test test test test test test

i think that my stature as a leader was elevated because of a negative event and the negative event was when the state supreme court took away collective bargaining. it was the first time the teachers have been led in a mass demonstration from a statewide perspective. a lot of people were looking at, what is virginia going to do.

is virginia -- are the teachers going to roll over and accept this and not do anything? well, people were shocked when the teachers came together to protest what had happened as well as to protest at that time enormous cuts being made in education. that was the first time it had happened. so a negative event helped to catapult me as a leader. there have also been situations where, you know, you're just in the right place at the right time. so i think there have been efrl instances where, if you put it all together, there is no one way to define how did you get to be this person. >> but, you know, regardless of which way you emerged, leaders emerge, in one of these following ways. it's fair to say each of these ways touched on you in some way. but can you look back over your life to date, think about that march in richmond, 7,000 teachers, think about the arguments that you had as head

of the nea with william bennett. another negative event. has there been any common theme running through these things? i'm not sure i am asking a coherent question. >> i think a common theme for me, and for what i've heard people say, is a willingness to stand up and to fight not only for what you believe is right but to fight for the quote-unquote the people. the people being the teachers, the members and the children. being willing to stand up and speak out for what you believe is right. and so when i look at the common themes and i look at -- and i listen to people and why they say they supported me or why they say they remember the things that i did, these -- those are the kinds of comments that i get back. >> i look at you now, and obviously you're poised, self-confident, articulate. it's hard for me to balance that with someone whose hand is shaking so badly that people wonder that you can make a speech. how did you go from that to

this? >> well, you know -- let me give you an example. i spoke a moment ago about reggie smith, who was, by the way, who grew up in -- longwood, farmville. reggie is dead now. and i remember once i went to give a speech -- i had my speech. and i put it on the chair to go look at something. and while i was over looking at something someone took my speech. and as i realized the speech was gone, they called on me to get up and speak. i was forced to get up and speak without the paper. and i remember distinctly that reggie kept looking out the window. he would never look at me the whole time i was speaking. so when i finished and stepped down i said, reggie, i said, what happened to my speech? he said, i am going to tell you the truth, i took it. it was about time you learned to stand up and say what you had to say without a piece of paper.

that's the honest truth. he said to me, you don't believe that you have the confidence to do these things, and he said, i think you do. and so, i mean, that's a small thing. but then, you know, as you become more confident, well, i know the subject, i know the people, i know the organization, and you build more confidence in yourself, then you stand up and you speak out. you have to understand, in education -- and i know you are aware that there are hundreds of issues. you can't be an expert on all of them. so you have to be able to say, now, where is my niche and what can i do? even in the teachers' organization. where is my niche and what can i do. i had to learn how to stand up and give a speech. or even if i have one, you don't have to go through it verbatim. but i mean, those were frivolous things to happen but that's exactly what happened. >> can you imagine what would have happened on that occasion if you had stumbled and bumbled and -- >> i probably did. >> i bet you didn't. >> i remember the people, they were -- they were laughing at

reggie. we didn't think you had the courage to do it. >> now, another attribute of leadership is the ability to persuade other people. >> yes. >> -- to do something that they may not have wanted to do otherwise. >> right. >> now, can you remember early attempts at doing this, to get a group to change their mind or to adopt a position that you think they didn't? >> yes. >> how did you -- okay. >> i can remember two. one was nea had had a position on their books for a long time opposing testing. and they used as the primary rationale for the opposition the negative impact it has on blacks. and i decided to oppose that because my point was the message that's being sent, whether on purpose or not, said we can't learn, we can't pass tests. the motion -- the motion ought -- the policy ought to be what kinds of things do we think ought to be in place in order to make sure we can pass these tests and how do we make sure the tests are fair and what role

should we play in developing these tests. and i remember a lot of the blacks who were at the nea convention were very upset with me because i was bringing this forward. i said, i don't want anyone to ever, ever be of the opinion that i as a black person or black kids can't learn, that we can't pass tests. we ought to make sure the tests are fair, et cetera. after talking with them, they agreed. so the motion passed. and we put together a task force to look at testing and how do we work with different companies but also how do we work with school districts to help minority kids pass tests. another example was, you may have heard about the national board for professional teaching standards, which was put forth by the carnegie corporation. >> yes. >> well, when we went into the board -- you don't know this part. i was opposed vehemently for that board. n now, nea had for years supported state standards boards. so i was puzzled as to why we

were now opposing the national standards board if we were supporting state standards boards for as long as i could remember. we had members of the executive committee and members of the board who were absolutely die metrically opposed to the concept. i remember saying, if we oppose the national board no one will ever believe again that we are sincerely concerned about the quality of education in this country because the message we will have sent is yes, we're for standards and quality but don't try to put inequality on the teaching programfession. the vote was maybe 60/40 against the board. i was determined that we were not going to fail. so i made it a point of going around -- by the way, i bypassed the executive committee and i made my appeal to the board and i persuaded the board to support it. again, i used the argument, you can't say you're for change if

you oppose it. then i went to the urban caucus because they were opposed. i went to the blackhawk cauc ca women's caucus, the higher ed caucus. they were furious about the standards board. they are fear was eventually they'd have to go for national standards and required to be certified. i'll tell you what i did. i told them -- and it was true at the time -- there had been no discussion of higher education faculty having to go through national certification. they said, if you will go on the floor and say that and then say that nea will not advocate for this, we will support you. we will actively support you. i said fine. when it got to that issue on the floor from the audience, from the delegation, they put the question to me in front of 10,000 people. i repeated what i said. they asked me to say it again just to make sure i wasn't trying to use tricky words. and i did. and i had also talked to the

