Discussion

The development of teachers’ professional identities is part of a complex process that incorporates not only educational preparation and training but also personal memories, conflicts, desires, and fears. Professional identities are not formed in a single instant and neither do these snap-shots of teacher images tell us a complete story. Rather, they are exactly that: snap-shots that capture a thoughtful moment, multiplied by hundreds of students. As a body of data, they give us some general insights into what these preservice teachers thought about teachers and the teaching profession, which we can extrapolate from how the teacher images were portrayed, what they were wearing, and how these elements of dress and color suggested certain material functions, cultural expectations, and connotations. While it is possible that the preservice teachers in this study may have drawn what they thought would suit course, professor or cultural expectations, it is hoped that in addition to (or undeterred by) these, these teacher images also reflect personal environments, experiences, and intentions: “Drawings are useful not only as iconic images, but also as layered paintings that hide or combine other social, cultural, and personal images. An analysis of drawing can thus reveal aspects of our personal and social knowledge – how we see the world, how we feel, and what we can imagine” (Weber and Mitchell Reference Weber and Mitchell1995, 19).

Casual professional dress code. The findings of this study reinforce the findings of past research on teacher appearance. This consistency indicates a definite identification of teachers with casual professional clothing and the messages that such clothing imparts to an observer: Teachers are practical and approachable. They serve others. They have a moderate, but not high degree of prestige. Their appearance has an unremarkable uniformity that may indicate conservative conformity and an alignment to middle-class respectability. In short, many of the teacher images faithfully reproduced a stereotypical representation of teachers. Although stereotypes are often promptly maligned, they are not completely negative apparatuses. They often characterize and frequently encapsulate the opinions of a community: “The teacher’s familiar blandness is appreciated by children and parents alike, because it seems to fit an undefined notion of how a teacher should be…Teachers are keenly aware of these expectations, to such extent that they may think it wisest to meet them by dressing or ‘disguising’ themselves according to prevailing images” (Weber and Mitchell Reference Weber and Mitchell1995, 56). They may be codified representations of historical realities. For example, Judge (Reference Judge1995) states that the enduring perceptions of teachers in the United States (i.e., friendly, flexible, non-prescriptive) “fit well with a deep distrust of governmental…power. The teacher cannot ever be the agent of government…no authority has the right to determine what a teacher should be” (262). And indeed, teachers’ hiring, firing, codes of conduct, and codes for appearance in the United States are determined on a local, not national, scale. Stereotypes can reflect the tacit understandings of long experience within a profession’s culture and traditions: “The conservatism we discovered in the majority of the preservice teachers’ drawings seemed to be a reflection of strong influences past and present: not only do teachers remember the staid, white female teachers pointing at the blackboards…they also discover…that such stereotypes continue to be the accepted norm” (Weber and Mitchell Reference Weber and Mitchell1996, 307). Conservative dress may also mirror preservice teachers’ anxieties about joining the teaching workforce or having (and handling) their own classrooms. Subdued, casual professional clothing attempts to elicit the cuts and colors of “classic” clothing and may signify a desire to return to traditional and trustworthy values or methods (Lurie Reference Lurie1981). These professional novices may be expressing subconscious desires for the dependable rather than the daring as they begin their careers.

It is possible that this stereotype accurately reflects the dress code for teacher appearance. To be hired as a teacher, one must understand the dress code, dress the part, and show up for work wearing clothes that reflect the “company’s” values, ethics, and style: “They [teachers] all dressed so similar…My shop teacher used to wear the sweater and tie combo all the time” (male PS, fall 2005). If the stereotypical dress seen in the teacher images serves as a signifier of affiliation to the group known as teachers, then the use of casual professional dress in the drawings signifies that these figures claim that association and recognition. If one conforms to the group’s acceptable clothing parameters, then that person is considered to be a part of the group, eligible to move to more select inner circles within that group: “To wear the costume considered ‘proper’ for a situation acts as a sign of involvement in it, and the person whose clothes do not conform to these standards is likely to be more of less subtly excluded from participation” (Lurie Reference Lurie1981, 12). Those that inadvertently or deliberately do not conform, send messages of disapproval and disdain to the group and set the tone and themselves up for failure: “I wanted to depict the traditional clothing and body type of an older teacher…The image looks boring, just like my public schooling experience. It is also what my future might look like because I might turn into this guy” (male PS, spring 2020). To continue to succeed in a secured position, a teacher’s wardrobe should consist of clothing that will serve them in every position that the job presents. Careers are not made at the conclusion of an interview, nor in the first few weeks on the job. A beginning teacher in New Jersey is not eligible for tenure until the first day of their fifth consecutive year at the same school, but only if they meet or exceed expectations with regards to their performance in the previous four years. In the first few years of teaching, careers are made through day to day accomplishments and impressions. Each day is an interview for the next step towards tenure. It is not inconceivable to imagine that the appearance, as well as the performance of a prospective tenure candidate, is marked by and supervisors and administration. It communicates what type of employee they may be guaranteeing a job for the next 30 years.

