Hey all,
Thanks for a great class today. I really appreciated hearing
about everyone’s ecosystems and it was fascinating to learn how they have
influenced your core selves. I
think ecological models have a lot to offer in helping us achieve a more
holistic, insightful and multi-dimensional understanding of an individual. It
helps us move away from the “single story” of a person and allows us to understand
what drives this person or how his/her identity has been formed or influenced
by invisible forces (in the sense that Professor Waterston discussed) at every
level of the system (micro, messo, macro).
In
our line of work/study, we are so used to encountering people who are labeled a
certain way: delinquent/sex offender/alcoholic/criminal, as if their psychological
dispositions/behavioral tendencies told us the entire story about them. But now
that we have the tools to move beyond a superficial understanding of a person (with the help of the ecological model), how then can we craft a suitable
response that addresses not just his/her microsystem but other systems beyond that
as well?
To
put things in perspective, the client-to-client work we do at our placements
are at the level of the microsystem. Catering to their immediate needs, we become
a part of their microsystem. But I believe we can all agree: this is not
enough. And I think this is what Hilfiker (whom we encountered a few weeks ago)
was trying to get at: much of our social justice responses are geared at improving
the microsystem, and our efforts are certainly laudable, but can social justice
aspire to more? Can it try to bring about change at the macrosystem? Is that a task
that can even be attempted by well-meaning individuals? How does change happen
at the macro level? Should we pass better laws? Build more equitable
institutions? Where should the will do these things come from? Would inciting
mass awareness of existing inequality and discrimination help shift public
attitudes?
Please
feel free to steer this conversation in whichever direction you please. I look
forward to reading your comments.
Have
a great weekend everyone!
22 comments:
Gina, you raise awesome points here.
For one, I would definitely agree that what we are doing at the micro-level correlates with Hilfiker's argument.Changing thing at the macro-level is different as history has told us. I believe there needs to be numerous changes in the micro, messo, and exo levels before any change could take place on the macrolevel.
As for my placement, I don't believe I have a very big impact on the defendants. I only interview them for 10 minutes. That being said, everyone is an individual and I am sure someone being interviewed for their first arrest will have a greater impact on their microsystem than, say, someone who has been arrested 27 times.
I think this discussion is so interesting because, as we heard in class, everyone has such interesting pasts. I would like to know how our history and micro, messo, and exosystems have impacted our career paths.
gina I really like the questions you posed at the end of your post. I think voting will have little impact on the macro systems, and I also believe that the work we do is at the micro and that that is not enough to make real systematic changes. As I've said before I think micro system adjustments are a "band aid". I've thought a lot about the ways that true social justice can be achieved in America. Most of what I've seen and know about the United States government leads me to believe that no sustainable or genuine change can happen through pushing new policies or legislation through (or pushing to eradicate old legislature that is oppressive). The entire system of United States government is messed up. Many people our age (folks that I've talked to outside of john jay) truly believe that it is hopeless to watch the news or vote because the United States is inevitably headed in the direction of a dictatorship. This is many many people who've said this to me in conversation (it may or may not be relevant to note that most of the people who've said this to me are white). in order to truly eliminate injustice in the US we must "incite mass awareness of existing inequality and discrimination", we must get people passionate about believing in a better world, we must fill them with the hope that only comes when people get together to fight as one.
A client said something to me yesterday that I haven't been able to shake from my mind, she said:
"I have been silenced so many times that I've forgotten my voice"
i think that we are facing a nation, a world, that has been silenced. we have all been told that we need to do x y and z to be in position where we can make real political changes. these barriers can only be overcome as a team, which requires more than micro level changes.
The questions raised by Gina have, in my head, a very circular answer that keeps me from being able to come up with the solution of obtaining at least an improvement to our society. You ask, Gina, whether social justice can aspire to more that merely targeting microsystems. We have agreed in class that for a bigger achievement of social justice we must target structures, legislation, policy,and create wider change. But is this truly possible if we first don't improve the microsystems of the community? How can the lower income communities rise to a relevant position of power to change policies if the public school system is failing? How can a child aspire to be more than a rapper, basketball player, video girl instead of a politician, a policy maker, an organization's director if he/she is bombarded with the media most of the day. How can we truly raise a generation of world changers if their microsystems are so psychologically scarring.