urbans about the kinds of things we were going to do. we turned the vote. the vote turned to be 80 for, 20 against. >> i remember the fears fears opposition black teachers had to -- the national teachers exam. >> right. >> the high failure rate of black teachers. >> right. >> surely there must have been some people in the 20 -- 80/20, in the 20 who couldn't reconcile themselves to this. >> and there still are. >> did you ever able to convince any of the 20 to join the 80 even after the vote was taken? >> on the national standards board. the answer is yes. and what we promised was that the nea would set aside resources to support teachers going through the national certification process. now, the nte and mbts are two separate documents. what i said to them on the nte was i oppose the nte. i don't think it's a fair way to assess whether or not teachers can teach. so you oppose the nte but what

do you support? you can't always say what you oppose. what do you support. so what would nea and its members support in the way of assessing whether or not teachers know and are able to teach that which they are supposed to teach. so that was the position that i took. i said, when we put together this task force we're going to make sure that there are representatives from all parts of the country, from all of the diverse groups in the nea, different educational levels so we come together and advocate for what we believe and not simply say we oppose something. that was basically the way we did that. we began to work more closely for example with the college board, with ets, we worked with the fair testing association because we agreed that the test should be fair, not just for teachers but for children as well. so how do we use our resources to make sure that tests are not -- are as biased free as possible. every test is biased. there are no unbiased tests. it's not just a matter of saying

you oppose, but what do you support? that's the way we got the teachers involved and got them to be supportive. i remember joe reed, a good friend of mine from alabama, he came up to me, he had his hands in his pockets. he said, mary futrell, i can't believe you are advocating this, but he said i have confidence in you. and if you think this is what we should do and if you are willing to put this task force in and set aside the resources i will talk to the alabama delegation. and i knew he was upset when i saw him. when he told me that, i just gave him a hug because -- >> what you're describing is a consultative process where the people who are against are talked to and, even though they have different arguments, you manage to say, well, i'm going to meet this argument this way and meet this argument this way. >> right. >> how did you develop this style? does it go back to early leadership positions? high school? student government? >> well, i think it came about because, as i worked with people -- again, i may disagree

with you, but i can disagree with you without being disagreeable. i need to respect you. i need to listen to you. and even though we may disagree on the issue, we maybe can agree on how to respond to the basic concepts contained there. the concept there was how do we make sure that there is accountability. and how do we make sure that whatever we're doing is fair. the people weren't opposed to that. one of the things that i said to the teachers, julian, we give tests all the time. as a teacher, i test maybe once every week. so how can i say i am opposed to testing. what i want to make sure that i do is i'm testing that on which i have taught and which the kids know. so i try to approach it from that perspective. and not disrespect them because they don't agree with me or because we may be at this point in time have not decided how to move forward. but let's sit down and try to work it out. let's sit down and try to figure out what it is we should do. the standards board was the

perfect example. the minorities were very concerned. the blacks. i say minorities because we have hispanics, blacks, asians. they were concerned about the impact of the certification process on teachers. what do we do about the rural and urban areas where we have high concentrations. i said first of all, this is a good idea. we supported it at the state level for 20 years. now we're simply saying let's deal with it at the national level. let's make sure the resources are there. nea must make a commitment to the states and to the locals to provide support, resources, training, information, whatever we need to do. and then what i said, i think -- and we're seeing this happen now -- teachers who pass ought to be able to earn some more-mile-an-hour. they oug -- money. they ought to be able to do different kinds of things but remain part of the classroom and part of the profession. those things were also

persuasive. >> was there ever an occasion for, in order to get something, you had to give something, in any of these leadership roles? >> yeah. i gave something on the national board when i promised the higher ed folks they wouldn't have to be assessed. now that issue has come up again and some of them are asking, why can't we go through this process and they're beginning to ask, well, we're going to teach people how to become nationally certified. should we not demonstrate we can be nationally certified? the whole process is give and take, the whole process. you can't expect to win everything. the other thing that i learned in all of this, because you don't win all the time -- rise above. you know, don't take it personally because somebody maybe didn't do what you wanted them to do. if you put five items out there, most people will not win five. if you win three and which ones

and trial and error. not through winning and losing but that's basically the way it happens. for example, even in the local association or even in the state association or even now when i am working at the dean's level, as a dean i don't expect to win every battle, but what are the key things and have i done my best to offer the best arguments as to why we should do a certain thing. and have i talked to the key people and have i -- do i know where the people are who are opposing and why they are opposed? do i know who the people are who

are supporting and why they support. what are the resources to do all this. it's not just a matter of getting up and giving a magnanimous speech and saying, these are the things i want to do. what's the strategy for winning? now, winning also might mean i have prepared this document. this is my proposal. am i willing to negotiate certain parts of it? am i willing to compromise on certain parts? yes, as long as the basic idea is still there. where you lose a lot of times, it's "i'm not going to change anything." if it's not exactly as it is i'm not changing it. that's where you lose. or i'm not going to listen to you. that's where you lose. or if you get up and put someone down. i used to work with a parliamentarian. he would say, whatever you do, mary, be fair, listen and don't ever think that you are so high above them that what they say is not worth listening to. the first couple of times -- sometimes somebody says something and you want to smirk. he said, because people are