Stereotypes can also however, discourage detailed discussions about the multi-varied contradictions that are necessarily inherent in such flattened images: “Stereotypes engender a static and hence repressed notion of identity as something already out there, a stability that can be assumed…trapped within these images, teachers come to resemble things or conditions; their identity assumes an essentialist quality and, as such, socially constructed meanings become known as innate and natural” (Britzman Reference Britzman1991, 5). The white, middle-class, composed, female teacher that Mead (Reference Mead1962) described more than six decades ago largely filled the boxes of teacher images collected for this study. It is difficult for me to ignore the impact and significance that this stereotype has had in the lives of my preservice teachers as seen through their rendered teacher images, nor was this realization lost on the preservice teachers themselves. They expressed in textual verbal statements that they (the schoolchildren of yesterday and the teachers of tomorrow) had not intended to draw a stereotype, but when they finished drawing, that was precisely what they had done: “My drawing does not remind me of any teacher I have had. It is more of an ‘ideal’ teacher in our society…It is funny that I used the stereotypes of a teacher to create my drawing instead of my experiences of what teachers look like in reality” (female PS, spring 2013).

Sometimes occupation helps to dictate dress; most labor occupations have strict guidelines about what clothing, adornments, even colors are acceptable in the workplace, while professional occupations tend to allow for more freedom and interpretation in dress: “Many occupations within the working or lower middle classes prescribe a uniform or lay down clear rules of dress, restricting the types of garments and colours suitable for work. The professions, on the other hand, generally operate with looser codes of dress that are left up to the individual to interpret…Within these constraints, individual professional women interpret what is and what is not appropriate to wear to work” (Entwistle Reference Entwistle2000, 51). It is intriguing that the “profession” of teaching, which (to be fair) did produce variety and difference in the smaller details of dress in the teacher images, also produced an overall, overwhelming “uniform”-ity of dress that aligned more so with working class punctilio. The relatively small number of teacher images wearing suits points to the modest social and economic status of teaching in the United States. Suits convey reliability, capitalism, upscale expense, and of course, power (The Economist 2010), whilst casual professional clothing conveys approachability, communication, and compassion. Perhaps the latter traits really are more in keeping with the core principles of teaching, but the lack of formal professional clothing in teaching is definitely reflected in and correlated with earning power.

Conversely, although a relative “uniform-ity” of casual professional dress was apparent across teacher images, the freedom to select the styles, shapes, patterns and colors of the individual pieces of casual professional dress created a group that was difficult to distinguish from other professions if removed from the background of the classroom. If taking into consideration only the clothing and colors of the teachers in the images (not the black- and white-boards, books, or desks that might also be pictured), the social and economic roles of the rendered teacher were unclear. Clothing can often indicate that a “certain person occupies a certain role and may therefore be expected to behave in a certain way…The fashions and clothes worn by doctors, nurses, visitors and patients in a hospital for example, indicate the role of the people wearing them. Knowledge of the person’s role is necessary in order that one behaves appropriately towards them” (Barnard Reference Barnard2002, 63). Removing the teachers from their classroom backdrops resulted in figures whose appearance was difficult to identify by occupation, role, or economic impact, other than some casual professional, working class employee. The clothing of female teacher images was particularly telling in that respect, partially because women’s clothing since the 19^th century has been largely ambiguous with regards to communicating economics or occupation and rather more concerned with decoration, with the exception of the power dressing ensembles that emerged from the 1970s and 1980s and attempted to signify working women as both women and professionals. That the teaching profession is made up of predominantly female teachers (especially at the elementary levels) may indicate to observers that it is not a distinguishable (or distinguished) occupation or at least not one that impacts the economy in any powerful or significant way.

