To Make Them Responsible
Sara Labora asked:
To Make Them Responsible
“What happened to you as a child that you feel the need to yell at me all the time?” was the question that put the teacher over the edge and ultimately led my brother down the empty hall towards the principal’s office. Of course, to a teacher this is a rather undesirable question; one that only an impolite attention-seeking child would ask and one that reeks of defiance and signals the crumbling of the authoritarian classroom structure. The question is not only inappropriate; it is embarrassing. It challenges the teacher’s management competencies and assumes a connection between the teacher and a horrific and traumatizing event in his personal history that may or may not have taken place. Ultimately, the question is a personal attack on the teacher’s sense of self-discipline and morality. In this classroom, a situation like this calls for the quick and painless removal of the perpetrator.
Since the age of two my brother Michael has, for lack of a better phrase, had “ants in his pants.” As an energetic and Tasmanian devil-like toddler, I remember my brother barreling through the grocery store at turbo speed humming bars of Rossini’s William Tell Overture. Since then, Michael has only acquired extra energy that often exhausts cynical adults that cannot keep up with his enthusiasm and excitement for life. Despite his high levels of activity, Michael has a kind heart and a keen sense of justice. However, these are not qualities that are valued in his classroom. Rather, students that learn quickly, are compliant to requests, and treat teachers with respect, whether it is commanded or not, are assets to the learning community, and children that cannot sit still while seeking to question and challenge norms are muzzled.
The perpetrator sat in the principal’s office for the remainder of the afternoon, where he was asked to consider how and why he had offended his teacher before drafting a one-way written apology. Sure, he may have hit a nerve and slightly damaged his teacher’s sense of self-efficacy. However, how can we justify giving adults candy and punishing children for the same crimes? Does this not assume that children are far more resilient than adults?
Maria Montessori once compared the classroom to a miniature version of society. She suggested that the prepared learning environment, created in the classroom, correspond to the interactions that take place in society. In society, one is most likely to verbally defend oneself in the midst of an argument. It is during these types of social situations that we learn to act diplomatically to “get what we want” and maintain relationships. Rather than silencing our students, should we not guide them to ask questions and state opinions in more appropriate and socially acceptable ways?
Furthermore, it is evident that in most societies, freedom of opinion is always conditional. In fundamentalist countries, for instance, free speech is only accepted when it favours a government’s agenda. On the other hand, freedom of opinion in Canada is stated through means such as atheist bumper stickers, fois gras protests, Gay Pride parades and so on. Essentially, this is the nature of a democracy. However, in many cases, freedom of opinion comes with a price when it does not support the desired agenda. In Michael’s case, freedom of opinion signaled an afternoon date with the school principal.
Ironically, the aim of education is to create responsible citizens out of all children, including the ones that we deem to be irresponsible. However, a simple way to achieve the goals education sets forth is to provide students with opportunities to exercise their freedoms in responsible ways. For example, recognizing a child’s innate potential for intelligent, creative and systematic thinking and by nurturing healthy, whole, curious individuals who are able learn whatever they need to know in any new context.
Following “the question” ordeal I continued to hear news of several incidents involving Michael at school. One of these included “talking back” to a teacher that had ridiculed him for “acting immature.” Another incident included a suspension for calling another student “chippy.” Finally, the principal called my mother at work to mention that she thought restorative discipline would be an effective means of dealing with Michael’s misbehaviour. Michael, his principal, the vice principal and his teacher that dislikes him met for a circle session.
My brother’s principal posed the appropriate restorative questions; why did you call this student “chippy”? How do you think it affected him? How did it affect your peers? Michael responded; “I called him chippy because he was calling my friend “four-eyes” because he wears glasses. My friend doesn’t like his glasses, and he doesn’t feel good about wearing them, but he has to. I called the boy “chippy” because he has a chipped tooth from beating up other kids, so he brought his chipped tooth on himself.” The principal responded, “So, you think two wrongs make something right?” “No,” said my brother, “but I think that it is just as wrong to be a bystander.”
The principal decided that the best form of punishment would be a suspension for all the students involved in schoolyard bullying. Consequently, the worst punishment was the so- called “restorative circle” that resembled the Spanish Inquisition and served as an act of interrogative bullying in itself. The goals of restorative justice could not be more far removed from binding arbitration.
