One of the most influential courses that I ever took in college was one called “Cultures of Learning.” This was the first time in my life where I was invited (by my professor, mind you) to question the authority of a teacher in the classroom. Why was I unquestioningly giving up my autonomy to someone who supposedly holds more knowledge, wisdom, and power? Why is the teacher the all-knowing source in the room? Is their knowledge inherently more valuable than the lived experience of their students? Of course this line of questioning rippled into all other areas of my life, shining a spotlight on how my personal experience within school essentially conditioned me to believe that I did not hold the “knowledge power” whenever I step foot into a classroom. This was around the time when TED talks were becoming more widely publicized and accessible, allowing me to encounter the work and ideas of Sir Ken Robinson; in particular, his presentation that centered around the question Do Schools Kill Creativity?. As I watched this talk I found myself reflecting on my own personal experience as a creative, “out of the box” individual surviving a system that tried to squander this aspect of myself. This encounter with my professor and this TED talk directed me on a path of critical engagement with educational theory and practice.
Some years later I stumbled across another one of his talks, this time accompanied by some incredible graphic recording, Changing Education Paradigms. One particular jaw-dropping moment that I recall from watching these for the first time was when he mentions how the contemporary models for the public school system are steeped in ideas from a time long ago: 1) a model for intelligence as birthed in the Enlightenment period, and 2) an industrial model for moving students through, in an assembly line fashion, through the school system. We funnel through a series of classes, organized by age group, until we are thrown off the assembly line into working use.
Chewing on this sudden realization caused a flurry of reflections on how this model of schooling deeply influences our ability to have healthy intergenerational conversations. Think about it. Outside of the home and what our own families model for is, most of the intergenerational interactions that we have during our development years are ones where older adults (teachers, school administrators, guidance counselors) hold most of the power and authority over the students. We’re taught to not talk back, to not challenge the word or a decision by someone our senior. Which begs the question, how does this ultimately influence how we interact with others once we’ve stepped out of the school system and into adulthood? How does this early conditioning affect our behavior and interactions within the workplace?
Most of my professional life has been spent in administration contexts within higher education, so I can only speak from my own experience. That being said, I have a feeling that the same observations could be made in any number of organizations. As one moves up the organizational hierarchy, more often than not you will find a general increase in age of those who hold positions of power. From our school years (or at least mine…), we’re socially influenced and encouraged not to challenge those who have seniority, whether that be in a position up the organizational ladder, or those who have more years under their belt. When a meeting is called with an organizational cross section of employees, you can feel the energy shift when older folks step into a room. I personally notice that I become more docile and hold my energy back, a pattern that was lived out throughout my experience in public school. I don’t like the way this feels at all; when I leave the room I immediately feel “icky,” as if I just compromised myself in some way. Sometimes I don’t know why I or my colleagues act this way. I can’t help but deduce that this is a behavioral pattern that has been imprinted on us since our early days at school, when the older teacher held all the power over the students.
This makes me wonder, what would it look like if were taught, from a young age, to be exposed to a number of different types of intergeneral relationships. In what ways would workplace dynamics and organizational hierarchies shift?
Which leads me to introduce this video as perhaps a means to illustrate what I’m talking about.
There are very few youtube channels that I follow obsessively, with almost every uploaded video watched. Cut is one of them. Here I go on a slight tangent about their work and why I admire it, but I promise I will meander back to the topic at hand.
The first Cut video I ever watched of theirs was “Grandmas Smoking Weed for the First Time.” This was at the time of recreational cannabis legalization in Washington and Colorado back in 2013, and I thought this video was absolute genius. I had never seen anything like it. The title is self-explanatory in terms of the content you’d expect to find; young tech-savvy producers introducing different methods of cannabis consumption to three ladies who look like they could be your great aunt or grandma; I mean, it’s adorable. The video follows these three brave individuals through their first journey of getting high, during which they are asked questions periodically as they play Cards Against Humanity, nobble down some munchies, and compare notes on their life experience, including why they never decided to smoke pot in the first place.
