Same old, same old

We had a seminar the other day, and the main event was a plenary given by a long-term resident of KSA. Among the many interesting points he had made, I feel it necessary to make a rebut to several.

One of his observations was that teaching is a kind of socio-cultural game, with expectancies, rules, roles, and purposes which Shakespeare at one time identified as coalescing around love, death, power, money, and ego. I would probably collapse all of those into a discussion of love, that the other pursuits are reactions in various complicated ways to a vacuum of that Life Force in some way or another, but that is another blog. The point I was piqued at was the ensuing comment, that teachers often "reproduce the conditions that limited them", presumably in more familiar contexts. Or, as the speaker was later to illustrate with Marx, "the workers are complicit in their own isolation." I don't know how accurate or contextualized the speaker's quote was, but the upshot of it was to pin the tail on the donkey: if your class is boring, maybe it's your fault.

Marx had a lot to say about the exploitation of labor, in fact constructing a whole theory around this construct. Some quotes include...

Capitalist production, therefore, develops technology, and the combining together of various processes into a social whole, only by sapping the original sources of all wealth -- the soil and the labourer.

KARL MARK, Capital

Hitherto, every form of society has been based ... on the antagonism of oppressing and oppressed classes.

KARL MARX, The Communist Manifesto

In other words, there is a conflict here, and this is summed up in the coercion interpretation of exploitation: how can the workers be complicit, choosing their lot, when capitalists exploit them?

 The worker in capitalism is not forced to engage in surplus labour in the same way that slaves and serfs were. In the case of the latter it was threat of punishment if they refused. Rather, what forces the wage-labourer in capitalism to engage in surplus labour is the fact that the capitalist owns the means of production. Lacking means of production of their own, the wage-labourers are forced to accept the wage offers of the capitalists to procure means of subsistence, and the wage contracts to which they are forced to agree bind them to perform surplus labour.

What is the case here in KSA? Is there coercion? I would say that a surplus of labor in the home countries of expats drove them out of financial need to come here. KSA owns the means of production: with significant oil reserves they can withstand recessionary pressures; but even more, they can adapt rather comfortably to the winds of change swirling around them. On a personal level, the teachers in Saudi Arabia accept the situations they face in classrooms, on campuses, and in shopping malls and city streets, because they fear a reprisal in the form of job loss, or perhaps even personal injury, recalling the threat of punishment characteristic of earlier times.

I work and sleep and rest with a constant sense of anxiety, which becomes naked fear sometimes, and at other times becomes nagging paranoia, as I watch every word and deed. The stress of walking on egg shells is what in part explains my constant fatigue: I go to bed tired, and wake up tired. Every day. It is not the workload; I have done 12 hour days installing solar panels in the middle of a heat wave out in a farmer's field. The physical exertion does not compare to this.

So then the game is not a friendly one of parcheesi or chess, where the only outcome of loss is a bruised ego, if that. It is a game of Russian roulette; you don't know when the next round in the chamber is live. That is, you don't know if tomorrow a student, or a fellow teacher, or the person driving in the car beside you, is going to change everything, suddenly and unexpectedly. Forcefully. Painfully. The best advice I have heard so far is to expect the unexpected.

The bottom line, though, is that the blame game the speaker said was characteristic of teachers is ironically and often a policy of blaming the victim. The dean who said he would have our back at a dinner just a few short weeks ago, recently advised the students in a large council meeting to report any teacher who transgresses the murky lines seperating discussions that are appropriate (women, religion and politics) from those that are haram. Why? Because the ills that our campus suffers from, can be captured and controlled by ostracizing the teachers? Is this the issue that will move education to the cutting edge?

The speaker talked of testing as a social act, of learning as lying on an unpredictable curve. Seriously? While we labor under the realization that our major tests have zero correlation with curriculum content, which is not only inefficient and pedagogically invalid, but has been called by some as morally repugnant (eg Finch 2002); while we are required to use a curriculum that has had little input or refinement by the professionals who use it, which does not encourage student choice and often does not reflect even coincidentally their major interests? And we wonder why there are disciplinary issues, which could be directly related to the student's sense of hopelessness or powerlessness, which is projected onto and often channelled by their teachers?