The work we do in our placements doesn't change the world as a whole, but it changes the world for the individual that they help. Even if the change is temporary, we have to aim to build strong, achieving, capable individuals before we expect to change structures. The way to do is to provide more social programs, more help, more leadership, and change will happen.
This is not to say, however, that we can't attempt to change policy and governmental structure simultaneously with individuals, but rather to point out that while we are out there trying to create great change, we must not leave behind those organizations who alter and improve microsystems.
I agree with Bekah. The key is in building passionate communities, passionate individuals. As a result, creating leaders.
Bekah you make an interesting point when you say that we must overcome barriers as a team. Indeed, it cannot only be someone from an oppressed group rallying for social justice but others who are privileged as well need to join in. They need to believe that they are inadvertently witnesses to large-scale inequality and discrimination. There’s this thing called the “Whiteness Project” and some of its findings includes many whites who do not believe there is such a thing as racism and some even believe in reverse racism.
That’s what I understood when you meant by working as a team: everyone needs to be on the same page.
I must admit the ecosystem confuses me a little sometimes so in the interests of clarity, I would like to clarify that microsystem denotes the immediate interactions and relationships we have with our parents/family/peers/school officials, and the macrosystem to be dominant ideology/values/ attitudes in society.
Danyeli you cite a failure of the public school system and bombardment by the media, but those do not belong to the level of the microsystem. Why is the public school system failing? Sadly one reason is that school districts are very much dependent on local taxpayer money and so poor neighborhoods lack the funds to build quality schools. How can we overcome this structural problem? And why does the media bombard us with the wrong messages? That’s the macrosystem (values and attitudes of dominant culture) trickling down to the level of the microsystem.
Let’s take mass incarceration as an example of the macrosytem setting in motion changes that rippled through the other systems. Mass incarceration did not emerge because of a sudden surge in criminality. It emerged from a pernicious mix of racism, ignorance and political short-sightedness in the form of tough-on-crime policies. But we’re still struggling with the effects of mass incarceration today, no matter what we do at the level of the microsystem. The more time I spend at my placement, the more I meet people who are exceedingly dedicated to fighting barriers to employment and education but to little avail.
What if individuals are passionate enough and eager enough to succeed but fail because of where they are born or the color of their skin? What if they're denied positions of leadership because of structural barriers?
Of course, the work we do at our placements certainly do much to assist the individuals who aspire to better lives but I wonder if we would have jobs to do if the macrosystem did a better job at creating an equitable system in the first place.
I was hoping Professor Waterston can explain how structural power (from anthropologist Eric Wolf's short paragraph) and socioeconomic systems like capitalism or neoliberalism play out on the individual levels of Bronfenbrenner's ecological model.
I really enjoyed last class discussion. It was probably my favorite session because of the narrative component. As stated during class there were a lot of recurring themes such as gender roles, immigrants, isolation whether it's in the woods or through a book, and how they have influenced the individuals we are today.
Gina I think you raise a great question, the way I feel in addressing the barriers we first need to understand why and how we view our own Eco system. I've learned that it is easy (at least for someone like me) to say "you are privileged so you NEVER faced any obstacles", now I know that it isn't rue...maybe for some.
At my placement I meet a lot of customers who want to see a change in their lives, especially those with children. They come in everyday take advantages of the resources that FedCap offers just to receive an email that they got the job. It's easy to be discouraged when you are homeless and jobless. There was one young man who being homeless relieved a second interview and shaved receIved free business attire, got the job, then came back to say thank you. This is why I really do appreciate Newhart my placement does for its community.
I agree with what's been said. I think we need passion, determination, motivation, and willingness in individuals that will then trickle out to others to (hopefully) become a social movement. The idea that you need privileged people to really make a movement work really bothers me though. I understand that a White Anglo Saxon Protestant man will undoubtedly be important in advocacy work such as cleaning up the criminal justice system but doesn't that perpetuate and reiterate the idea that marginalized populations really have no voice, or at least, that their voice isn't enough to bring forth social change.
