Task Zero, Review:
Anyone who has chosen to be an agent of change, hasn’t chosen an easy job. Debra Meyerson tackles the subject of organization change in her book Rocking The Boat. In her book, Meyerson shows that the most effective radicals are those who have learned to both oppose and conform at the same time. As she puts it, ‘they are able to rock the boat and yet stay in it’. Meyerson describes how it is possible to challenge the status quo at various levels and develop an ability to walk the fine line by looking into the pros and cons of the situation. She details the process of change by focusing in on three areas: first, how to define a tempered radical. Second, how these radicals bring about organizational change. Third, the potential challenges that these radicals face.
In the first section, Meyerson lays the groundwork by introducing us to the tempered radical. She provides examples that define a tempered radical as a person who exists as an outsider within an organization because her values and identity differ from the majority. These are the people that want to fit in yet they want to retain what makes them different. The second section focuses on how tempered radicals introduce change through individual effort. Meyerson explains the psychological aspects of resisting and making a difference, how threat can be turned into opportunity, and how negotiation is used to bridge the gaps. She also describes how small wins create opportunity. The final section of the book deals with the potential challenges that can be emerge. Meyerson describes the difficulties and how to deal with the psychological pressures that can arise.
Task One, How am I different?
To a certain extent, I can identify with each of the ways people experience “difference” from the majority. Yet, the area that resonates the most with me is in having philosophical differences, particularly with some of my colleagues. I have strong opinions on curriculum choices, pedagogical approaches, and how classrooms should be managed. I share my opinions, and evidence to back up my position, and I’m often unapologetic in my desire to advance them. What might be most surprising is that many of the positions I hold on curriculum, pedagogy, and classroom management, conflict with the very foundations of the STEM approach to learning. I don’t want to get into details, but the educational system, particularly in Chicago, is too bureaucratic. The threat of scores, accountability, and evaluations is very real in our system. So, much of the change I seek has less to do with rocking the boat as it relates to STEM, and more to do with just making sure the boat stays afloat. I also differ from Meyerson viewpoint, in that I don’t resisting change quietly. This might be good, or it might be bad, but it’s often how I approach what I believe needs to changed. I agree that negotiation is part of the process, that you leverage small wins, and it is necessary to organize collective action, which is no small task.
Task Two, Becoming a Tempered Radical:
Where I am at on the continuum depends on what I am trying to accomplish. With some of my broader agenda items, specifically with curriculum content, I am leveraging small wins. Other items, for example, the flow of language arts in the classroom, I am still in the broadening through negotiation stage. The goals I set could be specific to a classroom or could be something I feel should be implemented school wide.
There are many lessons that I could take away from this book. One of the biggest lessons I can take away from the book is that the only rules that matter are the ones that are right for me. I don’t like to blindly accept things I don’t agree with. I feel that my personal goals are aligned closely with those of the school I work for, but I am “still nudging at the system — and those little nudges make a difference."
Task Three, Facing challenges:
As Meyerson notes, “Challenges and obstacles may be an inevitable part of tempered radicals’ swim up the tide,” so figuring out how to manage these challenges is important. The first challenge that Meyerson covers is ambivalence, she describes the challenge of ambivalence as simultaneously holding opposing feelings toward the same object. Certainly, there are ways of doing things that are in place, for example the STEM approach to learning, that is an approach to learning that I support, but understand teachers don’t implement when they have to make sure student scores are high or they lose their jobs. Another major challenge that Meyerson writes about is the lure toward co-optation. Basically, describes this challenges as a struggle against conformity. Many organizations reward people based on maintaining the status quo and showing loyalty. I am a team player, but I have my agenda and how I think things should be, and will voice my opinion if I think it is in the best interest of the team. So, again there is a line that should not be crossed, and if that line is crossed, Meyerson explains how reputation can be damaged and legitimacy lost. I have crossed the line, and it has taught me that sometimes my opinion is best reserved to keep to myself. Lastly, Meyerson describes how radicals can become frustrated and burned out for trying to create change for such a long time. There is no doubt that there are those moments that I question the purpose and whether or not it is really worth the effort. At the end of the day, I have to remember to be thankful for the opportunity to have a job, and maybe trying to create change shouldn’t be such a priority.
