Something changed

Something changed, some critical point was passed, in terms of my work here. I can’t put my finger on it exactly, I don’t know precisely what happened or when, but suddenly I’ve gone from bored, unproductive and feeling altogether useless, to having quite a bit going on, being sought out for activities, and feeling like I might actually have a role here.

One great activity was GLOW Day. GLOW Camp (Girls Leading Our World) is a 9-day summer camp run by PCVs in many different countries, and it has been conducted annually in Moldova for 7 or 8 years. The camp here, for girls 13-17 years old, has earned an excellent reputation, and this year over 500 applications were received for the 120 available spots. The camp focuses on leadership, self-esteem development, breaking down stereotypes and gender roles, and lots of other interesting as well as fun activities. 4 of the 5 girls from Tvarditsa who applied were accepted, which was very exciting. We have 2 “alumni” girls in the village, Sveta, who attended last year, and Polina, who attended the year before. Given the high demand, and the desire to provide the opportunity to as many girls as possible, you are only able to attend camp one time. A new camp was started last year, TARE (Romanian acronym for Young Women – Active, Responsible, and Equal), which is for young women 18-22, focusing on career options, women’s empowerment, self-esteem, safe sex, and, of course, having lots and lots of fun. 2 Tvarditsa girls were accepted for TARE this year, including Sveta (the GLOW alumna).

The GLOW Camp directors put together some material for GLOW Day, a one-day seminar that can easily be conducted in any community. I asked Sveta and Polina if they’d be interested in planning and conducting a GLOW Day here, and both jumped on the opportunity. Much to my surprise, they ended up re-writing almost the entire program and, in my opinion, put together a much better, if even a bit ambitious, agenda. Topics included: stereotypes, gender roles, self-respect, domestic violence, and leadership. I was impressed how they put these topics together, any of which could provide a full day of activity and discussion.

For Stereotypes, we had a couple of activities. The first was drawn from some material PC had sent to us about World Press Freedom Day, called “If the face fits.” 14 descriptions/professions were given to the girls, and they were asked to write down three words that described that profession (i.e. doctor – smart, busy, man). Next the girls were given 14 photographs of different people (faces only) and asked to match the professions with the photos. Polina facilitated a discussion of why they chose the professions they did for each person, and it was quite interesting to compare their matches with the real professions/description of each person. No one correctly selected one of the women as a prime minister, and no one thought the handsome young man was a disabled person, for example. Next, Polina asked about the stereotypes they’ve heard, like boys are smarter than girls, only thin people can be famous, etc. And then she wrapped up with by asking if any of the girls had ever been the victim of stereotyping and how it had made them feel. The girls had a very thoughtful and enlightening conversation.

The next activity involved “nationality,” a concept we don’t really have in the U.S. It loosely correlates to “ethnicity” in the U.S. culture, but has a much stronger meaning of self-identity and heritage. Whereas most Americans will describe themselves as Americans, perhaps adding a hyphenated descriptor such as African-American, Irish-American, or Korean-American, in the former Soviet Union, you have both a citizenship, i.e., Moldovan, and a nationality, i.e., Bulgarian, Russian, Ukrainian, etc. As I’ve mentioned before, Tvarditsa is a Bulgarian village in Moldova. No one here was born in Bulgaria, no one has Bulgarian citizenship, yet they identify themselves by the nationality of Bulgarian, and not as Moldovans. In Soviet times, everyone had their nationality identified in their internal passport. While for many people it does identify their heritage, for others it does not necessarily refer to their “blood.” When a teenager applied for his/her first internal passport, he could choose his nationality from one of three categories: his mother’s nationality, his father’s nationality, or the nationality of the region in which he was living. Thus, a child born to a Russian mother and Ukrainian father who lived in Latvia could choose either Russian, Ukrainian or Latvian as his nationality. The whole thing is just bizarre to me, but they take it very seriously here, and the tradition of indicating Nationality on the internal passport has been maintained (although I hear the newest version of passports no longer lists it). It strikes me as simply a way of dividing people, creating distinctive categories in a society with little visual cues by which to differentiate, and thus discriminate against, people.

So, Polina led the girls in an activity about “nationality.” She assigned each girl a nationality/ethnicity (Russian, African, French, Italian, Turk, etc) and had them write down stereotypes about that nationality. The girls had, by now, figured out where things were going and, being on their best behavior, were a bit reluctant to talk about the negative stereotypes they had or knew about the nationalities, but Polina did a great job facilitating the conversation and getting them to talk openly and honestly. She then shared with them some thoughts from an article on living in a multi-cultural society.

Next Sveta took over with a discussion of gender roles. She read a series of statements, such as “A woman’s first priority should be taking care of her husband and children,” “Boys should not show their feelings,” and other stereotypes about gender roles, asking the girls to rate their own thoughts regarding the statements. They kept the ratings to themselves, with Sveta encouraging them to think about their own personal stereotypes about men’s and women’s roles. She then read some material from her high school history textbook about women in the 20th century. I was really impressed that she had found and incorporated some Moldovan-produced material into the seminar, as the rest of the material was designed by American PCVs.