This is the same rhetoric that assumes that advocates want reform as opposed to radical and revolutionary change. Personally, I think that reforms still manage to maintain to different extents depending on the situation the status quo and the same vectors of oppression still factor in to benefit or place at a disadvantage... "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"
I also think that that change starts individually. I think this is something that goes from micro to macro- finally and hopefully- resulting in change. It's something that expands and spreads.
In my placement I think we do a ton of work on a micro level. The staff is conscious of the "real" world and when the students write things for outside opportunities they blatantly tell students not to use "CASES" because if googled by the person looking at the application he or she may judge them based on the fact that they interacted with the organization. I thought this was pretty bad-ass of the staff. Sad because it says something about the society that we live in but pretty cool of the staff.
I'm upset that I missed last weeks discussion. I feel so left out. I really have been wanting to get to know all of you better, and it seems I missed a big chance. I missed class because of some microsystem issues that led to a Sydney-System Malfunction, a bit of an intellectual and emotional breakdown of which I am now fully recovered.
Jobpath is entirely focused on the micro system, and we influence the individuals microsystem thoroughly, especially in the department I work in. I work in the residence, these individuals he support workers 24/7. I think for the purposes of Jobpath there are no systematic changes that must be made, but for these issues of the criminal justice system macro-level changes are necessary.
Danyeli's question bears repeating: "How can we truly raise a generation of world changers if their microsystems are so psychologically scarring"? I think this is a wonderful question to consider alongside your sobering assessments of band aids/ micro-level impact. Systemic change will still happen because of individuals (until robots take over the world). We can't focus on individuals exclusive of their other eco-systems, but we need to reach people and, as Monica suggests, most of your agencies are part of that project.
A note on Gina's point about education spending. Spending per pupil can sometimes be more in worse-performing districts than in higher-performing districts. This always puzzles me, but it is something that eco-system theory helps to shed light on. $ is important for physical plant, teacher salaries, food programs, books and technology, enrichment programs, etc. But readiness to learn is impacted by more than these things -- and in poorer districts the meso contains that struggle to utilize the resources that are there. It is easier for politicians to focus on the numbers (the $ per pupil) than on the relationships between the various systems that impact the individual.
A quick question for Sydney since she and I commented simultaneously and I missed her comment: how might your JobPath clients' lives be different if our special education system were different? Are there early intervention programs that could help them be more independent now? Is that a corollary to Gina's question that if certain things were addressed before criminal justice system involvement, our agencies might not be necessary?
With regards to Danyeli's question of "How can we truly raise a generation of world changers if their microsystems are so psychologically scarring?", I believe that microsystems tend to be psychologically scaring because of macro-level problems: like income inequality, punitive justice system, inefficient foster care system, failing public education system etc. Going back to the culture of poverty discussion, we identified structural barriers like capitalism and racism that perpetuate the intergenerational cycle of poverty. When people are unemployed, uninsured, and live in socially and economically impoverished communities, crime and neglect tend to thrive.
When people have a secure job, when they don't have to worry about putting food on the table, when they have confidence in the school system to educate their children, their microsystems improve.
Dear All,
I apologize for my late response. Speaking the language of our two last classes, I was trying to succeed within my mesosystem (work) in order to fulfill my needs on microlevel:)
Following the discussion, I would totally agree with Beka's point about the American government. The U.S. Constitution is built on ideas of discrimination and inequality. Over time, many amendments were implemented in order to "make it up". However, the strongest power of states is something that should be considered. Cyntoia was not given the second chance just because she faced incredibly hard laws of the state and the lack of professional support.
Lauren's point seems to be questionable to me. I do not think that we are able to change a lot on our micro-and mesolevels without making changes on macrolevel. Life of any of us is influenced by the government ("invisible forces"). Going back to the stories of Kevin, Monica, Arturo, and myself, I can not help but wonder how different our lives can be if the system of government would look different. I might never leave my country if not the collapse of the Soviet Union and the social and economic crisis following that collapse. Monica's mother would never be politically active if there is no oppressive regime in Colombia. Etc....