watching you. he said, as long as you're fair and they know you're trying to get others involved and you're trying to listen, they'll usually go along with you. they may not be quite sure of what it is that's being proposed but they'll trust you and trust whatever you're trying to do. i found that that worked. i found that, when people got up and if it's not my way and they get mad, for the next hour or two, you're going to lose everything. if people say, okay, she didn't get all she wanted or maybe she didn't win on this one but there are other things coming up. sometimes out of sympathy they'll give you the other things. you have to understand that and you have to understand you're not the only player. and as jim harris, the other black president of nea said at one time, the lord giveth and taketh away. you're there by virtue of the fact that they put you there. just because you're there doesn't mean they have to buy everything you say. >> let me ask you if you think what you've been describing to us is particularly what others

have called a gendered style of leadership as opposed to a masculine style of leadership. is that -- do you think what you've been describing and is that what your leadership has represented? >> i think that it's probably a combination of the two. because most of the leaders with whom i have worked have been males. and i am not the first female president of the nea and nor am i the -- was i the first female president of the vea. i know i'm not the first minority president of the nea. there have been four. a lot of people don't know that. but some of it i think is gender based in that i think women tend to be more willing to sit down and try to talk it through and work it out. i think women will be more concerned about a person's feelings and not just hammering somebody and -- or putting someone down. i think women are probably more willing to look at different

approaches to things. and that doesn't -- i don't think that's a sign of weakness. matter of fact, what i find when i read reports by business people they talk about the ability to go in and deal with the environment and the people there and to work with the different ideas as opposed to coming in and being very autocratic. i think it's a combination of the two. i have learned a lot from watching the men and how do you deal with the issues and stand up but i have also learned from the women. and i've seen very strong women as leaders. >> among these people who were your predecessors or other people with whom you have worked even before the vea, are there particular mentors or even models that you followed? >> yeah. one of the things that -- well, one person i really, really influenced me a great deal was a woman named laurie winn in milwaukee. she was the head of the black caucus in nea for a long time. i'm going to confess and say,

until i saw laurie as a leader, i had never really seen a woman or maybe paid attention to a woman in a national dynamic leadership role. but she was something else. i mean, laurie challenged a whole nea structure. if you don't involve more minorities, if you don't do this, we'll walk out. they didn't believe it, and she led a march. i was part of the group that walked out. she was -- and they -- the aft, al shanker indicated he wanted to challenge and debate the leadership of the nea on the floor of the representative assembly. and i found it interesting that, when they decided who would debate him, they picked laurie winn, an african-american woman on the executive committee rather than the president or vice president. she debated him. her strategy was interesting. she talked about children. when she finished there was a standing occasion. laurie also taught us -- >> what did shanker talk about? >> he talked more about education in general and about the organization.

but i remember laurie talking to us about leadership. nea used to have all these minority leadership conferences that we used to go to. i remember going to the meetings and laurie would say things like -- she said, you know, we have to be super good. and so i remember some of us sitting in the audience saying, what do you mean? if i am equal, i'm equal. she said no. for us to achieve at the same level as others, we have to be super good. whatever we do, we have to be doubly good. if you're going to be a leader, you have to be doubly good. she also was saying -- and whether this is true or not -- that we oftentimes come in as leaders when the organization is in trouble. so you're coming in and you have spent a lot of your time just trying to rescue the organization. >> now, she is talking to you as minorities? >> right. >> or as minorities many of whom are women? you always hear in order for a woman to succeed she has to be twice as good as the men. >> this was the whole group. she is talking to us as a group.

i was tremendously impressed with price. one of the -- because -- let's face it, i deal with a lot of racism and a lot of discrimination. i was saying to somebody not long ago. it doesn't matter how high you climb, you still deal with it. one of the things that's kept me going and whenever i deal with it. i think about miss price, marion anderson, i'm sorry. marion anderson, after being denied the right to sing at the dnr. she went to the steps of the lincoln memorial. they said some people say this is racism. and they said, well, why? do you think it's racism? she said yes. they said why. they said, what is racism. she said it's like a breeze that blows across your face, you can't see it or touch it but you know it's there. a lot of people, when they hear that -- i don't know what they hear but i hear two things.

it's ever-present and it doesn't matter how high you climb. it's there. marion anderson was a diva, recognized all over the world, yet she was denied this right. sometimes when i have to deal with racism and discrimination and gender whatever, i think about her and how she dealt with it. i think about mary mccloud bethune and how almost out of nothing she started a college and what a tremendous impact she had on presidents of the united states. here was a gentle woman but a powerful woman. i think about coretta scott king. i worked with her as president of the nea. how much i admired this woman who through her own sheer determination was determined that her husband's legacy was going to live on. i think about a lot of people who have influenced me. and i listen carefully to what they've experienced and what house happened to them. i learn patience, determination, i learned to speak up.