There were also preservice teachers that took a more individualized approach to their teacher images and rendered teachers in bright, clashing colors, lab coats or aprons, or sporting tattoos. They explained that they intentionally drew their teacher images differently from what they thought would be expected: “I have piercings and tats which is why you can see that flower tattoo on my teacher’s arm. It is who I am and part of the teacher I will be” (female PS, spring 2015). The desire for independence is indicated by a departure from the norm, resistance to conforming to a stereotype, and the search for an external representation that is more palatable or aligned to personal viewpoints: “How we perform our identity has something to do with our location in the social world as members of particular groups, classes, cultural communities. The clothes we choose to wear represent a compromise between the demands of the social world, the milieu in which we belong, and our own individual desires” (Entwistle Reference Entwistle2000, 114). For example, teacher images that depicted “super teachers” (see Figures 4 and 8) make a conscious effort to combat moderate, traditional images of teaching with symbolic, powerful ones: “Well the strange clothes relate to me because I do not want to be a teacher that simply dresses or acts like a normal one, because…I have noticed…that the great teachers always do something different” (male, spring 2013; see corresponding Figure 4); “Teaching is more difficult and amazing than people think. We need to shake up what people think it’s all about!” (female PS, fall 2020; see corresponding Figure 8). There is conflict, however, in these departures from the norm, because the development of teacher identity is a complicated process. Even for self-actualized, professional, master teachers, creating a new identity by modifying stereotypical images that have permeated their experiences and lives can prove problematic. Imagine then the tension produced for preservice teachers who are likewise trying to remain individuals, but at the same time modifying both mythological and realistic images of teaching and conforming to societal and institutional expectations.

Figure 8. “Super teachers” make a conscious effort to combat moderate, traditional images of teaching with symbolic, powerful ones. drawing of a teacher satisfying multiple codes. This image has been selected to particularly illustrate: “Blues (i.e., all shades of blue, such as cerulean, cornflower, teal, etc.)” and “Adornment: Facial cosmetics (i.e., mascara, lipstick, eye shadow, etc.).” Rendered in fall 2020 by a female preservice teacher.

Self-effacing and non-sexual dress choices. Although most of the teacher images were drawn as female (77.28%, and drawn by female students: 72.37%), both teacher image genders were overwhelmingly rendered in clothing that was oriented towards deference and function as opposed to furbelow or vogue. Female preservice teachers’ drawings were often very detailed with regards to clothing and their textual comments left no doubt as to the importance of presenting a teacher whose appearance was not attention-seeking or sexualized, but rather conveyed subservient professionalism: “I did not want my teacher’s skirt to be too short or for her sweater to be too tight” (female PS, spring 2014); “The teacher is simple, but neat and covered, which I believe is a big part of a teacher’s attire. Ex. She has jewlery [sic] but they are simple peices [sic] that don’t draw attention or are too loud” (female PS, fall 2016); “This brings back memories… of the dress code problems they’ve been having with the teachers! It seems even they are losing touch with the meaning of being ‘properly dressed’ at work” (female PS, fall 2019); “To be honest, my first idea was to be creative with my drawing, adding a sexy shirt…or some other accessory of that sort. Then I realized that I didn’t want the class to think that this drawing is a future reflection of myself as an educator!” (female PS, spring 2020); “Miss X, as we’ll call her, is dressed professionally in a black knee length skirt and conservative blouse. Her make-up is minimal. Nothing is too revealing or too ‘loud’” (female PS, spring 2006).