Family is very influenced by the government in terms of support. Stigma is also being placed on some people because of governmental issues. Many African-Americans would never have been discriminated if not the structure of American society that embedded the special attitude towards them.
How can we change it? In my view, the only way is to have more people in governmental institutions who would be willing to do so. As it was raised during the class, it is all about money. If you want the proof, please read the book of M. Alexander "The New Jim Crow".
Remember how difficult it was for Herb Sturz to pass some of his projects. I agree with Danyeli that socially active people might be intimidated in some way by the governmental control. However, the only way to achieve social justice is to start with a small project targeting a specific problem, and inspire people to do the same.
Gina: Thank you for stimulating an amazing conversation, and thank you for posing a specific question to me.
Since this is a blog post and not a place to write a whole lot, I’ll just say this:
These words, phrases, and concepts (micro, macro; structural power, power as
an attribute of the person, power “as the ability of an ego to impose its will on an alter, in social action, in interpersonal relations,” and “[tactical or organizational] power that controls the settings in which people may show forth their potentialities and interact with others”) are just that—phrases and words that are trying to capture what is really a complex, interweaving reality.
The individual is not an island unto herself/himself (even if we do receive the political-cultural message that everyone can lift themselves up if they wanted to, that every individual has complete power and potency). In reality, none of us can do anything without others and without being attached to entities larger than ourselves (families, neighborhoods, institutions, etc.). At the level of the individual (micro-level), “will/free will”—the ability to act or make choices—is in play, BUT for the most part, those individuals do not create the options from which they make “choices.” At the level of interpersonal relations (also micro level), there are power dynamics. I am in relationship with others and can exert “power” over them (get them to do what I want them to do). These dynamics happen in settings, on a “stage” (think of life like a theater stage—the stage is constructed, and the actors enter into the pre-constructed stage) that we didn’t entirely create either. Organizational power has to do with those settings in which people’s lives get played out. There are many “theatrical” stages in life—the family as an institution is a stage, the schools are on the stage that is the system of education, the marketplace, the social service agencies. To me, this is the “meso” level. For me, the macro level has to do with the structures of the systems that are operationalized at the level of the institution. Our economic system, or example, is at the macro level, operationalized at the “meso” level as the marketplace (where by the way, the structural aspects are so often difficult to SEE, even though we THINK “structure” begins and ends at the level of the marketplace). The macro level shapes the field of play. It determines the “stage” on which lives unfold. It frames the possibilities and the impossibilities. If the stage is constructed in a certain way, certain things are likely to occur or more likely to occur than are other things. If it’s constructed in a different way, other things are likely or more likely to occur. The invisible hand of “structure” shapes that “likelihood.” I’m not sure how else to put it.
I will add that these words, phrases and concepts are always incomplete or inadequate to the task of “explaining” how all this works BECAUSE, how it all works is a process, a give-and-take, one thing depends on another and the other things depends on that one thing. It is a dynamic. It is like a dance, weaving in and out, influencing and shaping. I do think the macro, “structural” level is “determining” in the sense that it shapes so much of the action that unfolds, even though there are spaces—there is room—within the structure to resist, go around, go against, dodge, break down, etc. bits of the structure.
I wish we could talk this out because I need the give and take of the discussion.
So I’ll end here.
Sorry for coming in late.
Hey Gina I think you definitely raised some important points that relates to the principle that we believe in. In this post, I will attempt to answer the question that you asked:
How does change happen at the macro level? Should we pass better laws? Build more equitable institutions? Where should the will do these things come from? Would inciting mass awareness of existing inequality and discrimination help shift public attitudes?
I am sure that when we all did our ecological model tree, we all realized that the micro stood as if not the most important perhaps the most influential in our life. In my opinion, before implementing change at the macro level, it has to happen first at the micro level. Given that, the micro level stands as the nucleus of every individual’s behavior.
In regards to passing laws, I believe that legislation does not really change individual. For instance, we have plenty of legislation that prohibits criminal behaviors by imposing harsh sentence on those who commits crimes and yet we still have more crimes happening.