i learned to express my emotions without being viewed as a woman who is overly emotional. i have learned to fight for what i believe in. i have learned to work with people. i mean, when i look at them, i have learned all kinds of things. >> now, is there a different style that you might have adopted had you been head or a member of a different kind of organization? after all, you're talking about organizations whose constituency is overwhelmingly female. >> mm-hmm. but whose leadership is not. >> but suppose you had been -- i'm just grasping here, a plumber. overwhelmingly male. do you think you might have developed something different? >> knowing me, i probably would have been pushing for the top, pushing to make a difference, pushing -- >> in a different style? >> maybe in a different style. i would be questioning why can't women do this. you're right. the profession is 75% female even though most of the leaders are males. that has to do with women feeling that men should be the

head and we should step back. i always asked the question why. why do i have to be at the back. why can't i walk beside julian. why do i have to walk behind him? as some of the male professions you have women who have come out and had to fight to open the door and to make a difference for other women. and what i always say is, yes, you fight to open the door, but then you don't close it behind you. when you open the door, open the door and keep it open and help other women, other minorities, other leaders, come through. i think it's wrong to open the door and then let yourself in and that's it. when i think about -- i look at other women, and i can't remember names off the top of my head, but i can think about communications workers, in the police force, i can think about in the construction industry, where women have made a difference and they've been willing to put themselves out there. and being a leader doesn't mean you always have to be up front. doesn't mean you're always standing behind the podium. a leader is a person who is willing to take the day or take the chance and put on those

construction pants and the helmet and get out there and say, i can do this too. >> let me ask you about different strategies you may -- leadership strategies or styles you may employ depending on the group you're dealing with. for example, you're active in both the minority caucus of the vea and the vea. now, are you different when dealing with these two groups? do you have a different style? >> i don't think so. when i am dealing with the minority caucus, the black caucus in the nea or vea or whatever, i tend to say to them, this is -- these are the issues. now, what i will do is give them maybe more detailed information and make sure they have all the information they need about the strategy on why we're doing what we're doing. and then, when i go on the floor, i am going to provide the same information but probably not in as much detail because i am not going to have the opportunity to give it in as

much detail. my advocacy for issues related to blacks or minorities hasn't changed over the last 30-some years. and people who know me know that that's where i am going to speak. sometimes we agree, sometimes we disagree. i think that anyone who is a leader, there are opportunities where you sit down and you can talk to somebody and be more candid, more private. do i do that? the answer is yes. the answer is absolutely yes. and there are certain people within the black caucus at the vea level and national level with whom i sit down and have those conversations and make sure they have the detailed information, et cetera. on the floor i might not be as detailed but it's basically the same kind of information. why do i do that? let's face the reality. doesn't matter what size group you're dealing with, that information will get out, and the last thing you need to do is to get up on the floor and be caught in a lie. or be caught that you distorted

or you're not sharing the whole truth. and so you have to be very careful about that. but whoever the audience is with whom i am dealing, they know that i am going to deal with those issues related to equity, et cetera, so they know that that's there. >> what about style as opposed to substance? >> style. >> if i am speaking to an all-black audience, i'm going to speak in one way. >> right. >> if i am speaking to an integrated audience or an audience that's over whwhelming white i'm speaking in a different way. i don't think it's even conscious. >> when i am speaking to a predominantly black audience i'm going to probably let my hair down and be more mary the black person, you know. >> yes. yes. >> the style i use, the tone. but the message is not different. >> right. >> okay? when i am speaking over here, i am maybe going to use a different style, et cetera. but in every instance it's going to be very professional.

it's going to be basically the same message. and again, i say that because the message gets out. >> the substance is the same. >> right. the style is different. >> the style and presentation may be different. >> yes. and let me say this. when i am dealing with the caucus -- all the strategizing doesn't take place in the formal meeting. a lot of the strategizing takes place in an informal environment when we've kicked back, with our shoes off and we're eating. it sounds like a general conversation but it's probably not a general conversation. we're talking about the issues. but i'm going to be much more laid-back and candid, whatever, than i would be able to be out on the floor. >> back to an earlier conversation. how much of this -- or can you divide how much of this is gendered, how much is racial, how much is professional and the styles you employ, how do you --

do you shift from one to the other to the other where gender is more important, where race is more important, where profession is more important? or are they mixed? >> i think i tend to integrate them. when i get up and i talk, first i'm going to be very professional. doesn't matter what the audience is. i'm going to be very professional. secondly, when i get up and talk, you see a person, you see an image. you know who is talking to you. so how you say what you say is going to be interpreted different ways. might be interpreted -- when i talk about children, people are probably going to say that's more of a female. when i talk about civil rights, the struggles and women's rights, there goes more the militant mary. there goes more of the -- of the ethnic mary, you know, the gender. so i think it's -- sometimes it depends on what i am talking about. and i can deliver a speech and you can see me in those different roles in that speech. but the roles are not necessarily the same all the way

through. am i making sense? >> yes, you are making sense. you're able in one speech to be a woman, a teacher. >> yes. >> an educational leader, a black person. >> a union leader. >> you can be all those things but not all at the same time. but there must be some times when you're all those people at the same time. >> when it comes together, this is mary. as she is speaking. i am always going to talk about children. okay. that's the teacher in me. and that's probably a lot of the feminism in me, but i am also going to talk about the equity issues and the equity issues will be issues around women and minorities and about quality and opportunity and those kinds of things. i can also talk very much about the union issues and how those issues relate to, for example, the teaching. how they relate to the equity pieces. you know. i do a lot of -- i do a lot of international work. i head of the international teachers union. one of the things i find myself constantly doing is trying to bring together the disparate

groups with very, very different educational opportunities and backgrounds, very, very different opportunities to organize, very, very different cultures, et cetera. you have to bring them all together. what you find yourself doing is, as i am an advocate for the women, to get more women into leadership roles. that's part of my speech. i'm an advocate for equal educational opportunities for children. that's part of my speech. i am an advocate for us to be more involved and supportive and have stronger organizations, unions. that's part of my speech. i am an advocate for us being more politically involved. all of those things come together. what you're looking at, when you look at mary, you're looking at mary with all these different pieces and i think they fit together. >> are there not times when people say, she is just a little too black for me. >> yes. >> other people say, you know, i don't think she is black enough. >> yes. >> what do you say to people who say either one of those things? you're just old union leader.