The next section was mine – self-esteem. I led a short exercise called “Know Yourself,” where each girl was asked to write a few thoughts on four topics: 3 things you do well; 3 things you like about yourself; 3 things you would change about your life; and 3 things you would like to be said about you. It was difficult for many of them to even think privately about their own talents and strengths, but it led to a good conversation about why it is important to recognize and value your own abilities. Next, I talked about abstinence, having adapted the material we used in the fall for our Community Activity in pre-service training. With so many girls and young women getting pregnant and/or married at 18 or 19 years old (or younger!), and absolutely no sex education in the schools, the topic is incredibly important.

Polina and Sveta then moved on to domestic violence, leading a discussion of the forms of violence (physical, emotional, verbal) and myths and facts about domestic violence with material we adapted from the Season for Non-Violence manual. We also gave each girl a “Family Pledge of Nonviolence” to discuss and hopefully sign with their parents and siblings.

The seminar concluded with Leadership and a discussion of the characteristics of a good leader, as well as the power of girls as a united group. We played a game called “Shout!” in which a word is spoken quietly by one person then increasingly louder and louder as more and more voices are added. Polina finished the program with a meditation someone had renamed “A Leader’s Prayer” in the GLOW manual:
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
The courage to change the things I can,
And the wisdom to know the difference.

Each girl was given a small gift at the end of the day – an American flag pencil & an Ohio State pencil (from my seemingly endless stash) and a small homemade bracelet we’d prepared in advance with materials my mom had sent me (beads and stretchy cord). We had cookies and soda, socialized a few minutes, and everyone seemed pleased.

18 girls attended the seminar, and as we’d been hoping for 20, we considered it a success! The next week the girls who attended must have been talking it up as I heard that some girls approached Donna, my partner at the Primaria, and asked her if we could conduct it again!

The following weekend was another seminar, this time for NGOs. Another EOD PCV, in his second year in the nearby town of Ceadir-Lunga, began developing and offering training seminars in the Russian-speaking communities of southern Moldova, and Emily and I asked if we could get involved. He agreed, and the three of us put together a day-long workshop on Professional Etiquette, with the main focus on being the cultural and professional expectations of Western Europeans and Americans. Ross introduced the seminar with a discussion of what the participants thought was professional and unprofessional behavior. There were many items on their lists that would match with our own, and a few things that differed. Ross carefully explained that our goal for the workshop was not to promote one way as better than another, or to criticize Moldovan customs, but rather to inform them of some of the differing expectations they may encounter when working with foreign organizations. Basically, it was a workshop on cultural differences, and of course that’s a huge topic that can’t be covered in just 7 hours, but we gave it a shot!

Ross had the first topic, which was Planning. The activities will sound a bit ridiculous to you, but let me tell you, it was REALLY challenging for them! Ross had copied out a blank week from his planner, with each day broken down by the hour. He asked them to fill out their schedule for the next Monday (the seminar took place on Saturday). It took them a good 10 minutes, with an unbelievable amount of questions – what if something started on the half hour? What if they didn’t have something planned? What if something unexpected came up? It was incredible to watch 10 adult professionals who had never once in their lives written down a daily schedule. Then Ross really threw them for a loop by asking them to fill out the rest of the week, what they were doing each day of the upcoming week. One woman laughed out loud and said quickly frankly “But I have no idea what I’ll be doing on Friday!” They labored over that for another 20 minutes or so, and then Ross divided them up into pairs and gave them the task of finding a meeting time in the next week with their partner. Sounds simple enough, and although they quickly realized it was much easier to do this with their calendars right there, it nonetheless took some pairs longer than I could have imagined possible. For the next task, Ross put them in groups of 3 or 4. The scenario: your organization has won a grant, the sponsor calls and is going to deliver a new computer to your office sometime in the next week. You need to make sure someone is in the office from 8:00 to 5:00 every day as the sponsor can’t say for sure exactly when they’ll be in the area to make the delivery. This was definitely more challenging, and took some negotiating as some people had to rearrange their schedules to ensure the office had coverage. The last scenario was the toughest: the regional accountancy agency calls Sunday night to inform you that they will be visiting your office for the next four days to audit your books. In groups of four or five, they had to find everyone Sunday night, have an emergency meeting and plan for the week. One group had some blanks in their coverage for the week, and when the “manager” said they’d had other things to do during that time, Ross jokingly informed them they were all going to jail for failure to meet with the auditors! It was a good lesson not only in the benefits of a calendar as a planning tool, but also in setting and readjusting your priorities as needed.

The next session was Emily’s, on Invitations and Thank You letters. We had written together some samples of informal and formal invitations, and she had the participants talk about the differences. One item that had not occurred to any of them – a “respond by” date. One woman said “Gosh, we always invite people and then just never know exactly who will be there!” Yet another helpful tool for that planning! The Thank You letter was a new concept for them, and one woman shared that she had recently been asked to write one to a sponsor and had had no idea how to do it. We had a couple examples for them, and emphasized the importance of thanking anyone who has provided you with assistance, whether it’s the use of a room for free or the donation of thousands of dollars, and how it is part of building relationships and developing a good image for your organization.