As for inciting mass awareness, it think this is definitely a good part of the solution. Since, we are in the 21st century, it’s almost impossible for one to live in his own world without outside contact. Most of our clients at Common Justice, are from neighborhoods that we would consider to be part of the culture of poverty. Their micro and macro layers are influenced by factors that awe would consider negative in the making of an individual. The question now is, how do we go about changing them to fit society’s needs and make them valuable members?
Of course social justice will be attain if we work collectively. However, as we work with clients in our agencies we should make sure that our clients are learning about responsibility and they are understanding the mechanism that society is being ran by. And since youth of color are the most affected by this culture of poverty, they need to undergo several stages before attaining social justice.
Guys I'm so upset! This is my second time typing all of this...My computer refreshed and I lost it all the first time! I think it was better the first time too....
I was reading back through to see if something might spark my interest before I told you guys about my experience today and I'm glad I di. I am excited to see Professor Reitz question. She maybe psychic.
I just (well an hour ago when i wrote this the first time) finished doing my work for my placement. The individual I am working with on Cultural and Diversity issues has already started resisting working with me. I have been having issues with her not showing or coming to our sessions very late. So today instead of trying to make her go somewhere and do something in the community, we made her ecosystem in relation to her opinions and the way she treats other people. It was SOOOOOOO insightful (Yes, that is a very unprofessional way of writing, but that is how insightful it was). I finally have been able to pinpoint a place to start with this project. Before now I was really just shooting in the dark. I wish we had done this assignment first, because it changes how I look at all of the assignments we did up until now. I definitely did not scratch the surface of what and who influences her and how, she wasn't even very forthcoming. She was purposely vague and tactfully changes subjects. She obviously wanted to hide things or avoid too much introspection. However, the more questions I asked and the more she talked some major issues popped up. WHile her guard was down she made really insightful comments. I also got a deeper understanding about what she really understood, how she understood and why she held certain beliefs. It was fantastic.
There are many macrosystem causes to the issues that the disabled population faces.New equal opportunity laws and stricter regulations on service and care of people with disabilities have "fixed' the stigma and neglect that people with disabilities were forced upon in the past. Unlike many of the civil movements the government supported, it is actually serious and attentive to this problem. These laws are actually enforced. In addition, while aide to all other populations are being cut the support and aide given to the disabled community is only increasing. The problem is that the average person, employer, teacher, parent, etc. still follows the negative (not necessarily hateful) stigma attached to people with disabilities. These societal attitudes may eventual conform to the system changes already in place, but it will take a long time to trickle down from the macro level. The only way to really fix these issues is to change the exo, meso and micro influences that perpetuate the already existing stigma.
In reference to Professor Reitz question, of course there are still issues on the macro level. It can never be perfect. Education is one of the major problems. I have been criticizing the NYC special education system since I moved here. Recently, I have had the pleasure of observing a private special education high school in Manhattan. WHile I still adamantly argue that integrated special education and general education schooling is important, the school I observed was pretty amazing. However, I did speak to some of the teachers and they did confirm my suspicions that the school I had observed, which was created by parents with children involved in Jobpath, was an exception. Other schools were not so good at educating and preparing people with developmental disabilities for the real world. Even the individual I work with for Vera expressed that school did not prepare her for real life. I think Jobpaths job would be easier if the school system was better.
Yay Sydney!!!! I'm so glad the eco-map helped facilitate a more open discussion with the person you're working with at job path. Fantastic. Great discussion Gina! I believe that it's the dynamic interplay between the micro, mezzo, exo, macro and chronic systems that truly affects justice.
For instance drug policy. The US classified drugs as criminal through specific policies that assign sentences to drugs based on arbitrary rationale. The US is one of a few countries that addresses "drugs" through the criminal justice system, instead of, for instance the public health system. Countries that have decriminalized drugs, like Portugal, and focused resources on prevention and treatment have significantly reduced harms of both dealing and using.
US drug policies affect every layer of the eco-system. Black men are disproportionately arrested and incarcerated for small amounts of marijuana-50,000 were arrested last year in nyc. Even though research shows that young white men have a higher percentage of marijuana use.