Anyone who has chosen to be an agent of change, hasn’t chosen an easy job. Debra Meyerson tackles the subject of organization change in her book Rocking The Boat. In her book, Meyerson shows that the most effective radicals are those who have learned to both oppose and conform at the same time. As she puts it, ‘they are able to rock the boat and yet stay in it’. Meyerson describes how it is possible to challenge the status quo at various levels and develop an ability to walk the fine line by looking into the pros and cons of the situation. She details the process of change by focusing in on three areas: first, how to define a tempered radical. Second, how these radicals bring about organizational change. Third, the potential challenges that these radicals face.
In the first section, Meyerson lays the groundwork by introducing us to the tempered radical. She provides examples that define a tempered radical as a person who exists as an outsider within an organization because her values and identity differ from the majority. These are the people that want to fit in yet they want to retain what makes them different. The second section focuses on how tempered radicals introduce change through individual effort. Meyerson explains the psychological aspects of resisting and making a difference, how threat can be turned into opportunity, and how negotiation is used to bridge the gaps. She also describes how small wins create opportunity. The final section of the book deals with the potential challenges that can be emerge. Meyerson describes the difficulties and how to deal with the psychological pressures that can arise.
Task One, How am I different?
To a certain extent, I can identify with each of the ways people experience “difference” from the majority. Yet, the area that resonates the most with me is in having philosophical differences, particularly with some of my colleagues. I have strong opinions on curriculum choices, pedagogical approaches, and how classrooms should be managed. I share my opinions, and evidence to back up my position, and I’m often unapologetic in my desire to advance them. What might be most surprising is that many of the positions I hold on curriculum, pedagogy, and classroom management, conflict with the very foundations of the STEM approach to learning. I don’t want to get into details, but the educational system, particularly in Chicago, is too bureaucratic. The threat of scores, accountability, and evaluations is very real in our system. So, much of the change I seek has less to do with rocking the boat as it relates to STEM, and more to do with just making sure the boat stays afloat. I also differ from Meyerson viewpoint, in that I don’t resisting change quietly. This might be good, or it might be bad, but it’s often how I approach what I believe needs to changed. I agree that negotiation is part of the process, that you leverage small wins, and it is necessary to organize collective action, which is no small task.
Task Two, Becoming a Tempered Radical:
Where I am at on the continuum depends on what I am trying to accomplish. With some of my broader agenda items, specifically with curriculum content, I am leveraging small wins. Other items, for example, the flow of language arts in the classroom, I am still in the broadening through negotiation stage. The goals I set could be specific to a classroom or could be something I feel should be implemented school wide.
There are many lessons that I could take away from this book. One of the biggest lessons I can take away from the book is that the only rules that matter are the ones that are right for me. I don’t like to blindly accept things I don’t agree with. I feel that my personal goals are aligned closely with those of the school I work for, but I am “still nudging at the system — and those little nudges make a difference."
Task Three, Facing challenges:
As Meyerson notes, “Challenges and obstacles may be an inevitable part of tempered radicals’ swim up the tide,” so figuring out how to manage these challenges is important. The first challenge that Meyerson covers is ambivalence, she describes the challenge of ambivalence as simultaneously holding opposing feelings toward the same object. Certainly, there are ways of doing things that are in place, for example the STEM approach to learning, that is an approach to learning that I support, but understand teachers don’t implement when they have to make sure student scores are high or they lose their jobs. Another major challenge that Meyerson writes about is the lure toward co-optation. Basically, describes this challenges as a struggle against conformity. Many organizations reward people based on maintaining the status quo and showing loyalty. I am a team player, but I have my agenda and how I think things should be, and will voice my opinion if I think it is in the best interest of the team. So, again there is a line that should not be crossed, and if that line is crossed, Meyerson explains how reputation can be damaged and legitimacy lost. I have crossed the line, and it has taught me that sometimes my opinion is best reserved to keep to myself. Lastly, Meyerson describes how radicals can become frustrated and burned out for trying to create change for such a long time. There is no doubt that there are those moments that I question the purpose and whether or not it is really worth the effort. At the end of the day, I have to remember to be thankful for the opportunity to have a job, and maybe trying to create change shouldn’t be such a priority.