Confidence. Choice. Authenticity. Principles. These are universals that cultures world-wide accept and espouse. Theoretical constructs divorced from realities, and tainted by thinly veiled accusation, are not a step forward. They are merely the same old, same old.

Discrimination Diversification

I had an interesting discussion with some friends the other day on the topic of racial discrimination, and how it affects social opportunities. My black friends at times seemed to be saying that no matter how hard it got in the economy, I as a white guy would never really understand desperation or hopelessness. When the economy improved, I would go right back to assymetric vocational access, something that blacks systematically are prevented from. When the economy improves, blacks are still black, and therefore their situation remains essentially the same.

My response was on several levels: that if I was so priveleged, why was I working here, so far from home? why had I been rejected on my last 10 applications to Korea - not even gaining a response form thank you letter? why had I enjoyed much-less-than-poverty-level wages for the last three years, which depleted my reserves substantially? why I lost money on real estate deals for the past 3 years, basically losing my retirement funds? and, why was I continuously impressed with the notion that the field of education was increasingly dominated by women at every level and position, effectively marginalizing my chances?

Even further back, why was I so poor just before I came to Korea, having to go to the food bank and driving a car that literally had a hole in the gas tank? why I was working 100-hour weeks and clearing 500 dollars, at times taking my life in my hands to just get by? And even further, why both my parents came from Europe after the war, after suffering deprivation of the war fought in their front yards, and the great depression before that? Does that sound like a life a privilege, that I was born with a silver spoon in my life?

I agreed that I could never really understand life as a black man in America. I have never lived in America for one, and I do not have a black heritage either. However, my wife is Korean, and my son is Korean-Canadian; vicariously, I have suffered through various social indignities and assaults with them: intrusive and incompetent immigration procedures, social shunning, in Korea pushing and shoving on the street, in Australia spitting, in Canada taunts, epithets and ignorant comments especially at my son. And of course the day-to-day slights that come with the life of being an expat in Korea, Japan, and Saudi Arabia for 15 years.

I have suffered from discriminatory treatment too. I have lost money and been prevented from jobs I would have liked and would have been qualified for. I understand what discrimination is like. And I am not of the opinion that I am better, or more privileged, in any way, than the black citizenry of Canada.
In fact, I see this reaction, of viewing whites through what is essentially a stereotyped prism generated by longstanding attitudes of victimization, as unfair. I am not the token white.

It is like someone with a longterm terminal illness, who struggles with pain every day. This person sees someone who breakes his leg, but does not respond with compassion. Instead, he says, "what's wrong with you?! what are you whining for? that does not really hurt - you don't know pain like I do! In a month, you will be walking around again. Me? I might not even be here in a month!" I feel sorry for the person who has the illness. But why does that negate the pain of a broken leg? Why does that not arouse compassion, but derision? And why respond with anger? Did the person with the broken leg give you that illness? If not, then why not face the end of life with gratitude, compassion, and hope? Isn't that a better way?

We all suffer from discrimination: white, blacks, non-royal Saudis, non-Saudi Muslims, Christians, women, men, children. Discrimination has no face. It is as diverse as all of us. And I would wish that our common suffering would bind us together, because that makes us all stronger.

Enlightening experiences

"While working in korea and japan, people would complain about the testing protocols. They should come to saudi arabia. This week is testing week, and nothing has gone right. Students took a writing test with test items they had never seen before, and thus were ill-prepared for. For example, with the item "describe something you own", one student listed body parts as his answer, with a few words lifted from the test rubric itself for good measure. We were originally given the instruction about test length being one hour, which was changed to forty in an email the night before, then back to forty five the morning. Teachers ended up giving students as much time as they needed. The marking was supposed to have a rubric with reliability, but we were told to mark "generously", which meant not to follow the rubric. The test was supposed to have two raters, but the scores were not blind, so to save time and effort, the raters simply copied the first score. We were supposed to mark the tests that we gave in our assigned classrooms; many teachers (inc. mine), simply left after the test - leaving those who were left to mark their work. There seems to be no consequence for this kind of shirking of responsibility."

