Lynn Barendsen

Thanksgiving Resources

The holiday season is a time of reflection for many.  As we prepare to gather (or not gather) with family and friends, many of us are asking, where are we as compared to where we were last year at this time?  Things certainly aren’t back to “normal,” but for some, the situation is much improved as compared to Thanksgiving 2020.  How we respond to this question is dependent upon so many factors: how we’ve experienced the pandemic, where we are in the country, our financial situation, our political, social and cultural beliefs, and our values.  In many cases, personal perspectives may be different from those of our family and friends, and these differences may indeed come to a head over Thanksgiving dinner.  Some are asking, is it safe (link) to gather?  Others are wondering, how can we reinvent this holiday (link) and honor historical truths?  Meanwhile, still others are wondering how to best budget (link) for the holiday during a time of economic hardship.

With that in mind, we thought we’d share some resources that might help:

  1. Arguments happen. The Better Arguments Project (link) tells us not to avoid them and asserts that “we don’t need fewer arguments, we just need better ones.” Explore their methods here (link).

  2. Perhaps the disagreements have to do with items in the news, and trying to discern facts from fiction. You might try using this (link) thinking routine from our colleagues at Project Zero.

  3. Try one of our Good Project frameworks (like the rings of responsibility (link)) to unpack differences and try to find points of commonality.  For an example, here’s (link) how TGP team member Shelby Clark used an exercise about values (link) in thinking about familial differences at this time last year.  

  4. The Family Dinner Project (link) offers resources, advice, discussion starters and games to help approach the “new normal” of Thanksgiving gatherings.

Are there resources you’ve found especially helpful in facing some of these challenges, either in your classrooms or at your tables?  Share them in the comments below!

Questioning Identity and Discrimination with GCI’s Newest Ambassadors

by Lynn Barendsen

In late July, I led a virtual Good Project session for 36 high school students from around the world, participants in the Global Citizens Initiative LEAD Challenge (link here). These students represented 30 different cultural heritages, spoke 28 languages, attended 30 schools, and hailed from 14 different countries. To say it was a diverse group is a bit of an understatement.

The LEAD Challenge Program focused on Leadership, Ethics, Advocacy and Design Thinking, and over the course of one week, students gathered virtually to learn skills and collaborate on an advocacy campaign for a nonprofit organization, APOPO (link here), which fights tuberculosis and works to uncover landmines. Attending sessions with Teaching Assistants, led by experts in a variety of fields, and working in small groups, they were asked to apply their learnings to a real world challenge. Following the program, students are then encouraged to bring what they’ve learned back to their home communities and work to solve local issues of their choosing.

This was the first year for this program, and GCI’s online debut, designed in part in an effort to continue its efforts to build community and global connection in spite of the challenges of the global pandemic. The Good Project team has attended the GCI Summit (an in-person opportunity) for numerous years, both in Cambridge and in Tokyo, so we are familiar with its mission and its methods.

During my short hour with this international group, I offered a brief history of The Good Project and the nature of our research, but we spent the bulk of our time engaged with an ethical dilemma about discrimination (link here). In this dilemma, Elena, a high school student, who immigrated with her family from Mexico at a young age, witnesses discrimination towards her father and others. She wonders if she should hide her ethnicity as she applies for internships in order to eliminate the possibility that she might receive similar treatment at the hands of hiring managers. Ultimately she decides to represent herself truthfully. In small breakout groups, students used a “See, Think, Wonder” thinking routine to further consider Elena’s situation (link here). The question “What do you see?” asked students to focus on and unpack the information and the facts of the story. “What do you think?” asked them to consider Elena’s decision and what they might have done if they faced similar challenges. Finally, “What do you wonder?” asked more far-reaching questions, including additional questions about the dilemma itself and about good work in general.

The breakout groups outlined the relevant information about Elena’s situation thoughtfully. Her choice was described as a decision between hiding her Hispanic heritage or being true to herself. Some pointed out that she assumed that she would be subject to discrimination because of her ethnicity, while others pointed to the existence of discrimination itself as fact. Calling out the inherent injustice of discrimination, one student pointed out that race and ethnicity are not equal to one’s abilities. 

Asked to consider what these facts made them think, students identified with Elena in multiple ways. They asserted that she is at an age where she will begin to question “everything,” and if she is finding herself ready to compromise her values, she should perhaps also ask herself why she is working in the first place, questioning “Is it for money, or for something else?” Some recognized that she and her family might be struggling financially, and if this were the case, some students suggested that hiding her identity might be the more prudent choice. Asserting that the inherent inequities in society made the situation difficult, one student wrote, “In my opinion either option is commendable because they both have their hardships.” Although most students were behind Elena’s decision to be true to herself, several explained that they would understand if she felt she needed to make a different choice.