Is it possible, that our current notions of education are somewhat confused? We clearly understand the goals of education, but seek to fulfill them backwardly. We recognize that teachers have much to do with modeling the behaviours and attitudes we want our children to exhibit. Furthermore, we recognize that education has an aspect of vocational training, but to what extent? Do we model justice, compassion, empathy and an ability to handle chaotic classroom situations with ease and fairness? Do we instill a strong sense of democracy in our classrooms by giving students a say in how they learn? Do we recognize the multi-faceted layers of our students? Do we recognize their academic, physical and emotional needs, or do we treat them as psuedo-individuals?
We have evolved beyond the “speak when spoken to” phase, and generally recognize that children are complete individuals with the same basic rights as adults. However, everyday Michael finds himself constantly biting his tongue in order to avoid a bureaucratic showdown. Michael has finally begun to realize that his mouth is his own worst enemy, even in the midst of injustice. For Michael, school is not the safe haven where he can voice his thoughts and concerns. Rather, it has become an experience where survival of the fittest has trumped inquiry and a passion for learning.
Unfortunately, Michael has only been viewed as a half-person in his school. Michael is the chatty kid in the class; he is the class clown. He is the kid that sabotages the lessons that teachers spend hours planning and preparing, and look forward to teaching. He is the kid a teacher could resent.
Moreover, Michael is the kid with the golden heart. He is the inquisitive kid. The kid who questions why things are the way they are. He is the kid driven by intuition that challenges the motives of others and recognizes the various forms of injustice that take place in his world. Michael is the kid that so desperately needs guidance in directing his passions and energy towards appropriate goals.
———————-
The other day, Michael’s teacher phoned my mother. He said, “Will you please give that boy a pencil?” “Yes,” she said. “But will you do something for ‘that boy’? Will you, in the very least, please dignify him with a name?”
——————————-
The goal of education is to instill a passion for learning in our students, while preparing them to be responsible and compassionate citizens. If we do not model responsibility and compassion, it is unreasonable to expect children to do the same. Moreover, we have a responsibility to not only model particular behaviours, but to dignify our students.
By educating the whole-person, as opposed to the psuedo-person we begin to treat students as equal counterparts, providing them with the sense of a “true democracy.” In a truly democratic classroom, students have the freedom to communicate their thoughts and needs. Consequently, by exercising these freedoms, children learn to communicate their thoughts in appropriate and effective ways in the classroom and beyond.
Andrea
This entry was posted
on Sunday, June 7th, 2009 at 6:03 am and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
To Make Them Responsible
“What happened to you as a child that you feel the need to yell at me all the time?” was the question that put the teacher over the edge and ultimately led my brother down the empty hall towards the principal’s office. Of course, to a teacher this is a rather undesirable question; one that only an impolite attention-seeking child would ask and one that reeks of defiance and signals the crumbling of the authoritarian classroom structure. The question is not only inappropriate; it is embarrassing. It challenges the teacher’s management competencies and assumes a connection between the teacher and a horrific and traumatizing event in his personal history that may or may not have taken place. Ultimately, the question is a personal attack on the teacher’s sense of self-discipline and morality. In this classroom, a situation like this calls for the quick and painless removal of the perpetrator.
Since the age of two my brother Michael has, for lack of a better phrase, had “ants in his pants.” As an energetic and Tasmanian devil-like toddler, I remember my brother barreling through the grocery store at turbo speed humming bars of Rossini’s William Tell Overture. Since then, Michael has only acquired extra energy that often exhausts cynical adults that cannot keep up with his enthusiasm and excitement for life. Despite his high levels of activity, Michael has a kind heart and a keen sense of justice. However, these are not qualities that are valued in his classroom. Rather, students that learn quickly, are compliant to requests, and treat teachers with respect, whether it is commanded or not, are assets to the learning community, and children that cannot sit still while seeking to question and challenge norms are muzzled.
The perpetrator sat in the principal’s office for the remainder of the afternoon, where he was asked to consider how and why he had offended his teacher before drafting a one-way written apology. Sure, he may have hit a nerve and slightly damaged his teacher’s sense of self-efficacy. However, how can we justify giving adults candy and punishing children for the same crimes? Does this not assume that children are far more resilient than adults?
Maria Montessori once compared the classroom to a miniature version of society. She suggested that the prepared learning environment, created in the classroom, correspond to the interactions that take place in society. In society, one is most likely to verbally defend oneself in the midst of an argument. It is during these types of social situations that we learn to act diplomatically to “get what we want” and maintain relationships. Rather than silencing our students, should we not guide them to ask questions and state opinions in more appropriate and socially acceptable ways?