In stark contrast to men’s bodies, women’s bodies have long been exhorted to exercise control and exude morality, seemingly because women have been historically characterized as unpredictable, unrestrained, and uncontrollable. Lurie (Reference Lurie1981) uses a variety of examples to illustrate how past conventionalisms with regards to women’s dress reflect (mostly men’s) society’s desire to contain and control, from upper class Chinese foot binding, to discouraging women to wear trousers, to higher and higher heeled shoes. As women balanced home-making and child-rearing with entry into a male-dominated teaching workforce, appropriate dress choices necessarily deflected attention away from women’s physical bodies because those that hinted at sexuality were considered threatening, non-conformist, and dangerous: “The sexuality of female teachers is often portrayed, not as healthy or enriching, but as perversion, as dangerous. Teaching and learning, after all, are not supposed to have anything to do with sex” (Weber and Mitchell Reference Weber and Mitchell1995, 124). Female workers were expected to be sexless and selfless; in fact, early female teachers in the United States were required to be unmarried. The presence of these two traits would help a woman retain her employment and if the language of her dress also tacitly conveyed those traits, that could only help to reinforce what was already expected and appropriate of a woman in her position. Selflessness reinforced a preferred slave-like dedication, which was apparently necessary as women weren’t considered serious workers: “So-called favorable images that characterize the teacher as selfless, also mirror the stereotypes associated with women. Like the ‘good’ woman, the ‘good’ teacher is positioned as self-sacrificing, kind, overworked, underpaid and holding an unlimited reservoir or patience” (Britzman Reference Britzman1991, 5). Sexless-ness ensured that a sterile, cerebral, and safe environment prevailed where parents left their children for the day: “Female teachers’ bodies are subjected to gazes that are filtered through ingrained prevailing stereotypes that suggest that one cannot be a woman (sexual) and a professional (intellectual) at the same time” (Weber and Mitchell Reference Weber and Mitchell1999, 152).

The association between women and children is both normal and natural as well as societally and culturally influenced because of women’s reproductive capacities. Many women become mothers and mothers are generally the primary caretakers of children. The majority of teachers in the United States are women and the majority of these are employed at the elementary school level (U.S. Department of Education 2021). This may be due in part to historical legacy, as women have made up the majority of the teaching population ever since the mid-19^th century (Rury Reference Rury2020). At that time, teaching became a pursuit appropriate for women (should they choose a pursuit other than marrying and child-rearing), as it was considered somewhat akin to child-minding and therefore suitable to innate maternal instincts (Rury Reference Rury2020). In addition, although women completed the same teacher education programs and internships as men, they could be paid significantly less than their male counterparts and schools took advantage of this fiscal serendipity.

This association between women and children goes one warped step further when aligning women to children by suggesting that women are not fully developed or mature the way that men are, especially with regards to their sexuality and presentation in professional spaces: “It seems that women were not to be trusted to keep their sexuality in check or to know how to behave without being told…Like young children who are assumed not to have the judgment and experience to know how to dress, teachers were and perhaps still are dictated to in such a way as to make it clear that they are not fully trustworthy, that it is not they who are in control” (Weber and Mitchell Reference Weber and Mitchell1995, 63). While 48.94% of female teacher images were rendered wearing skirts or dresses, which could arguably be understood as more sexually accessible than trousers, these garments were consistently of a modest length (to the knees or longer). Almost all of the teacher images portrayed a modest, unassuming, and nonsexual figure indicating that this self-policing has been internalized, and perhaps intentionally propagated, within the teaching profession. Teacher images that were explicitly rebellious, sexual, or commanding were nearly non-existent in this data corpus.

The appearance of the majority of female teacher images was one that mimicked power dressing rules that were borne out of the late 1970s with the increase of women in the workforce (Rury Reference Rury2020) and remain in effect (to various degrees/professions) to the modern day: a straight skirt, a stylish blouse and/or jacket, and something feminine close to the face (i.e., cosmetics, jewelry). For example, trousers appeared on female teacher images half as much as skirts and dresses with 24.28% (casual professional trousers, 19.09%; trousers as part of a suit, 5.39%) of trousers in comparison to 48.94% of skirts and dresses (skirts, 36.18%; dresses, 12.76%). Power dressing hoped to manage women’s culturally inherent sexuality (which was a deterrent to advancement in professional circles) by laying out rules for dress that would give a woman authority through “control over her body and self-presentation in the face of male-defined notions of female sexuality and the potential objectifying male gaze in the workplace” (Entwistle Reference Entwistle2000, 188-189). However, this did not mean that a women’s femininity should be completely quashed underneath boxy garments (such as the male sack suit), but somehow impossibly balanced between feminine, yet not-too-feminine (i.e., skirts as opposed to trousers, but not in feminine colors like pink and lavender) and masculine, yet not-too-masculine (i.e., tailored jackets and tops, but not so much so that they revealed the shape of the breasts or waist). This quixotic balance preserved some femininity so that males in the workplace would not feel threatened, but not so much that the female employee was aping men or pretending to aspire to or appropriate male status by assimilating their dress in toto. The dress of the female teacher images and accompanying textual data certainly indicated that my female preservice teachers were versed and adept in assuming responsibility for striking the “correct” balance between being a woman and being a professional (teacher): “Professional and business women continue to express concerns about how to present their bodies at work so as not to be read as ‘sexual.’ This concern with the body gives further evidence of the way in which women have had to become conscious of their bodies and responsible not just for their own sexuality, but for the sexuality of men who might be ‘misled’ into reading sexuality into their dress” (Entwistle Reference Entwistle2000, 190).

