You may have been hearing on the news about Colin Kaepernick, the quarterback for the San Francisco 49ers, sitting or kneeling during the national anthem at football games in which the San Francisco 49ers are playing. I want to talk about this as I think it is relevant to our work here at school—I want to make three points.

Kaepernick has been sitting or kneeling during the national anthem during this pre-game season as a form of protest against police brutality of African Americans. According to his press conferences, his intention is to raise awareness and dialogue about police brutality in the name of the United States; he intends to donate the first $1 million he earns this year to organizations working toward de-escalation practices among the police. He recently announced that he will donate all of the proceeds from the sales of his jerseys.

So, point number one: As a white woman, living with all of the privileges that the light complexion carries with it in the US, I realize that I have always felt somewhat emotional when the national anthem is played or sung at sporting events—it connects me with something larger to which I feel I belong. But as a white person seeking to be in partnership with people across difference, I empathize with Kaepernick’s point that there are clear patterns by race in who “belongs” in the US, who is taken care of by the government, and who is accepted for who they are. These patterns are not acceptable to Colin Kaepernick as a Black person, nor are they acceptable to me as a white person.

There are many people angry about Kaepernick’s actions. I am reminded of a famous quote from Dr. King about white people’s concern for order and harmony amidst tension in the civil rights movements. “I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro’s great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen’s Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to “order” than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: “I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action”; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man’s freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a “more convenient season.” Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection.” Protest is never going to be appealing and comfortable—the nature of protest is to disrupt and create dissonance. As a white woman, even if I don’t have the opportunity to sit or stand during the national anthem (not being a person who attends sporting events), what does it look like for me to actively participate in the pursuit of justice? In my case, it means ever-increasing consciousness and transparent naming of my whiteness to hopefully eliminate its oppressive effect on others, and courage to engage in conversations about whiteness, oppression, and biases, particularly with other white people. What does it look like for you?

Okay, point number two: I have been struck by Kaepernick’s communication with the press. He has held two lengthy discussions with the press in the past week in which he has laid out his arguments and evidence about police brutality the name of the US government. He clearly understands the implications of his actions and potential consequences. This what we want all of our students to be able to do! I want students to be capable of standing up for something in their communities or their lives, and in the face of questioning, doubting, or challenging, or simply to persuade, line up a series of arguments and evidence. I want them to be able to draw from historical events and perspectives, as Dr. King’s words were helpful to me in this situation, and how Colin Kaepernick is drawing on a history of athletes using their platform to protest. I want them to be able to speak passionately, straightforwardly, and confidently about their position.

I believe that our work in asking students to articulate positions and seek or state evidence that backs up their positions, our work in engaging student voice and dialogue in the classroom, our work to develop strong reading skills, our work in building students’ skills around critical analysis is all in service of being able to do what Colin Kaepernick is doing. For different students, the task may be a job interview or it may be a stand they take with a city or it may be a proposal they put together for their boss or it may be an op-ed article that they write for the newspaper or it may be an essay they write for a college class. In all of these tasks, they need strong literacy skills, critical analysis skills, and the confidence to face adversity.

Amidst the din of reactions to Kaepernick’s protest, here’s to his academic training and the educators that guided him to be persuasive in stating his positions. I want us to imagine each of our students defending their positions before a press conference with knowledge, code-switching communication skill, and confidence in their positions and in themselves—that’s what we’re striving for. As President Obama said about Kaepernick’s actions, “I’d rather have young people who are engaged in the argument and trying to think through how they can be part of our democratic process than people who are just sitting on the sidelines not paying attention at all.”

And point number three: Our students are aware of Kaepernick’s protest and many other athletes who are similarly protesting. I am talking about this today because we need to be practiced and open in engaging in dialogue with our students about how they perceive and feel about this. We may have sports teams that choose to protest by taking the knee for the national anthem. We may have students with a variety of opinions and perspectives, all of which are acceptable and welcome. The Common Core State Standards, balanced literacy, math talks—all of our curricula are intended to prepare students for this kind of dialogue and debate.

Please don’t shy away from it—embrace the complexity of being an educator in a diverse democracy. If you need help in any way thinking about how to talk with students and engage them in dialogue, please come talk to me—there’s nothing I’d rather talk about this week.