Finally, asked to consider what Elena’s choice made them wonder, the breakout groups had a number of thought-provoking questions. Not surprisingly, with such an action-minded group, some turned to the possible solutions, wondering “what can companies do to eliminate discriminatory hiring practices” and what steps should be taken to “become inclusive enough so people will not be put in a situation like this?” Some responses asked straightforward, important questions, including “Why are managers still in charge if they are discriminatory?” and “What percentage of hiring managers are white?” Other students became more philosophical in their musings. For example, one participant explained that the word “good” is subjective, and wondered if there are “any universal moral values that hold true at all times?” Another probing question asked, “What makes certain societies give superiority to specific races/ethnicities?” Finally, one student asked, “To what extent can you break technical/legal rules for the sake of remaining on the moral high ground?”

Although our conversation together was brief, it was clear that the discussion prompted some important reflection. Participants recognized that experiences like Elena’s “have a larger impact on our personal view of ourselves and our families.” At the same time, they also questioned the nature of this impact, asking, “Should marginalized people be burdened with the task of being ‘brave’ and ensuring respect for their community? Is that a burden at all? What do we owe to each other and ourselves?”

Using this dilemma as the basis of our discussion, I also encouraged the students to consider larger questions about the nature of good work, its relevance in their daily lives, and how they might learn to reflect upon good work on a regular basis.

The challenges of online gatherings are by now way too familiar to educators, and in particular, the issues of community building across such a diverse group are especially complicated. Our brief hour only scratched the surface, but during that time the group was engaged and shared a passion about the topics we discussed. I look forward to hearing about what comes next for this idealistic and talented group.

Wrestling with Good Citizenship

by Lynn Barendsen

Recently, I had the privilege to gather (virtually) with the Civic Collaboratory (link), a national group of civic and social innovators.  We represent a variety of domains (education, advocacy, the arts, technology and more) and are positioned across the political spectrum.  Many of us spend our days grappling with the tough questions of our day: how do we go about bridging the gaps that divide our country; what is the place of civic dialogue and social cohesion when we believe there are still deep injustices to rectify; how can we develop a shared language when we have fundamentally different truths?

I don’t have all the answers to these difficult questions, but I firmly believe we need to keep wrestling with our responses. In that spirit, I wanted to highlight some important initiatives and opportunities

  • Read Pearce Goodwin’s editorial (link) to learn more about a two-day event creating thousands of conversations between Americans with differing opinions.  The initiative is called “America Talks” and you can sign up yourself to participate by clicking here.

  • Watch the new documentary Our Towns (link), based on James and Deborah Fallows’ book, Our Towns:  100,000 Mile Journey into the Heart of America to learn about hundreds of local restorative initiatives around the country.  Both the documentary and the book illustrate how community and the building of a common language can help us to navigate our differences.

  • And if you haven’t already, please have a look at our recent blog series on Good Citizenship by clicking the button below:



Good Citizenship: A Series - Part 2

Good Person, Good Worker, Good Citizen

By Lynn Barendsen 

At The Good Project, our primary focus over the past two and a half decades has been on understanding the nature of “work,” identifying the features of good work across the  professions, and developing frameworks, tools, and resources to help nurture good workers and good work.

However, we have not been concerned solely with the individual in the workplace. Although “work” has been our research focus, we recognize that individuals are not only workers. We all play other roles outside of work environments; such roles often require responsibilities to our families and friends, to our neighbors, to society, and to the wider world. In addition to being a good worker, what does it mean to be a good person and a good citizen?

To unpack these questions, it’s helpful to think about two concepts: neighborly morality and ethics of roles.

First, what does it mean to be a good person? This is where the concept of neighborly morality is useful. We often describe neighborly morality as the Golden Rule: treating others in the way that you yourself would like to be treated. We notice ‘good people” in the grocery store (offering to help others carry packages), in our neighborhoods (shoveling walks for elderly neighbors), or on the road (waving others into lines of waiting traffic). Good people think the consequences of their actions upon other—especially those whom they encounter in daily life. 

A good worker is judged on work performed—and here we can make use of the concept of ethics of roles: the standards by which different professions measure their workers. Is it of high quality in terms of the standards of that particular workplace? Additionally, is the work ethical, taking into account the particular ethical standards of that workplace or profession? To be sure, not all workers are subject to the equivalent of a Hippocratic oath; nonetheless, workers are (or should be!) attuned to the ethical implications of their work or an ethical code which might include “doing no harm” or taking responsibility for one’s efforts. And does the worker find meaning in work? To be clear, a good worker may not feel excellent, ethical, and engaged every single day; but in general, a “good” worker strives to meet each of these criteria to the best of his/her ability.

As we consider good citizenship, it might be argued that neighborly morality and ethics of roles both come into play. Think “good person” with a civic lens: good neighbors consider their responsibilities to their neighborhood and treat others as they themselves would like to be treated. These are the elements of neighborly morality.

