Both Scholarly and Religious: Dallin H. Oaks

Dallin H. Oaks served as the President of BYU (Brigham Young University) from 1971-1980. From 1980 to 1984 he served as a Utah Supreme Court Justice and was closely considered by the Reagan administration in 1981 to be a nominee for the Supreme Court Justice. On April 7, 1984 Oaks was sustained as a member of the Quorum of the Twelve of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints which is a life long calling.


Obviously Dallin H. Oaks is not only a well-educated and scholarly man of high distinction, but he is also a deeply religious man as well. Therefore, when he speaks, I listen knowing his words convey an extremely important message that I need to apply to my life.


Yesterday as I read his LDS (Latter Day Saint) Conference talk Good, Better, Best given at the October 2007 Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints Conference, I thought of its application to how we serve our diverse learners.

At the beginning of his talk he reminds us that just because something is good is not a sufficient reason to do it. He goes onto say that there are so many good things to do in this world there isn't enough time to do them all. We must give priority to the best of the good.

Elder Oaks tells of when he was a youngster how they used the Sears and Roebuck catalog as we use malls and the internet today. In the catalog there were three quality categories for shoes--good, better, and best--with a cost increase as the quality increased. He compared this to choices we have in life. Even though something may cost more (in time, energy, or money), the added cost may be well worth it because of the added value it brings.

This counsel relates to our service to diverse learners in a variety of ways:

First, there are now thousands of people who give speeches, write books, and make videos about what we need to do better serve our diverse learners. The majority of them are good, but we don't have time to respond to them all. We must choose the best from the good. I would define the best as those who are focused on what works either because research and/or experience support their claim.

Second, we must think not only of the good things we can for our diverse learners, but rather the best things. For instance, a good thing is for all educators (teachers and leaders) to become ESL endorsed. A better thing would be to apply what is learned. The best thing would be to make sure that the lives of the students are changed and improved because of the efforts. In other words, rejoicing just because more educators are ESL endorsed is not sufficient.

We move from good to best when our desire to serve our diverse learners is founded in love rather than out of duty or arrogance.

Teaching About Religion Is Critical to Multicultural Education

Teaching about religion is especially critical to multicultural education.

In 1988, a broad coalition of 17 religious and educational organizations published guidelines that distinguish between teaching about religion and religious indoctrination. The guidelines state, in part:

• The school's approach to religion is academic, not devotional.
• The school sponsors study about religion, not the practice of religion.
• The school educates about all religions; it does not promote or denigrate any religion nor does it press for student acceptance of any one religion.

In addition to these religious-liberty clauses, there are also three guiding principles that Charles Haynes calls the civic values at the heart of American citizenship. They are:

RIGHTS: The rights guaranteed by the Constitution are for citizens of all faiths and none.

RESPONSIBILITIES: Religious liberty depends upon a universal responsibility to respect that right or religious liberty for others.

RESPECT: Living with our differences, including religious difference, in a democracy requires a strong commitment to the civic values that enable people with diverse perspectives to treat each other with respect and civility.

When we teach about the many cultures and religions of our nation and the world, we must also simultaneously emphasize our common ground which is the values and responsibilities we share as American citizens.

Reference

Haynes, C. C. (2007). To advance religious freedom, teach about religion. Retrieved from the World Wide web http://www.firstamendmentcenter.org/commentary.aspx?id=19421 on December 17, 2007.

Willing to Dialogue With Those With Whom We Disagree

The work of my good friend, Izzy Kalman, the author of Bullies to Buddies, has done it once again!

I was disturbed by a conversation I had yesterday with a friend. This friend had just been involved in a very hot debate in Utah over vouchers. He shared with me that when he had reached out, more that once, to dialogue with those who had not only attacked his ideas because of their opposing views, but also had attacked his character, his offer to dialogue was either rejected or ignored.

This disturbed me greatly for various reasons, one being that if we as adults can't be role models on how to dialogue with those who disagree with us, how can we expect our young people to learn how to deal with conflict in a civil manner? Looking for answers I went to Izzy's website--www.bullies2buddies.org-- for some counsel. I wasn't disappointed.

At Izzy's website there was a link to another website--www.freedomforum.org. At this site I found "A Statement of Principles" called Religious Liberty, Public Education, and the Future of American Democracy. Although there are seven principles all of which are excellent, there was one, the 7th that particularly fit this situation with my friend.

The 7th principle: CONDUCT OF PUBLIC DISPUTES
Civil debate, the cornerstone of a true democracy, is vital to the success of any effort to improve and reform America's public schools.
Personal attacks, name-calling, ridicule, and similar tactics destroy the fabric of our society and undermine the educational mission of our schools.....Through constructive dialogue we have much to learn from one another.

There are still some lingering questions I am facing this morning: How can we have this happen--especially when efforts to dialogue are rejected and/or ignored? Where do we start?

It could very well be that the answers to these questions lie within the principles of spiritual leadership.