Furthermore, it is evident that in most societies, freedom of opinion is always conditional. In fundamentalist countries, for instance, free speech is only accepted when it favours a government’s agenda. On the other hand, freedom of opinion in Canada is stated through means such as atheist bumper stickers, fois gras protests, Gay Pride parades and so on. Essentially, this is the nature of a democracy. However, in many cases, freedom of opinion comes with a price when it does not support the desired agenda. In Michael’s case, freedom of opinion signaled an afternoon date with the school principal.
Ironically, the aim of education is to create responsible citizens out of all children, including the ones that we deem to be irresponsible. However, a simple way to achieve the goals education sets forth is to provide students with opportunities to exercise their freedoms in responsible ways. For example, recognizing a child’s innate potential for intelligent, creative and systematic thinking and by nurturing healthy, whole, curious individuals who are able learn whatever they need to know in any new context.
Following “the question” ordeal I continued to hear news of several incidents involving Michael at school. One of these included “talking back” to a teacher that had ridiculed him for “acting immature.” Another incident included a suspension for calling another student “chippy.” Finally, the principal called my mother at work to mention that she thought restorative discipline would be an effective means of dealing with Michael’s misbehaviour. Michael, his principal, the vice principal and his teacher that dislikes him met for a circle session.
My brother’s principal posed the appropriate restorative questions; why did you call this student “chippy”? How do you think it affected him? How did it affect your peers? Michael responded; “I called him chippy because he was calling my friend “four-eyes” because he wears glasses. My friend doesn’t like his glasses, and he doesn’t feel good about wearing them, but he has to. I called the boy “chippy” because he has a chipped tooth from beating up other kids, so he brought his chipped tooth on himself.” The principal responded, “So, you think two wrongs make something right?” “No,” said my brother, “but I think that it is just as wrong to be a bystander.”
The principal decided that the best form of punishment would be a suspension for all the students involved in schoolyard bullying. Consequently, the worst punishment was the so- called “restorative circle” that resembled the Spanish Inquisition and served as an act of interrogative bullying in itself. The goals of restorative justice could not be more far removed from binding arbitration.
Is it possible, that our current notions of education are somewhat confused? We clearly understand the goals of education, but seek to fulfill them backwardly. We recognize that teachers have much to do with modeling the behaviours and attitudes we want our children to exhibit. Furthermore, we recognize that education has an aspect of vocational training, but to what extent? Do we model justice, compassion, empathy and an ability to handle chaotic classroom situations with ease and fairness? Do we instill a strong sense of democracy in our classrooms by giving students a say in how they learn? Do we recognize the multi-faceted layers of our students? Do we recognize their academic, physical and emotional needs, or do we treat them as psuedo-individuals?
We have evolved beyond the “speak when spoken to” phase, and generally recognize that children are complete individuals with the same basic rights as adults. However, everyday Michael finds himself constantly biting his tongue in order to avoid a bureaucratic showdown. Michael has finally begun to realize that his mouth is his own worst enemy, even in the midst of injustice. For Michael, school is not the safe haven where he can voice his thoughts and concerns. Rather, it has become an experience where survival of the fittest has trumped inquiry and a passion for learning.
Unfortunately, Michael has only been viewed as a half-person in his school. Michael is the chatty kid in the class; he is the class clown. He is the kid that sabotages the lessons that teachers spend hours planning and preparing, and look forward to teaching. He is the kid a teacher could resent.
Moreover, Michael is the kid with the golden heart. He is the inquisitive kid. The kid who questions why things are the way they are. He is the kid driven by intuition that challenges the motives of others and recognizes the various forms of injustice that take place in his world. Michael is the kid that so desperately needs guidance in directing his passions and energy towards appropriate goals.
———————-
The other day, Michael’s teacher phoned my mother. He said, “Will you please give that boy a pencil?” “Yes,” she said. “But will you do something for ‘that boy’? Will you, in the very least, please dignify him with a name?”
——————————-
The goal of education is to instill a passion for learning in our students, while preparing them to be responsible and compassionate citizens. If we do not model responsibility and compassion, it is unreasonable to expect children to do the same. Moreover, we have a responsibility to not only model particular behaviours, but to dignify our students.
By educating the whole-person, as opposed to the psuedo-person we begin to treat students as equal counterparts, providing them with the sense of a “true democracy.” In a truly democratic classroom, students have the freedom to communicate their thoughts and needs. Consequently, by exercising these freedoms, children learn to communicate their thoughts in appropriate and effective ways in the classroom and beyond.
Andrea