is iterative (the output of one cycle becomes the input of the next); and (3) that small variations in initial conditions lead to large differences in outcomes. Many systems within educational organizations appear to meet these conditions (Cunningham, 2000).

The concepts of chaos theory can explain the way schools work. For example, teachers do not exist as separate entities, but are affected by the relationships that exist within schools. It may also shed some light on how we can deal with and understand how things in our classrooms, schools, and entire communities are interrelated and all reflect in some manner upon each other.

There are several aspects of chaos theory such as nonlinearity, complexity, butterfly effect, fractals and feedback mechanisms that may have significance for educational settings.

Nonlinearity

In a linear system there is a simple cause and effect relationship; A causes B which causes C, and so on. However, a chaotic system is nonlinear. A may not necessarily cause B at all times. Lots of variables come into play and interact with each other. School systems look like nonlinear chaotic systems, too. In school district A, the purchase of new computers might have a positive impact on student achievement, while in school district B, this might bring little or no gain in student achievement.

It is widely believed that experienced teachers have better classroom control. If you have a veteran teacher in a classroom, you will have an orderly environment and the administrators, thinking in a linear way, might believe that the more veteran teachers in a building, the more orderly the environment will be. That might not be the case in every school district, especially in urban schools; there are instances where young and inexperienced teachers contribute positively to the school environment much more than veteran teachers.

Complexity

Chaotic systems take complex forms, making their precise measurement difficult if not impossible (Glickman, 2001). Different measurement instruments have been put in place to evaluate and compare the performance of a school. However, due to the complex nature of schools, none of these assessment methods seem to measure precisely the school performance and have very limited validity for the following reasons (Cunningham, 2000):

• The prior achievement of pupils is not taken into account and this is a major factor in pupil achievement at a later stage.

• Schools are differentially effective in different subjects and with pupils of different ability, which is not reflected in a single figure.

• Schools change over time; however, the achievement data used reflects only one group and is essentially historical data.

• Student mobility between schools is not reflected in the assessment.

• Social factors, sex of students, ethnic origin and social background are not taken into account. These factors are out of the school’s control.

Therefore, assessing school performance and comparing one to another have become increasingly difficult given the complex nature of today’s schools.

The Butterfly Effect

The butterfly effect means that a small and seemingly unrelated event in one part of a system can have enormous effects on the other parts of the system. Theoretical meteorologist Edward Lorenz made the term ‘butterfly effect’ famous when he argued that a butterfly stirring its wings in Bejing today could unleash powerful storms in New York city next month. One implication of sensitive dependence on initial conditions is the impossibility of predicting not only next year’s weather, but the long term future of any chaotic system (Glickman, 2001).

In terms of school improvement, what we understand from the butterfly effect is that it is impossible to predict the long-term effects of school improvement efforts. Planning in a chaotic system like a school should be medium range (one or two years) rather than long range (five to ten years). Formal planning in an unpredictable system needs to focus on process rather than product with the goal of producing “a stream of wise decisions designed to achieve the mission of the organization” (Patterson, Stewart and Purkey, 1986).

The butterfly effect ensures that no lesson will ever go completely as planned, or have the same effect on any two students. It indicates the need for teacher flexibility in teaching, as well as the need for individual attention to students, each of whom is experiencing a given lesson within his or her own personal context (Glickman, 2001).

Fractals

A fractal is a geometric shape that is similar to itself at different scales. Mid-sized branches of a tree are remarkably similar in shape to the larger branches from which they come. Smaller branches, in turn, are the same shape as the mid-sized branches from which they come, and so on.

Through work with fractal generations, it has become apparent to scientists that predictability does exist (known shapes re-appear), and randomness plays an important and unexpected role. What has been learned is that, within chaotic and seemingly unpredictable systems, structures of order exist through which the system recreates itself.

Complex social systems can also reveal self-similarity on different scales: at each level of the system, specific patterns of organization and culture reappear. Like fractals in nature, schools reveal self-similarity in different scales. For example, a school-wide staff development day, a department meeting, a classroom lesson, and a halfway interaction between a teacher and student might all reveal the same cultural characteristic. Thus, reflective inquiry at the school, team, classroom and individual level can help educators better understand their school culture, change needed, and pathways to improvement (Glickman, 2001).

By being reflective practitioners, teachers can develop their teaching skills, acquire more insightful experience in their fields and learn to look at problems from a different perspective. They also understand their weaknesses, areas of strengths and recognize the repeating patterns of their teaching styles.

Feedback Mechanisms

Chaotic systems contain feedback loops enabling outputs to feed back into the system as input. Feedback can bring stability or turbulence to a system. For example, a thermostat is a feedback mechanism that causes temperature stability. Conversely, when the sound from a loudspeaker feeds back through a microphone, it is rapidly magnified to create a disruptive shriek (Gleick, 1987). Feedback can also cause a system to move toward greater levels of complexity.

Feedback in schools can take the form of student performance data, survey results, quality circles, third party reviews, and so forth. The important thing is that meaningful data on the results of change efforts be made available to teachers, and that they be given opportunities to reflect on the data and redirect their change efforts accordingly.

With all the unpredictability present in classrooms, beneficial feedback is critical for both teachers and students. For teachers, student performance data, direct student feedback, and classroom observation data can all assist them to improve classroom instruction. For students, feedback on their cognitive and affective performance-from teachers, parents, and peers-is an essential part of the learning process. The fact that in chaotic systems like classrooms output becomes input means that the artificial distinctions we often draw between learning and assessment need to be removed: in reality, learning and assessment cannot be separated (Glickman, 2001).

Conclusion

The deterministic view of education that schools are simplistic, cause-effect systems which can be easily manipulated, quantized and controlled is not addressing the problems of today’s schools. From an alternative perspective, chaos theory gives us an understanding that the things we consider unimportant or trivial in our daily lives might have an equal weight in terms of affecting the results as the things we consider important. Just as it is characterized in the Qur’anic teaching that every minute thing or action is recorded in a Book regardless of its proportion. “Whatever your preoccupation (O Messenger), and whatever discourse from Him in this (Qur’an) you may be reciting, and whatever work you (O people) may be doing, We are certainly witness over you while you are engaged in it. Not an atom’s weight of whatever there is in the earth or in the heaven escapes your Lord, nor is there anything smaller than that, or greater, but it is (recorded) in a Manifest Book” (Yunus 10:61). It further suggests that everything we do has a significant impact on us, our communities and ultimately society as a whole.

In conclusion, chaos theory has the potential to offer deeper understanding of how today’s schools function in an ever changing world of our times.

Aydin Kara is a graduate student at University of Dayton. He studies educational leadership and administration. He can be reached at aydinkara33@hotmail.com.

References

• Cunningham, R. 2000. Chaos, Complexity and the study of Education Communities. Institute of Education.
• Gleick, J. 1987. Chaos: Making a new science. New York: Penguin Books.
• Glickman, Carl D. 2001. Supervision and Instructional Leadership: Allyn and Bacon
• Lortie, D. C. 1975. Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Patterson, J. L., Purkey, S. C., and Parker, J. V. 1986. Productive school systems for a nonrational world. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.