The next two sessions were mine – brochures and personal resumes. One of the organizations at the seminar already had a brochure of their own, and we’d brought samples from a bunch of different organizations to show them. After some discussion of the kind of information to include, language to use (i.e., action verbs; clear, concise language, etc) we had them take a crack at writing a brochure for their own organizations. Once again, it proved more challenging than I could have imagined, but overall they did a good job. We then had them present their samples and asked the other participants to pretend this was the first time they heard about the organization, and to describe what they thought they knew about it based on the brochure. It turned out to be an excellent exercise, as one group wrote mostly about what they would like to do in the future, as opposed to what they had already accomplished (part of that Moldovan modesty thing again), and only by hearing others’ impressions based on the brochure did they realize their “advertisement” did not convey at all that they were an established, accomplished, experienced and respected organization.

Next was Personal Resumes. This is also an entirely new concept in Moldova. During Soviet times, when everyone was guaranteed employment, there doesn’t seem to have been much in terms of “applying for” jobs. The application and hiring process still differs vastly from the American system, and instead of using a resume, the practice here is to have an Autobiography, which is literally an essay about one’s life. The one example I’ve seen went something like this:
“I was born May 7 1950 in the town of Ceadir-Lunga. In 1957 I started the first grade and in 1967 graduated from the X high school. In 1967 I entered the X Pedagogical Institute in the department of Russian Language and Literature. In 1971 I finished my university studies. From 1971 to 1972 I served in the military. From 1973 to 1977 I worked as a school teacher. From June 1977 to the present I have worked as a journalist. I’ve published 5 books. My wife, born in 1953, is an teacher. My daughter is in the 10th grade.”
And so on and so on. While there’s not particularly anything wrong with this format, it’s just not what a Western sponsor is looking for when s/he asks for an NGO director to include a resume with a grant application. So, this topic was both particularly relevant as well as an especially difficult concept for the participants to grasp. We reviewed for a long time the various components of a typical resume and distributed a sample. The hardest part was getting them to write a draft of their own resumes. They are not used to using the short, concise, truncated language common in resumes, and they struggled to condense their lengthy full sentences into short brief statements. But, it was a great start and I think they enjoyed the activity.

The final session of the day involved a short skit exemplifying professional etiquette. A clock showed 8:00 am and Ross sat in his business suit in his office. As I entered, we greeted each other and shook hands. Ross offered me a seat, then something to drink. He thanked me for coming and explained that he wasn’t able to meet later as he had another appointment at 9:00. We exchanged business cards and Ross gave me a brochure about his organization. Then the telephone rang. Ross offered his apologies, said the secretary had called to say she would be late this morning and he needed to answer the phone. He stated his name and the organization name when he answered the phone, explained that the person they were calling was not available and offered to take a message, which he wrote down. As he hung up, Emily knocked on the door and waited for him to reply. With his permission, she entered the office and Ross introduced us to each other. She apologized for interrupting, saying she wouldn’t have knocked if she’d known Ross was in a meeting. He passed along the phone message, explaining that someone had called requesting she fax a document as soon as possible. She left to send the fax, and then called to confirm that the fax had been received. End of scene.

This situation probably sounds like nothing exceptional to you, but believe me, each and every action was chosen with purpose, representing the opposite of how most Moldovan offices operate. Businesses and offices are rarely open at the time their posted schedules indicate. It’s uncommon for meetings to start on time as one or all of the participants are usually late. People talk on the phone or with whomever walks in during meetings; and if someone does bother to knock on a door, they never wait for a response but just walk right in, oblivious to whether or not another meeting is taking place. One of the more interesting discussions, I thought, generated from the fact that Ross and I shook hands. Moldovan men and women are taught NOT to shake hands with each other, and in fact Moldovan men will sometimes not even acknowledge a woman in the room when introduced to a mixed group. He will shake the hands and greet the men before and after the woman, skipping over her entirely. This is one of the more challenging aspects of Moldovan culture for many female PCVs, who struggle to not take it personally but nonetheless find it very insulting. One of the male participants in our seminar shared that he had once been introduced to a group of Westerners and he truly did not know what to do. He was uncomfortable shaking the women’s hands as he’d been raised that it was inappropriate. It was a good conversation, and again we were careful to not pass judgment on one culture or another, but merely to point out that Western women may expect to shake hands with men as well as women.

I spent Monday reviewing the evaluations and I was pleased that people found the seminar worthwhile and they asked for more of them. We’ll conduct the same seminar next Saturday in a different town, Comrat, for another group of NGOs. Then we’ll begin working on the next topic in the series – fundraising. We’ll probably conduct that one in August, as our summer schedules are filling up with camps and vacations. Eventually, I’m hoping we’ll end up with a group of NGO leaders who can conduct these seminars themselves, thus ensuring that the learning and development continues after we PCVs have left.