I wrote this on my black berry about 2 weeks after I arrived. Since the beginning of the new semester, teachers have been asked to participate in various voluntary capacities (dean's task force, observation, CAL State mentoring program) to address the issues that had become all too apparent. The dean's speech given at that time (discussed in an earlier blog) was hopeful, but given the pace of change, and the continuing lack of leverage agents seem to have here, positive outcomes are still beyond the curent horizon.

"At the ielts office, in a building that from the outside is built like a bunker. Inside, there is an integrated work environment, a little to my surprise; this being thw diplomatic quarter, perhaps not. Have to sign the same documents for working - no worries. Will start on feb 18 for testing, may get to do a few sessions before march break, so nice to build up some spending reserves before going on vacatoon, if i actually do, we have to see if that is possible with my visa situation.

Have been quite sick for about 2 days prior, but the antibiotics have finally kicked in, just in time, but still wasted a weekend in bed. At school, there was a situation with a teacjer who had made complaints about several teachers inc me, fatuous and time wasting. Enough though to warrant about 40 people hours to investigate. It made it all the way to the pres of the company to come, and now it is over. For the one who made the complaint though, i suspect not. I had this sitn with a studnet at fanshawe college, who seemed to be not satisfied until he had gotten his pound of flesh for a percieved slight. My reward for listing to his venting and modifying his score to an A+ was a nonrenewal of my contract after the next term. I had thought FC was the worst institutoon i had wokred in, until i got here. Although come to think of it, this place is trying, and may comes to grips with many of the most egregious issues in a few yeras. FC?  I doubt that would happen in ten."

The outcome was that the complainant was moved to a new office and team. But it is situations like this, where the complaint was given energy greatly disproportionate to its value, yet issues concerning vacations, working conditions (lockers/keys for teachers, etc) and other areas are political soccer balls that keep getting kicked down the road to be solved later. That is why the first experience with admin issues here (with testing) still rings familiarly with my observations today. The difference now is my level of expectation, and my degree of preparedness, as I come to expect that problems will occur and I need plan b and c in my back pocket ready to go.

Anomie and authoritarianism

Anomie is a term meaning "without Law" to describe a lack of social norms; "normlessness". It describes the breakdown of social bonds between an individual and their community ties, with fragmentation of social identity and rejection of self-regulatory values.

I sometimes wonder if authoritarianism is a response to the historical normlessness of such anomie societies, which might address the question of why did Islam develop here in Saudi Arabia, and not in Africa, or elsewhere in the Middle East? The unwillingness of individuals to regulate themselves from the inside-out is compensated for by an authoritarian and institutionalized system working from the outside-in.

Huntington has talked about the clash of the west and the Islamic world as being concerned with religious differences vis a vis democratic values, and this creates much tension worldwide. Inglehart's modernization theory asserts, in contrast, that as societies develop, there is less need for the security that religiosity tends to bring, and that conflicts arise instead from social issue differences like gender equality and attitudes toward sexuality.

The purpose of any theory is to generalize a position, so that it finds wider application; it's replicable. Human societies being as complex as they are render such wide-ranging theories difficult to defend, but when constrained more locally may be informative (ie interactional differences cancel each other out, eliminating main effects). In the graph below, for example, data for 3 different years is given. The data has been entered into the binomial equation associated with each year. But, what if all the data had been entered, regardless of year? The distribution would have been much flatter; the variations would cancel out the differences between these three years.

Fig. 1 Multiple distributions

In KSA, for example, a saying here is "the rule-breaker becomes famous," which is un-Islamic, but very Saudi. You almost wonder whether the imposition of strict socio-religious rules here, as opposed to say another Muslim society such as Lebanon, is a direct counter-reaction to regional cultural normlessness, exemplified by the drifting of cars and other reckless driving habits, the use of "inshallah" to justify the breaking of promises or the refusal to make them, and what seems to be a lack of willingness and sense of entitlement of younger people to take on personal responsibilities when others can do it for them?