The choice of a skirt or dress instead of trousers in the teacher images may also indicate an acknowledged imbalance of power between men and women on the basis of sex in the educational profession. Historically, women have been positioned as secondary to men and characterized as the weaker, yet paradoxically, unrestrained sex. The effect of this can perhaps be seen in the self-policing choice of a skirt or dress (and this metaphor may be stretched to include high heels which appeared in 32.79% of female teacher images) which could represent the acceptance of female sexual weakness and inferiority, as the skirt physically and symbolically hampers the wearer to a degree that trousers do not (Lurie Reference Lurie1981). Eicher and Roach-Higgins (Reference Eicher, Roach-Higgins, Barnes and Eicher1993) posit that (Western) male professional dress, in comparison to their physical bodies, has greater volume and shape as opposed to women’s. Consider the volume of a boxy suit in a substantial fabric such as wool, which fully covers the torso and all limbs in multiple layers (i.e., collared shirt, tie, suit jacket, long trousers, socks, closed shoes, even perhaps an undershirt, waistcoat, and overcoat). Compare this to a filmy blouse, a silk cardigan sweater, a straight skirt that just covers the thighs, and open shoes that reveal the top of the foot. Despite the largely sexless, selfless, and controlled female teachers depicted in the teacher images, their bodies were more exposed and less consequential, while men’s bodies were better hidden and better paid.

Finally, one outlier code was the presence of high heeled shoes that were rendered in more than one-third of the female teacher images. High heels are considered more sexually charged shoes than for example, flat boat shoes. They complete haute couture runway ensembles, lingerie advertisements, and have been fetishized since they came into existence. However, high heeled shoes are also considered a more formal professional shoe option than flat shoes, perhaps because they imply settings of composure, gravity, and elegance and gliding along effortlessly in them requires determination, discipline, and an impeccable sense of balance. Thus, the sexy high heels and the sexless female body create tension in some teacher images. The inclusion of high heels could be simply be an involuntary compliance to prevailing societal guidelines which indicate that high heels are the formal professional shoe option for women in the workplace. But it could also be a form of rebellion, a way of inserting the unsexed female body (and by default, female sexuality) back into the image without making the female form overtly sexual and an object of predatory and critical gaze.

The colors black and blue. Colors have generally accepted social meanings that are most likely learned, however research on color meaning is not particularly conclusive because of different research methodologies and data collection (Pett and Wilson Reference Pett and Wilson1996) as well as intent and audience (i.e., aesthetics, science, psychology, etc.; Miller Reference Miller2014; Fox Reference Fox2021). Across the varied studies of affective (psychological significance) color meaning, most participants agreed that longer wavelength colors (560–700 nanometres) are usually described as warm (i.e., red, orange, yellow) while shorter wavelength colors (400–560 nanometres) are described as cool (i.e., green, blue, violet). Warm colors tend to be associated with happy, active, or exciting events, while cool colors indicate calm, peaceful, or controlled settings (Pett and Wilson Reference Pett and Wilson1996). In a variety of color and mood-tone studies, the color blue was associated with the following relatable moods: security, comfort, tenderness, soothing, calm, peacefulness, and serenity (Wexner Reference Wexner1954; Schaie Reference Schaie1961; Wright and Rainwater Reference Wright and Rainwater1962). The moods or meanings for the color black were either unhappy (such as distressed, disturbed, upset, despondent, dejected, and melancholy) or powerful (such as dignified, stately, defiant, contrary, hostile, strong, and masterful) (Wexner Reference Wexner1954; Schaie Reference Schaie1961; Wright and Rainwater Reference Wright and Rainwater1962). Associative color meaning is created by social contexts, which is why the same color can mean different things in different parts of the world. For example, in the United States one would be green with envy, but in France, one would be green with fear. While there are a few color associations that are considered global (i.e., black is associated with night, darkness, and dirt and blue is associated with sky and water; Fox Reference Fox2021), the color associations discussed in the following paragraphs align primarily with Western color contexts and connotations.

