I’ve often referred to the writing of Amanda Ripley’s book “The Smartest Kids in the World.” With great examples and personal investigation she underscores the conclusion that engagement is at the heart of the best learning happening around the world (according to PISA). Of course I think she also points out that “engagement” can take many forms and some of them may be much healthier for kids than others. In any case, with her storytelling sticking with me for a number of years I was excited to learn of her latest book: “High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out?”
Centered again around a few core stories she delves into the psychology of conflict that can paralyze individuals and communities in harmful ways. While I had American politics in the back of my mind, I tried to use the lenses she provides to consider schools. There was a lot to consider regarding student and parent relations but what resonated most was some of the successes and challenges I’ve seen among faculty and leadership relations in learning communities
A significant element of High Conflict is the presumptively false yet incredible “power of the binary.” We take sides and then we polarize them further. We create false dualities that are oversimplified and harmful to helpful dialogue. Especially the listening side of dialogue. When we are in conflict the nuances and range of interpretations on an issue that add important context can fall by the wayside as each side digs in.
I’ve seen this through various debates on orthodoxies in education. A classic is the battle between supporters of “whole language” literacy vs “phonics.” You’ll even find descriptions calling one a bottom up approach and the other a top down approach. Opponents. And the passions can be equally strong. But with a bit of forced humility after accumulating and preponderant research, the standard bearer of whole language Lucy Calkins has finally acknowledged that the teaching of phonics does have an important role to play for children learning to read and write. While many schools and resources had already settled on a “balanced literacy” approach in the nuanced gray between these two camps, I suspect millions of kids suffered in systems where teachers marched confidently in the black or white of one side or the other. With the nuance now more clearly on the table with research and the cautious retreat of one side’s leader I have hope this will be a less divided discussion.
These “high conflict” challenges also resonate with the dynamics of individual school communities. Ripley describes the inevitable divide between ground control and crew in space programs. Five times as many conflicts are reported between the two groups compared to conflicts among the groups. Each group often strengthens connections among themselves by sharing opinions that those “other guys are the worst.” This reflects a common divide in schools between “faculty” and “admin.” Those other guys. I cringe a bit when I hear it’s worst symptoms on both sides. But it’s a natural and important distinction that can often become quite challenging to a school culture.
Fortunately Ripley does provide some good advice to help when we find ourselves in High Conflict that find can find some helpful traction in schools:
Investigate the Understory
The Understory is “the thing the conflict is really about, underneath the usual talking points” As opposed to the “crock pot:” the issue the conflict appears to be about on the surface, when it’s really about something else
Reduce the Binary
Avoid referendums and yes/no votes that oversimplify perspectives and contribute to the tendency to work in the binary. We need to highlight complexity and range of information, opinions and options.. Ranked choice voting is much better than a thumbs up or thumbs down. She concludes with an outline of approaches
Buy Time and Make Space
Ripley reminds us here of the dark behavior imagined in the “Lord of Flies” in contrast with the real life group of stranded youth in Fiji that created cooling spaces after conflict and community time. The conclusion to their story was much happier; and real. She also suggests the power of going “ to the balcony” and stepping away from the dance to get perspective. Take time to imagine and describe a better scenario. This reminds me of my time in Quaker schools and the power of silence and time for reflection. Likewise, the strength that can come when making decisions to keep options open with decisions when reasonably possible
Complicate the Narrative
“Be suspicious of simple stories”
Protect and encourage curiosity
Amplify contradictions
Ask questions
LISTEN
I believe one of the best thinking routines is the simple question when honestly asked: “What makes you say that?” If we all took a little more time to ask and really listen to that question I think we’d find a lot less conflict in the world.