The Complaint Box Versus The Ballot Box

I’m excited to introduce our  first guest blogger at Learn[ed]Leadership.  Patrick Love is a upper school counselor at Brent International School in the Philippines.  In addition to college guidance and counseling services, Patrick has a real passion on the role of school counselors as leaders, and has been embodying that through designing a school wide social and emotional counseling  program and championing data driven change.  Outside of school Patrick is a talented and accomplished travel  photographer who’s been published in various national and international publications (view his work at patricklovephotography.com).

The Complaint Box Versus The Ballot Box

By Patrick Love

Teaching our students to solve problems and find solutions is one of the overarching goals of education.  However, most individuals and schools out there have room to improve in this category.  What can leaders in education do to improve their problem solving skills?  Surprisingly, the answer may lie with our students.

Solving problems and working towards school improvement is always a challenge.  As a school counselor, I believe that advocating for others is a key part of my job.  Much of what I do tries to forward the academic, social and emotional development and well being of my students.  Simply put, I want my school to be a great place for students to learn and develop. Of course, I am not alone in this, I work as part of an amazing team.  We have found that almost anything can be fixed or improved upon.  However, success often hinges upon whether the people working together are willing to join together to work on the issue at hand.  This should be no surprise, but it might be surprising just how many people out there do not start with this in mind.

When someone comes to a teacher, counselor or principal with a problem, it usually takes on one of two flavors.  The first one I call the complaint box method.  Like someone dropping a note into a complaint box at a restaurant that says, “I didn’t like the food.”  This is helpful in that it informs others about what they did not like, but usually it leaves out all the information that is necessary for working towards a solution.  These people have usually tried to find a solution on their own, and in failing to do so, want to pass the problem on to someone else.  It also limits the range of possible solutions, because the complainer has not offered to be a part of the solution.  I call the second method the ballot box method.  Someone who votes has agreed to be a part of the governing process.  They know that they will have to work hard towards certain goals, and even agree to pay money (taxes) to support solutions to problems.  Those who use this method understand that they are interacting with another problem solver.  They must be constructive and solution oriented.  Secondly, they understand that they are probably a part of the solution, and they are willing to collaborate.  People who do this invest themselves in the organization and the relationships that make it.  They can problem solve on their own, but they also trust their team, and work well with them.

As we work on teaching students to be problem solvers and solution finders, and as we work to improve ourselves, I believe that leaders would do well to take a closer look at the work of Zoe Weil, co-founder and president of the Institute for Humane Education (www.HumaneEducation.org).  In her TEDx talk, The World Becomes What You Teach, she outlines an educational system that teaches students how to focus on the legitimate needs that people have, and the resources and community systems that are necessary to fulfill those needs.  She teaches students to put their academic learning into the service of creating new ways to meet basic human needs.   She stresses that the best solutions are the ones that are as humane, sustainable, peaceful and just as possible.  Instead of having students on debate teams, who are trained to take complex issues, turn them into either/or statements and argue only one side, Weil proposes that we have solutionary teams.  Solutionary teams would compete against other teams to create the most viable, cost effective, innovative solutions for issues ranging from difficulties at school, in the work place and even on global levels.  To see just how realistic and successful their solutions could be, students compete with others to find the best solution, the teams would then join with others and work to implement the best solutions.  What she is suggesting is that students actually practice filling up ballot boxes, instead of filling up complaint boxes.

Educational leaders are finding this idea to be both exciting and hopeful.  Many of us want to work in schools with curriculums that build real-world skills and abilities, and benefit the community.  A great deal of workplace satisfaction and fulfillment is found when we experience students developing and showcasing their amazing abilities, and positively impacting the world around them.  That is all great for educators, students and the community, but what will be the outcome when our students are in the workforce?  Students who graduate from a school that supports this type of curriculum, will probably go on to do the things that our current students are already doing.  Weil believes that the only difference would be that these students would perceive themselves as solutionaries.   They would know that it was their responsibility to ensure that the systems within their profession were productive and sustainable.  Here is where we can learn with our students, and at the same time learn from our students.  Educational leaders who teach solutionaries, not just with lessons, but by embodying it in the workplace, will not only create a more positive school environment and experience students in more satisfying ways, they will also create more dynamic and entrepreneurial students.  In the end, democracy wins.