Black, although a seemingly uncomplicated hue, has been imbued with a variety of symbolic meanings throughout history and its significance can vary greatly depending on cultural, social, and historical contexts. Black has been a fashionable color to wear in different circumstances and circles since the fourteenth century (Hollander Reference Hollander1978), but it is also often straightforwardly linked to immorality and pollution as its counterpole white is linked to virtuosity and purity. It can connote a variety of messages, which alter subtly with who, what, where, when, how, and why black is worn. Black may signify sobriety, denial, and mystery, but it can also symbolize knowledge, sophistication, and drama (Lurie Reference Lurie1981), even rebellion and counterculture. In many Western cultures, black clothing was historically worn during periods of mourning as a symbol of respect and sorrow and still is to this day. Perhaps historical legacy plays a part in black as a color choice for working professionals. As Lurie (Reference Lurie1981) explains, the northeastern region of the United States was home to the largest population of Puritan settlers and their particularly severe garb (i.e., dark or drab dress with white accents at the neck and hands) can be seen in the dark suits and light collars/cuffs of modern working professionals. Over time, black has become a standard and highly versatile color in the realm of professional attire, associated with a range of positive qualities and emotions, including sophistication, power, authority, formality, and timelessness. It is regarded as a neutral color that can be paired with a range of other colors and patterns, which makes it a popular choice for those who want to look professional and fashionable at the same time. Black as a dress choice may convey preservice teachers’ anxieties about entering the teaching profession or depressing expectations that the work will be difficult or trying. It may also connote their sense of sophistication or proficiency as they enter a profession where they will have the chance to exhibit the specialized content knowledge they have worked hard to master. It is also possible that it is an intuitive default choice for novice teachers who are unsure of what to wear, but subconsciously understand that the cultural dress code characterizes black as a neutral, appropriate color for professional dress.

In the verbal data collected along with the teacher images, preservice teachers indicated that black was a suitable neutral color; a color that was a predictable but somewhat dull staple in a teacher’s wardrobe: “It’s good for basic teacher clothing [the color black], but not too much of it. You don’t want to be morbid” (female PS, fall 2019); “Black is good for pants because you can sit on the floor and doesn’t get dirty” (female PS, spring 2020); “Black adds a little class to your outfit and it looks more professional, but you have to dress it up a little” (female PS, spring 2017).

Blue is a color associated with placidity and security and has often been linked to the sky and the sea, as well as to concepts of divinity and spiritual purity (Fox Reference Fox2021). It also signifies trustworthiness, service, and hard work and is, coincidentally, the most common color for all clothing in the United States (Lurie Reference Lurie1981), as well as the most popular color in 17 countries across five continents by at least one-third of the total vote in each country (Fox Reference Fox2021). The color blue predominates the official (and unofficial) uniforms of professions where loyalty and production are the main directives that the said profession wishes to convey to the public (i.e., insurers, police officers, bankers). Blue-collar workers/professions wish to communicate that its members are modest, service-oriented, and reliable. As teaching is also a service profession, the choice of blue in the teachers’ is rather suitable, given the color’s past and present associations: “I feel like my teachers always wore a lot of blue which is why my teacher has a blue shirt on” (male PS, fall 2017); “I put my tacher [sic] in a blue dress, but I would have drawn a suit if I knew how. Blue is a safe color, I mean who doesn’t like blue?” (female PS, spring 2014); “It’s important not to wear glaring crazy colors to be taken seriously. That’s why my teacher is wearing a blue shirt and black pants” (male PS, spring 2011).

Public school teachers are often codified as representatives for the masses and perhaps the choice of blue (as a very popular and common color) in their garb is a way of identifying with the majority and authenticating their civic positions. Blue in the teacher image clothing may suggest that preservice teachers believe the teaching profession to be fundamentally service-oriented and honest. They may also believe that hard work is a foundational component to success in this field and that their work will be legitimately observed and judged by the public. Perhaps, there is even a devotional or inspiring aspect to becoming a teacher: in very few professions are you given almost free rein to work with a very special and sacred population (children) and be an influence in their future thoughts, words, and deeds.