At first glance you might think that this video is kitchey, something made to grab as many viewers as possible at a time of extreme cannabis commodification. But what struck me, and has since with other Cut videos, is the spark of intergenerational connection that allows viewers to consider different perspectives based on lived experience. Ageism seemed to collapse in these four minutes.
Cut has since meandered on a long journey exploring different types of content to its now 9 million (and counting) followers. While some series can be a bit flashy, I admire their ability to develop provocative content, which, in my view, challenges viewers to think critically about our own judgements and assumptions about others. They do this by putting folks in situations that encourages them to lean out of their comfort zones. Taboos are embraced, stereotypes are openly shared and then smashed to oblivion, lines of social formalities are poked and played with.
Which brings me to the video I wanted to talk about: a new-ish released video, “Rebrand Me, A Makeover Show.” Much like a lot of their other videos, the title is self explanatory for the content that follows. In this particular video, an older gentleman who, after years of being married to a woman, came out as gay, willingly subjects himself to a crew of younger folks to give him a makeover, including his clothes, composing a custom theme song, making a website, and much more. Not only does he have a team coaching him in all of these aspects, but there is also a focus group that comments on his change throughout the makeover process.
Now, I can’t lie and say that the title of the video didn’t make me cringe. It did. Approaching a person with a strategy that you would bring to a business is something that never settles well with me. Though I decided to watch it anyway, because if I’ve learned anything from watching Cut videos, including this series by one of the team members who holds a PhD in Visual Anthropology, I would have to assume that they are perfectly aware of the limits and ideas being tested.
What struck me about this video is not so much the transformation of this individual, but the intergenerational connection that happens throughout. As someone writing from their lived experience as a nonbinary person, watching someone more advanced in their years accept, step into, and explore their “out” identity as a gay man, I have to admit it drew tears. I challenge you to watch it without shedding one.
I bring this video in as an illustration of my point that I started to make above, about intergenerational connection. Here you have a man who has most likely been in the closet his entire life, grown up in a time of extreme social stigma (it’s still prevalent, but you know, it was worse), limited LGBTQ rights; I can only imagine the emotional turmoil he must have been through to get to this point of accepting his own identity. It shows itself from time to time as well as he timidly recounts his journey.
And yet, here he is, guided by warm, accepting, and encouraging millennials. It’s beautiful. What’s especially heart warming are the words of the focus group towards the end of the video. This man reports that he has never heard words of praise and admiration from his peers to the degree that these youth had shared.
So. Going back to models of intergenerational relationships as presented in public schools. Because we are educated in a way that keeps us with our peer groups, how does this prevent us from sharing learning moments with others who may be in a different age category? As illustrated by the video, how many of us miss out on creating meaningful life-to-life connections simply because of the presence of age hierarchy? How many of us actively avoid interacting with folks in other generations, simply because the main model of this interaction was one in which someone older held unquestionable authority? To flip the generational direction, how do these questions translate to how we approach learning from children?
To me, this video demonstrates how rich and meaningful these intergenerational interactions can be. How much can be learned. How lived experience and perspective can vary immensely, and how surprising and exciting it can be to learn about these aspects of ourselves.
So I bring this train of thought and line of questioning to the workplace. Using the little thought-provoking nuggets of Sir Ken Robinson’s TEdtalks and the Cut video as a contextual backdrop, let’s extend the line of questioning to how our workplaces may look differently if we were educated differently about power, age, and authority? What kind of workplace relationships could be forged? What explosion of ideas would emerge from a dynamic, open exchange of ideas and experiences between folks of different generations?
I don’t necessarily have a concrete answer to any of these questions, but they certainly excite me. Given the recent rise in research about diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts, we know that diversity boosts creativity and innovation. Diversity, of course, includes aspects of race, gender, sexual orientation, and cultural identity, and it also includes age. This gives us something to chew on when thinking about our places of work.
So next time you walk into a room, whether at work or elsewhere, take note of the age range within the room. And for fellow millennials, rather than rolling our eyes when we see grey hair and dismiss someone as a “boomer,” remember the Cut video. Let’s challenge our conflating ideas of authority and age, which were drilled into us in public school (this applies to those older than us and those younger than us.) Let’s instead imagine what potential magic can emerge from a heart-centered intergenerational exchange.
Comments