>> what i generally do is not say probably a whole lot of anything but try to use my actions to speak for me. and it hurts. i'm going to be very honest with you. it hurts when people either say directly to you or they intimate or whatever they do that she is not black enough or she is not union enough or she is not professional enough. it hurts. it's like, what else do i need to do? what else do i need to say? you're trying to get people to understand that, when you are the leader of a group like vea, nea or education international or george washington university school of ed, you're not representing any one group. and what you've got to do is bring all the groups together. now, how do you bring the groups together? you have to do that because you have to role-model what you want to happen and how do you get them to work to support certain issues. but does it happen? yes. you're too union. classic example. the colleges and universities are now dealing with unionizing t.a.s, teaching assistants.

i am the only person in the room who has a union background. and so as they start talking, everybody is kind of like watching me. and i'm feeling very uncomfortable because everybody is watching me. they don't know what i'm going to say. so i finally devised the strategy is i'm not going to say anything. if you ask me, however, i'm going to be very honest with you about i think they have the right to organize. that's a part of the freedom of speech, you know. but you feel very uncomfortable. everybody is sitting there looking at you, and you feel guilty. even though you've done nothing wrong. or you're sitting in the room and they start talking about ethnicity or race or things like that. >> and they look at you. >> and they all look at me. >> you have to be the expert. >> so what i do is, don't ask me a question unless you want the answer. if you want the answer, you're going to get my answer. >> isn't there an occasion where you say, don't ask me that question. because just because of the way i look or who i am. ask joe, frank, or sue. >> or it's a moot issue. or if i'm not the token black,

i'm not the token woman. because up until this year i was the token woman and the token minority. i'm going like, well, i am not the only person who should answer this question. in reality, you ought to answer this question. i don't have a problem. you got the problem. how are you going to deal with this issue. but it makes you feel very uncomfortable that you are being put on the spot. >> how do you dodge being put on the spot on the one hand, you do represent black people. you do represent unionized professional workers, you do represent organized teachers. i look to you to ask you questions about them. how do you defer the question and say, listen, somebody else needs to answer that question? can you always say it's your problem, not mine? >> no, i don't think you can. >> you are the expert in some ways. >> usually what i'll say is i will give you my opinion. my opinion does not necessarily means that this is the opinion. i'll give you an example.

i was in a meeting a month or so ago and they started talking about discipline in the schools. it very quickly shifted to teachers. and it shifted to the way teachers dress. and then it very quickly shifted to the union. so someone looked directly at me, well, what has the union done about the way teachers dress and how it relates to discipline? i was very uncomfortable. i haven't been active in the union at the national level for ten years. why are you asking me that question? someone reached over and said, mary, don't get upset. so what i said, it's really been quite a while and i can't give you an up to date account about what the unions are saying about the way the teachers dress but if you would like me to get the information i will. if i had responded right away, it would have been a reaction to what they said and would probably have been very negative. >> now, let me take you back to some earlier discussions, take you back to your tenure at the nea.

during this time bill bennett is one of the education secretaries. and you give him at the end of his tenure, i think, the worst grades of all the reagan era education secretaries. he is constantly battling with the nea and with organized teachers. was there ever a time when you thought, gee, we're losing this public relations battle and we need to regroup? >> right. >> how did you take the temperature? >> the answer to your question is yes. and there was a lot of frustration, sense of despair, a sense of it doesn't matter what we say, the message is not getting out. finally, i said to the executive committee and the staff and eventually to the board, we have to stop talking about what we're against. because at that time everything came out and we were against it. i remember reading the nation at risk report and saying, why are we opposing this? i might not agree with everything here but there are a lot of good ideas here. it wasn't so much opposing the

product, it was opposing who put the product forward. i said, what -- i said, i don't care who put it forward. are there things here we can support. we need to start talking about things we support and we believe in, et cetera, and make sure to put a positive spin on it. but there were times when you felt like you were just getting beaten down into the ground, and there were days you would wake up and say what battle do i have to fight today. why do i always have to fight a battle. why can't there be days when i am not fighting a battle and we're just enjoying life and doing some good and creative things. it took a while to turn the situation around. i also had to learn to temper myself because i can be very hot-headed and very heated when i get into conversations, especially if i feel strongly about something. and i had to learn how not to over react. i had to learn how to do things like not always be the first one to respond. let somebody respond first and see what they're going to say. you don't always have to jump out there. it took a while to do that.

but eventually -- by the time i got to my second term that things had begun to turn and we were coming out with more positive statements and we were getting more positive press. a lot of the focus was also on teachers and what they're doing in schools, talk about the positive things teachers are doing. and it began to turn, but it took a while. some days it was absolutely grueling. >> now, is this because teachers were on the defensive? >> yes. >> how did teachers get put in the defensive and how did you put them on the offensive? >> well, you have to remember that there was a sustained attack on public education. and when you attack public education, you are attacking teachers. it's interesting how it's not the superintendent, it's no tt e principal or these other people. the people who get attacked are the teachers, who have less to do with the decision-making process than anyone else. so what i would do is talk about the positive things teachers were doing.