However, the ethics of the role of citizen are also relevant, involving knowing the expectations of a citizen in one’s community, region, or nation. In the US, for example, do individuals vote, and when they do so, are they well informed about candidates and questions on the ballot? Do they consider their responsibilities as citizens and recognize the impact of their civic actions (or lack thereof)? And finally, are they engaged—paying attention, educating themselves about current issues, and taking action, as appropriate? Of course, the meaning, rules and values of citizenship may vary from place to place. Nonetheless, the 3 Es constitute a useful starting point for considering how individuals understand their civic duties.

Recently, there has been a resurgence of attention to civics education—overdue, in my opinion, and vitally important. At The Good Project, we embrace an approach that guides not only the citizen, but also the person and the worker, by encouraging responsibility in all the spheres of our lives. We advocate a sense of neighborly morality, acknowledging that our “neighbors” are now global as well as local.

 The rules governing many spheres of work are also changing—new roles are being created (for example, in the digital realm), and old ones are disappearing (in many white collar positions). Alas, we can’t always rely only on overly politicized educational systems to offer guidance about standards for good work. Across many communities and institutions, including in educational systems, responsible adults need to model appropriate behaviors and attitudes. Only in that way can we hope to have members of the emerging generation accept their responsibilities in all they do, as persons, as workers, and as citizens.

Teaching Good Work in the Classroom

by Lynn Barendsen

In late October, Shelby Clark and I co-taught two sessions of an online course titled Teaching Good Work in the Classroom. Each two-hour course was designed to offer educators an introduction to materials from The Good Project for classroom use. The syllabus included a brief overview of our research, an introduction to a Good Work activity and dilemma, and an overview of the Good Project Resource Center. Participants included classroom teachers and school heads from public and private schools from around the U.S., as well as attendees from Australia, Brazil, Hong Kong, Italy, Morocco, the Netherlands, Panama, Poland, and Singapore. 

The Good Work activity introduced during these sessions asked participants to think of someone they consider to be a “Model Good Worker.” In small groups, educators considered the qualities or attributes that might be used to describe the individuals they had in mind, which included co-workers, family members, and paragons they may have never have met. 

Here are a few sample responses:

  • “Finds purpose in their work. Their work enriches rather than exploits.”

  • “Shares expertise freely with humility.”

  • “Is curious, asks clarifying questions to understand, not convince.”

  • “Is reflective and invested.”

  • “An advocate for others, they stand up for what is right.”

  • “Treating all people with dignity, being unafraid to speak out against injustices.”

Many of these responses  are ones we have heard in previous sessions; for example, educators used words such dedicated, honest, passionate, persistent, and fair. In addition, however, we noted  a social justice and advocacy focus present in some of the above comments that is less typical of our previous Good Work sessions. Although just one indication, participants’ comments were, not surprisingly, reflective about both the current political climate and the racial justice movement (internationally as well as within the U.S.).

During this course, educators also had the opportunity to consider an ethical dilemma—one that emerged from one of our research subjects.. This conundrum describes a high school science student who fabricated how she gathered her data because she believed it would give her a better chance at winning a prestigious prize. In small group discussions, participants discussed the dilemma using a “See, Think, Wonder” thinking routine. 

In writing about what they “saw” in this dilemma, some participants wrote that they recognized that this student had worked hard, and they empathized with her situation; others saw that she was hiding the truth; a number saw that she asserted that she had strong values. Many explained that they thought the student believed she was justified in her actions, and some explained that they had been in similar situations with their own students.  When asked what this dilemma made them “wonder,” educators asked what they might say if they were really in the student’s or her teacher’s shoes. Additionally, some wondered about the consequences of having people in powerful roles who are continuing to deviate away from the rules; yet others wondered about issues of equity and access in education. Although these last two considerations have come up in previous discussions about good work, they are not “typical” and have not come up in previous discussions of this particular dilemma.

This session felt notably different than other Good Project workshops I’ve led. Certainly, we were online rather than in person, but that is the nature of most of our work these days.  Educators are experiencing tremendous pressure: within the U.S. and beyond, their work is being viewed under a microscope, and they are constantly asked to adapt and change their plans at a moment’s notice. I, for one, anticipated that participants might be exhausted and negative. Instead, both groups were fully engaged, looking for new ideas, and seemed to enjoy the collegiality of working with like-minded peers—most of whom were unknown to them and may have come distant societies.. As described above, our shared conversation about what is and isn’t “good work” was impacted and deepened by #BLM and the pandemic.

We have also created an asynchronous version of the course, which we have posted in the Good Project Resource Center. Depending on what we hear from educators and researchers, we anticipate creating additional webinars in the future. These might include: introductions to Good Work dilemmas and activities for classroom use with different age groups; an overview of the Good Work lesson plans and suggestions for implementation;, professional development activities for teams of educators or other workers, and more. 

Please have a look and let us know about your interests and needs. We welcome your feedback.