To address Bekah's points about the macro system in the US, there's exciting work being done to reform and reverse drug laws. The Rockefeller Drig Laws have been reformed. The Brroklyn DA refusies to prosecute small amounts of marijuana possession cases. Medical marijuana passied in NYS.
This is a thrilling time to be at John Jay. The pendulum is shifting away from punitive criminal justice measures and towards coordinated community based approaches to human need. You have the opportunity to envision what this shift should look like! Take the challenge!
Apologies for the typos- chrono-system
Refuses
Passed
I'm writing on a tablet that thinks it knows better than a human...
Hello everybody,
This new tools (the ecological models) can help us to understand better our participants in each of our placements. At CEO, we try to identify and stabilize the participants’ micro systems. Is the participant living in a stable household? Is the participant still hanging out with the same friends? How is the participant relationship with his parole officers? Those are the type of questions we try to answer. The truth is that it is not an easy task to get participants to share, especially since they don’t have a close relationship with the staff members at CEO.
Job coaches and job developers have an overlapping position in the micro and meso systems. For instance, job developers create a relationship with the participants -no all participants attend the program with the intention of being helped-. As part of the participants’ micro system, job coaches and job developers try to help them to understand the services CEO provides and secure some needs such as getting a phone or applying for health care. A good question to have in mine is to what extent does a staff-participant relationship influence the participants?
I believe the interaction between staff and participants' parole officers is considered under the meso level. There are cases in which job coaches have to contact parole officers to let them know whether a participant has been discharged from the program or to recommend a modification of the participant’s curfew. Although I haven’t been able to experience this type of interaction yet, I am wondering how that would be.
I agree with Lauren when she said that there needs to be a lot of changes on the micro, meso, and exo levels before we get to change the macro level. Is it a good initiative to advocate for participants? I still don’t see a clear picture in how do we change society perception towards formerly incarcerated people in a short period of time. The work CEO does have a positive impact on participants’ micro and meso systems but still we need to use the data and successful stories of our participants to keep changing the employers’ perception about formerly incarcerated people.
I absolutely ADORE Kevin's phrase "inciting mass awareness." We need t-shirts, now!
And, yes, Sydney: I am psychic.
Finally, Arturo's first point about "stability" really resonates with me. In trying, like the rest of you, to understand the various relationships between all the different levels of our eco-systems, I keep coming back to the idea of stability (shelter, sustenance, care-giver, legal status) and how essential that is to creating conditions for social justice. Of course, there can be stability without social justice (lots of examples from history), but there can't be social justice without stability. And perhaps this is an answer to Bekah's question about the relevance of working at the micro. As Arturo points out, this is the place where we as individuals feel stability, our first exposure to the possibility of justice.
The work that our agencies do does a great deal to bring a measure of stability to the lives of our clients, to the voiceless (Bekah's client) and the jobless, to those "who want to see a change in their lives" (as Brenda mentioned). In the theater of life where the structures of inequality, oppression and racism loom over many, our agencies provide something a little more than band aids.
I invite you to consider this: our agencies indirectly help counter popular widespread notions in society that stigmatized populations (ex-offenders, substance abusers) are not worth investing in. By taking advantage of the resources our agencies provide, these people go on to improve their lives in significant ways and they become walking, talking testimonies of the power of second chances. I think they are the examples that will in time reduce the stigma that society harbors for them, which in turn could lead to favorable changes at the macro level for such groups of people.
As Professor Rose said, it is indeed the dynamic interplay that can generate possibilities for social justice and Professor Waterston reminds us that the stages upon which our lives play out at the different levels are shaped to a large extent by macrosystem forces. I love that Professor Reitz talks about stability, I am reminded of something writer David Brooks wrote a while ago that I think really captures the importance of the interaction between the micro and macro systems:
"Children need emotional and physical order so they can go off and explore. A parent’s main job is to provide daily predictability and emotional security.
Communities need order to thrive and cooperate since where there is chaos and disorder there is distrust and withdrawal. The main job of local leaders is to provide the basic infrastructure of security: roads, police, honest judges and orderly schools"
Post a Comment