i spent a lot of time visiting schools and talking with teachers. you would build some of those into your speeches and you were able to give concrete examples of things teachers were doing that were very positive. the amount of time teachers spend working with children, the amount of time and money teachers invest in trying to compensate for what the schools are not providing. how teachers are trying to be more innovative and how teachers are involved in their communities, et cetera. and so you start talking about it from a positive perspective. talk about the fact that teachers want high standards, teachers want students to achieve as opposed to we are opposed all the time and begin to approach it from that perspective and looking at it from a positive position. >> let me take you back to an earlier discussion and, again, that's about race. how has being a black person affected the leadership style you have employed over these years, your present position? you talked a moment ago about being the black expert in the

room. how has race generally affected the leadership style you have employed? >> well, a lot of people expect blacks to be -- lack knowledge, specifics. they also expect us to be very emotional and very hot-headed. we can't have a civil conversation. a lot of people anticipate that we are going to be more physically involved in what we are doing, et cetera, that we are not going to do our homework. more concerned with the way we look and the glitter and the glamor than the substance. i found myself doing that. but i had some interesting mentors. i was serving on a committee with ernie bauer. i was a teacher. it was a golden opportunity. there were two or three teachers on the whole committee. every time they'd get to something about teachers i would get passionate and i would pound the table.

somebody said to me one day, let's go for a walk behind the barn. this is the honest truth. they said to me, mary, you're very good but you are destroying your message because you get too emotional and you are too demonstrative. and people are focusing more on your emotions and your demonstrations than they are on what you are saying. so no one is hearing what you're saying. >> mm-hmm. >> if you continue to do that, you will turn people off. and they won't listen to you. and so their point was you need to find a way to express yourself without doing it that way. and that's -- that was -- they said to me, a lot of people expect blacks to respond that way. when you -- when you can't express yourself, you get loud, you -- you use -- maybe you use profanity or you want to hit someone or you want to walk out of the room. i was shocked when they said that to me. then they said, we're not saying this to criticize you. we're saying this as friends.

and when i stopped and reflected on it. i went back to my room and i cried. the next day i don't think i said very much in the meeting. when i reflected on it, they were telling the truth. i had to learn how to calm myself down, not learn how to be part of the stereotype. but are there times when i think you show emotionis and have to o certain things? the answer is yes. so i -- i don't disagree with some of the things that they observed, but at the same time i said, well, there are times for this. >> now, you are celebrated because the -- not the first black person -- the first black person to rise to these positions of prominence. and "ebony" magazine chooses you as one of the top 100 black leaders in america. but would you describe yourself as a black leader or a leader who is black? >> hmm. that's an interesting question. what's the difference between the two? >> tell me. >> [ laughing ] a black leader or a leader of

blacks? i think a leader of blacks means i am trying to carry the message for the black community. trying to express what i believe are the concerns of the black community. a black leader basically is more, i think, one of persona, who i am. i guess the question i would ask is, can you separate the two? >> can you? >> i don't think you can. >> but can you be one sometime and one the other? >> i guess what i was going to say was can we stereotype black leaders? can we assume that all black leaders act a certain way. i am a black leader because of who i am. and i would like to think that i am a leader of blacks because i advocate for issues that i know are of concern to the black community. >> are you also a leader who just happens to be black? when you stood up as head of the nea and talked about teachers and more pay or higher standards or whatever, you're not a black

person there, are you? i mean, you are -- people look at you and tell, that's a black person. >> they look at me and they say, that's mary. >> yes. and you're speaking for teachers, and teachers are black, white, brown, everything. >> i think most people would probably say that's mary. and she is speaking for the profession, et cetera. i think there are a lot of blacks, though, who would say -- and it's also for women. a lot of blacks who would say she is speaking for us, she is -- she represents us. >> right. >> and there are women who would say the same thing. she is speaking for us. she represents us. i think a lot of it depends on the audience and what the audience wants to see. and most people, though, will probably say that's mary. you ask, how do you define mary? i'm not sure that they would say she is mary the black person or mary the woman. i think they would probably say mary the teacher, the educator, et cetera. >> now, you became the head of

the national organization to push passage of the e.r.a. >> right. >> of course, it never passes. >> right. >> are there ever people who say, gee, that's not a real teachers' issue, that's women's issue and you shouldn't be involved in that. you're supposed to be looking out for the interests of teachers. teachers are men and women. why are you doing this? >> i say because we believe strongly in equal rights and that a person should not be judged on the basis of color or sex or whatever. i would say, if you want to look at the teaching profession -- the pay is different. for years it was different as it related to elementary versus secondary and males versus females. in the last 25 years we've basically equalized pay finally. when you look at the profession you have to look at the way girls are treated in schools and how we're often told that we cannot achieve because we are females. when i look at the women's movement, i look at it as a

movement which encompasses the teaching profession encompasses the female and male students that we teach. but primarily i looked at it from a point of view of, if i can't have equal rights as a woman, why do i think i can have equal rights as a minority or anything -- or vice versa? if i can't equal rights as a black person, why do i think somebody is going to have equal rights as a woman. so i was often -- you asked me a moment ago about looking are you black or are you what. i probably, julian, was forced more often to deal with the minority and the female piece. and i know that the community was divided. do we stand up for the african-american community and not deal with women, or do we stand up for women? i used to say to people, how do i separate myself? i am both. i am a woman and i am an african-american. so i cannot separate myself. >> are there times when you feel divided, though? >> there are times when i felt like people wanted to divide me.