Hello colleagues. There are so many things happening in the world that relate to our work here at school. The Olympics, the presidential race, ongoing popular culture phenomena… but I want to share something with you from the 1800’s that I think is as relevant to our work as anything happening in current events.

Please indulge me for a moment of history. In 1865, General William T. Sherman of the Union army, having successfully marched south through to Savannah, Georgia, met with 20 Black ministers—half of whom were slaves and half of whom were freedmen. He asked them, “What do you want for your own people following the war?” Their answer was unequivocal—they wanted land. “’The way we can best take care of ourselves,’ Rev. Frazier began his answer to the crucial third question, ‘is to have land, and turn it and till it by our own labor … and we can soon maintain ourselves and have something to spare … We want to be placed on land until we are able to buy it and make it our own.’ And when asked next where the freed slaves ‘would rather live — whether scattered among the whites or in colonies by themselves,’ without missing a beat, Brother Frazier (as the transcript calls him) replied that ‘I would prefer to live by ourselves, for there is a prejudice against us in the South that will take years to get over … ”

Four days after this meeting, on Jan. 16, 1865, and with the approval of President Abraham Lincoln, General Sherman issued Field Order 15, consisting of three parts. First, the order seized the land on the sea islands and 30 miles inland from Charleston, South Carolina down to Florida—a total of 400,000 acres of land—and allocated it to former slaves. Second, the order indicated that the Black people taking ownership of this land would govern themselves. Third, it indicated that each family would have a parcel of land of up to 40 acres (the mule came later.)

So what happened? By June of that year, 40,000 freedmen had settled on 400,000 acres of Sherman land and had begun the process of electing Black leaders to govern their newly forming communities.

After Lincoln was assassinated, in the fall of 1865, his successor, Andrew Johnson, a sympathizer with the South, reversed Field Order 15 restoring the land to white plantation owners.

I want to say that it blows my mind to consider how the subsequent 150 years might have played out if Andrew Johnson had not reversed this Field Order. Even by today’s standards, Field Order 15 was a radical and revolutionary response to the years of bondage, violence, and oppression that African Americans had withstood—it was the earliest attempt at reparations in the form of land redistribution. Given what we know about the systemic barriers to African Americans accumulating wealth across generations through property ownership, if Field Order 15 had been allowed to stand, the vast gaps in socio-economic status between African Americans and other races in the US might have been significantly different today. We may well not be facing the racialized achievement gap that we face today if Field Order 15 had been allowed to stand.

Why are we talking about this? Being reminded of this chapter in American history has affected my heart. The communication between General Sherman and the 20 Black ministers is a very powerful example of authentic partnership across difference to transform lives. It has made me ask myself two things: to what extent are we truly listening to what our community is asking of us? (as General Sherman did with those 20 Black ministers—who were extremely clear about what their communities needed.) AND What is the revolutionary and radical step that we are undertaking this year that could have a transformative effect on future generations?

As I reflect on the state of the US at this moment—from the murders of Freddie Gray, Alton Sterling, Philando Castile to the Department of Justice’s indictment of the San Francisco Police Department for racism to the current rhetoric in the presidential election—these questions are particularly poignant for me. The ILT [and other leadership teams] has been working on our instructional vision and our year-long goals. Our SSC, ELAC, AAPAC, and PTA have begun discussing plans for the year. I want to be clear that I’m going into each of these spaces with these two questions situated deeply in my heart—how is what we’re talking about (in any of these meetings) responsive to what we’ve heard from our community, and particularly our students? AND How is what’s being proposed or discussed in this meeting a radical or revolutionary step that will impact future generations?

I encourage you to join me in holding these questions in your heart. In your classrooms, how are you regularly and intentionally listening to students and their families? Not in a defensive way—defensiveness on the part of General Sherman would never have resulted in Field Order 15—but in such a way that trusts that they hold some expertise in knowing what they need. And what are you doing differently this year that might have a lasting impact on the young people before you? Are you planning to hold individual conferences with students regularly throughout the year to give specific feedback about their learning and communicate your love for them? Are you planning to greet each student at the door by name with a handshake, a hug, or a high five? Are you crafting a unit plan that allows each student to connect her oral family history to broader American history?

I am honored to work with a community of educators who are willing to take up these questions. The turbulent times are asking this of us.