In my piece about character in Independent School Magazine (Winter, 2012) I talk about teaching the values, behaviors and skills for good character in a tribal way, where all role models consider themselves to be a stake holder and thus ultimately responsible in small or large part for the development of the young person in their midst. Once so committed, we inevitably teach a child in three basic ways; 1. by telling, 2. by showing, and 3. by doing.
By far the most difficult of the three is doing. And so it comes as no surprise that this is the most effective method as well. It is difficult because it requires commitment. It is effective because when the student sees that you walk the walk he/she knows you mean what you say.
It has been my experience, and not only in education, that most people can tell…and many people can show…but very few actually do. Beware. You can not fake doing. If you do not believe enough to do, if you do not continually strive to perfect those qualities in yourself that you teach , you become transparent, and cannot gain the respect necessary to teach effectively.
This in essence is why the subject of character is so difficult to teach in a school setting. While teaching math or english, for example, follows a well charted path there is less disagreement about the content of teaching character. When it comes to a hierarchy of values, there can be great division. Further, there is a natural reluctance to seem to impose one's own value structure upon others. Nor should we. What we should be teaching is that personal values constantly evolve and grow, just as relationships evolve and grow, and as empathy and spiritual understanding grow. The important part is to have them - to stand for something beyond yourself.
Doing is the downfall for many. Politicians are particularly prone and attempt to overcome a lack of doing by a greater volume of telling. Some are very gifted tellers. But ultimately, they are transparent.
Teachers can be very effective showers by the nature of their craft, which may involve pointing out individuals who have done or are currently doing that which the teacher is telling. It is doing once removed, effective but not as effective as doing it oneself - that is, role modeling.
In a family you must do what you tell, there can be no deception. Here the relationship with the teller is intimate, therefore what you do is a more effective method of instruction. In the tribes of our antecedents, where each member relied implicitly upon what the other would do for their own personal safety, this was true. Since that time layers of distance have grown between teacher and student that make it more difficult to discern that the teller is doing. In a typical public school a student might have eight teachers and sit in a class of thirty students. Here doing on the part of the teller is not easily demonstrated. When a candidate for state or national office tells, the many layers of time, distance, and are an impediment to seeing that candidate actually doing.
But now we have Google and Bing and search engines that by the touch of a key can expose doing, for good or ill. Even on a global scale transparency is now a threat to tellers who are not doers. It is why middle east dictators are so concerned about eliminating social media from their countries.
Ultimately, I suppose the best attitude is the one illustrated by those three little monkeys; see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil, but in terms of character education, it is best to do it if you intend to tell it.
Commentary by Rich Gamble