>> never yourself? >> i don't think i felt divided. you have to remember something about me. i was raised in a female headed household. >> with sisters. >> right. with sisters. i didn't have any brothers. my father died when i was 4 1/2 years old. my mother's brothers didn't live with us. i was raised predominantly in a female head of household. my perspective about women is probably different from the perspective that other people may have about the role of women and black. my mother was the head. my mother was the leader. my mother was -- she was the one out there making the difference. >> um. now, i am trying to wrap up a lot of things in a very few minutes. you have talked about yourself as the beneficiary of civil rights activists and have expressed concern that young people don't seem to appreciate this legacy. how could we make them or should we make them. some people say it's great that young people don't remember the segregation era. they shouldn't. they didn't live through it. let them go forward in this

different world. >> well, let me give you two examples. three years ago george washington university celebrated the 30th anniversary of the march on washington. we had a number of the civil rights people come back and we invited students to come. one of the things that really surprised me was, number one, a lot of the students didn't come. those who did said, in the end, why have you not done these kinds of things before. what are you telling us here, this is the first we've heard of it. and if you don't tell us about what it was like and what the struggle has been and what we have achieved, we just assume this is the way it's been. these were like high school and undergraduate students tell us these things. so part of the problem is ours. we have not been vigilant about making sure that future generations understand what it was like and what the struggle was and how much we've achieved. >> i've already heard people of the younger generation and not quite so young, 20s and 30s, say

i'm tired of this stuff. >> right. you hear them say it about -- this is the way it's always been. i don't care about the struggle. et cetera, et cetera. what i try to say to them, if you don't care, you will a 'll . if you don't continue the struggle and the struggle isn't over you can't complain when all of a sudden what you thought you had isn't there. a way to look at it is what's happening with the election. if you don't go out and vote, then when somebody takes the vote away from you, you have lost. you can't go back now. you look at jobs, opportunities to live where you want to live. all of these things did not just simply happen. somebody had to fight for them to happen. if you don't continue to fight, they won't stay there. and it's not just with minorities. i hear the same thing with women. i'm tired of people talking about the women's movement. as if we have always been able to be in these different positions. but not lecture, but involve. you know, my kids, when i go -- i still demonstrate. when i go, i take them with me so they can see what it's like, they can understand what it's

like, they can be there and be part of it. and that's part of what i think we have to do. but the fight is not necessarily one that's always in the streets. it has to be in the schoolhouse, has to be in the -- it has to e everywhere. and you know that better than i do. >> how did you learn that it had to be everywhere? because some people don't learn. some people think, you know, if we can just file lawsuits, that will be okay, if we can just do this, that will be okay. >> i learned it from virginia state college. when i went to virginia state, we had not in a lot of demonstrations in lynchburg. it was almost unheard of for backs to stand up and demonstrate. at virginia state we did. we sat in and marched and paraded and had rallies on campus and we brought people in. and all of a sudden, here was this world that i didn't know existed. and i was part of it. and so, you know, a lot of us in those days made commitments. and those commitments, as long

as there was a need, we'd be there. so that's where we are. >> some people would say that we don't have either the opportunity to develop leadership as the kind of opportunity you just described or nor do we have people who aspire to leadership in the same sort of way. if that's so, and i'm guessing it's so, how can we create the opportunity to see that somebody comes up after us, somebody else develops the way you've developed, somebody -- circumstances so different. nobody's growing up in a segregated world now nurtured by teachers in the same way i don't think as you were and nurtured by a community in the same way you and i were. how do we -- what do we replace that with, or can we replace it with anything? >> i guess i would answer that by saying how do we pass on traditions to our children? >> yes. >> how do we make sure that they know and understand the legacy from which they come? how? and you do that through the way you teach them, the way you raise them, the things to which you expose them. you teach them by giving them

opportunities by taking them along and involving them and not leaving them at home looking at tv. i went to the rally that they had in washington in august. and i'm going to tell you two things that pleased me. one, i was pleased with the turnout. there were a lot of people, a lot of faces. i would have liked to have had the march. i think being part of that helps, you know, as opposed to just gathering and you're there. but i was also very impressed with the new leaders there. a lot of them i had not really followed, but i was impressed with who was there and what they had to say and the fact that there were new leaders. and that the young people are trying to carry on. was it as massive as it was 30 years ago? no. but at least it's still alive. and so i think what you have to do is you have to nurture and bring along -- if you don't, it dies. >> well, is it being nurtured? is it being kept alive? is that happening? >> not as broad as we have in the past because i think a lot

of people feel like we've arrived. we don't have to. >> i don't mean to interrupt, but i don't think anybody said to martin luther king as he was coming up, you know, we're doing things that are going to make you into a great leader. and i'm not even fewer if people of his time and place, many thought about it, but i'm not sure if there was the same kind of concern as today about where leaders are coming from and so on. why this concern now when i don't believe we had it at the same level, say, 30, 40, 50 years ago? >> well, and you probably know the answer to this. i think at 40, 50 years ago, we had issues so critical that they in themselves were galvanizing. >> and so in your face? >> in your face. you know. you know, what was it like not to be able to go in the front door? what was it like to not be able to make more than $1 and you worked all day long? what was it like not to be able to ride the bus even though you got on the bus and you were there? what was it like to go to desegregated schools? what was it like not to be able