Thus, the growing liberalization that Inglehart's theory suggests as inevitable might spur a stronger clash within this society to contain it and thus prevent it. From an individual level, could you see this in someone who has lived life on the edge, finds religion, and then tends toward a very strict and judgmental interpretation of what makes a "good life"? And that this person swings back and forth, as the dissonance within his mind takes him in one direction and then another as time goes on?

Thus, I still see merit in a conflict theory to explain the cultural phenomena, but less so as a consensual response to particular kinds of religious or social values as Huntington would have it, and more in terms of reactions which happen to be juxtaposed. That is, the conflict exists in part because oil happens to be largely under Islamic soil; if it were under Hindu soil, would we now be talking about an Indo-Western conflict instead?

I will have to give the culture-shock-inducing aspects of Saudi culture more thought as time goes on.

Two cents on two weeks

It has been an interesting week so far. I have a cold, and I have probably gotten due in part to some of the stresses associated with the, uh, surrealness of it all. Another thing is that my roommate was talking on the phone late at night, and waking me up in the process. Thankfully that was sorted (he will now talk on the livingroom sofa, which is behind another door).

At the end of week 1, which I thought had gone rather well, half the class complained about the pace of the learning. I used my 3.5 hours of teaching (8AM to 1140AM) to get though the materials, and the students said that it was too much too fast, with not enough listening and speaking. That was the curriculum, I said, but I was willing to listen to proposals. What we ended up agreeing to was this:

8-9         Reading textbook
9-940     Documentary
10-11     Writing
11-1140 Speaking: Discussion groups

One student has a list of 700+ documentaries on memory sticks, and we can pick and choose from there. In exchange, the students agreed to always bring their books and homework and participate in class from beginning to end. It has mixed results so far: students have indeed brought their books - when they have shown up. I get lots of promises (I will never be late again, blah blah), and excuses (I had to pick up my diabetic parents at the airport who just arrived from Bahrain), end result: not living up to their committments. Patience, grasshopper, patience.

As well, I had recieved a complaint from another teacher, over what I feel to be a trivial matter. Without getting into details, that complaint wasted the time and efforts of about 6 people before it was thankfully quashed. We had recieved a presentation the day before of the official complaint process, which curiously did not include info about teacher vs teacher procedures.

On a serious and concerning note, though, was a complaint procedure which had gone awry. At the meeting, we were told that teachers would be informed about complaints prior to observations, and process of information and detail sharing would proceed. Later that afternoon, I met with one teacher, who was suddenly confronted two days prior in class by 3 HR staff, who told him on the spot to leave the class. The teacher was shocked, but asked if he could have the request made in writing (to prevent the scenario where he could be accused of leaving his class and relinquishing his duties on his own accord, thus justifying a firing). This was refused, and he was told in front of his students to leave or security and/or police would be called. He subsequently left the class, but was not given any explanation of why this even took place. I hope to recieve some closure over the next few days, and perhaps to hear more details if this scenario is even accurate. This is concerning, however, because it leaves me to wonder on the possible arbitrary nature of HR departmental power: could I be subject to this one day as well?

Finally, another two teachers had a strange encounter with two students while in the bathroom. The teachers had gone into the bathroom stalls, to relieve themselves. Upon exiting the stalls, two students stormed up to them, waggling fingers inches from their nose, telling them they would be reported to the manager and fired. Mystified, but also becoming angry at this insolent treatment, teacher A went to get assistance from a line manager, the other teacher B to stay with the agitated students. The manager came, but by then the students had allegedly pushed teacher B, who was angry and who then said loudly to the approaching manager that these students should be written up etc etc. Unfortunately, the tension escalated into a misunderstanding between teacher B and the manager, without anything being done about the offending students. While this misunderstanding eventually resolved itself, later on as I was with tecaher A, the two students in the original altercation were walking up the stairs. we both asked the students to accompany us to see the manager. The students said very casually they were tired and were going home, and then continued to saunter off, completely ignoring our requests to accompany them to the office. We looked at each other, as we clearly saw our own impotence in the light of this blatant disrespect. But what could we do? There is no leverage, most if not all the managers were already off-campus by then, we did not know their names, and frankly, we felt that little if anything positive would result from this anyway.

That night I went to sleep with a slight headache, and woke up next morning with a sore throat and runny nose.