to go in certain areas. i remember all these things. what was it like? the kids today don't have those same experiences. but i think it's still there, but it's more subtle. it's still there. we see it -- we see it a lot of times, for example, in the way kids are taught and the way things are happening in the schools. you still see it a lot in the job market. you see it a lot where people live. look at all the gated communities we have now. and those gated communities to me in many ways say hands off. this is closed. and not just to minorities, but to certain socioeconomic groups. you know. so i think that what we had then was more in your -- and we lived with it. we knew what it was to deal with it. and it wasn't -- it was very overt. it was very up front. now it's more difficult, but it's there. >> now, we can't go back. >> right. >> we're not going back to that in your face, but we need leaders just as badly. >> right. >> what do we have to substitute, if anything, for that in your face? what experience does a

youngster, college student, high school student, somebody -- what experience do they have that duplicates or replicates this in-your-face experience that you and i had? >> well, i think a lot of it now is class. race is still there, but i think class is very quickly moving to the front of the line. and what you're seeing is a lot of poor kids not getting opportunities. and it doesn't matter whether they're black, white or hispanic or who they are. they're being left behind. and the opportunities are not available for them. so instead of racism, you've got classism. that's smacking them in the face. they don't have access to this. they don't have access to that. they can't get jobs. they can't get in. so i think that's the issue that's really going to probably be more of a galvanizing force in the future. >> on that note, thank you very much. >> you're welcome. you're watching american history tv. all weekend, every weekend on c-span3. to join the conversation, like us on facebook at cspanhistory.

today is martin luther king jr. day. and with congress not in session, we have featured programs on all three c-span networks. on c-span at 11:30 a.m. eastern, live coverage of the british house of commons debate on whether to ban donald trump from their country. that debate's expected to last three hours. our coverage will reair at 8:00 eastern. on c-span2's book tv at 6:30 p.m. eastern, university of wisconsin professor william p. jones and his book "the march on washington: jobs, freedom and the forgotten history of civil rights." >> when a. phillip randolph went to reorganize this march that he had called off back in 1941, everybody said, well, you'd better get martin luther king. you need to get his support. and he went to martin luther king. and martin luther king said, well, i will support you, but let's expand the goals of the march. the march is not just about winning equal access to jobs, fighting empty discrimination, it's also about winning the right to vote in the south. >> and at 8:30, georgia

representative john lewis recalls his involvement in the civil rights movement in his book "march book two." the second part of an illustrated adaptation of his life. and on american history tv on c-span3, at 2:00 p.m. eastern, roham alvandi on iran's cold war partnership with the united states. >> iran had to look to a third power to preserve its independence and its sovereignty against the imperial ambitions of britain and russia. in the 1930s, iran had looked to germany to play that role. and after the second world war, a whole generation of iranian statesmen looked to the united states as a country that had no imperial ambitions and no history of colonialism in the region. >> and at 8:00 on "real america," a 19 # 3 interview with the reverend dr. martin luther king jr. on his nonviolent approach to civil rights, his comments on president kennedy's civil rights

bill, and how gandhi influenced his work. for the complete holiday schedule, go to c-span.org. for this year's student cam documentary contest, students are telling us the issue they want the presidential candidates to discuss. and we're hearing about the students as they produce their videos. here's a tweet from andrew, eighth grade social studies teacher at summit school in winston-salem, north carolina. at summit eighth, recording student cam intros at the white house. virginia congressman bob goodlat tweeted, help them with their student cam project this afternoon. good luck. from arizona, more of our day at the capitol. thanks again, arizona state representative john bynes and senator clark for the tour. and todd pagle in edison township, new jersey, tweeted "interviewing jvalentine25 for our student cam project about

school bullying. there's $100,000 in prizes. the grand prize of $5,000. the deadline is january 20th, 2016, and the winners will be announced on march 9th. for more information, visit our website, studentcam.org. tonight on "the communicators," republican fcc commissioner ajit pi discusses key topics being considered by the fcc including the speed of broadband deployment across the u.s. he's joined by brian fung, "washington post" technology reporter. >> broadband deployment really is one of the key drivers of job creation and economic growth. one of the things i found striking is that in the 21st century, there has been a democratization of entrepreneurship everywhere from sioux falls to bozeman, i've seen people using use it to build businesses that in a previous era would have had to migrate to one of the coasts or would have withered on the vine. but because of that connection,

they're now able to innovate. i think that's something that's really powerful especially in rural america. >> watch "the communicators" tonight at 8:00 p.m. eastern on c-span2. up next on american history tv, cia historian clayton laurie discusses espionage and intelligence-gathering tactics used during the civil war. he addresses topics such as spy rings used by both the confederacy and the union, how intelligence was used during the war, and why there are so few primary source documents on civil war-era intelligence gathering. the smithsonian associates hosted this event. it's a little under two hours. >> so it's a pleasure to welcome dr. laurie back. he's an historian with the history staff at the central intelligence agency. he joined the u.s. government in 1986 as a staff historian with s