Tag: Classroom Management

Make Me (Lessons from the Classroom in a Time of Corona)

~ Blue Cereal

Mount Rushmore-19As I write this, the nation is getting restless with all of this Covid-19 “shelter in place” stuff. The daily body count is a constant feature on any 24/7 news channel, and there are some real concerns about how we survive economically even if most of us eventually get through it medically.  I’m not going to argue the science, the economics, or even the politics of the thing at the moment. I can’t help noticing, however, several features of the current crisis which aren’t entirely unfamiliar to educators. Since many of us have a bit more time on our hands than we’d like, I figure there’s nothing lost in pondering a few of them here.

First: The Overwhelmed Medical Profession

Teachers aren’t doctors. We may save lives in some sense, but nothing like what many of them do quite literally every day. Nevertheless, there’s something familiar about the current dynamic in which medical professionals are being asked to handle an ongoing disaster which was largely preventable, using insufficient resources largely selected and distributed based on politics rather than in consultation with those who are actually experts in the field. To those in scrubs: we feel you, friend.

Just to antagonize them further, many of the same voices which are offering token praise of their efforts and personal sacrifices are in the same breath undercutting the entire ideology within which they operate. This isn’t a medical issue to be addressed with science! It’s a plot! A subversion of our way of life based on political skullduggery! “Social distancing”? More like Social-ISM! Again, yep. Been there. Still are, actually.

Anti-Social Distancing, MomSecond: A Federalism of Convenience

The relationship between local, state, and federal government is usually at its tightest when disaster strikes, but not so this time. I feel for mayors and governors who are attempting to manage a situation which by its very nature spills over borders freely and which they lack the power to fully contain. If they had complete control of those in their districts over an extended period of time, they could no doubt make great strides in turning this baby around, but instead people come and go and they lack the power to prevent it.

Even worse, they’re dealing with a federal government claiming to want to help them but often making things more difficult. Resources which could be going to their neediest citizens are redirected by powers in Washington, D.C., based on their own political priorities and pet projects. Any effort to make their own rules is met with resistance; any effort to coordinate solutions is shrugged off as “not a federal responsibility.” I’m not suggesting the immediate consequences are quite as severe, but this dynamic does sound vaguely familiar to those of us in public education.

Third: The “Make Me” Problem

Let’s assume for the moment that the majority of mayors and governors ordering businesses closed or that people stay inside have good intentions and want to save lives and so on. I’m not challenging anyone’s motivation. There’s a tricky distinction, however, between authority and control. More than anything else happening on the national stage at the moment, THIS is something QUITE familiar to educators of any subject at any grade level.

Sorry We're ClosedIn theory, I’m in charge of my class. There are guidelines within which I’m expected to work – I can’t hit the kids, cuss at them, take their personal stuff, etc. There are rules limiting what I can and cannot do. Within those rules, however, I have some leeway how I manage my classroom. In theory, if I insist there be no talking during silent reading, then there should be no talking. If I decree a seating chart, students should sit where the chart says they sit. Because those are the rules. While they may be inconvenient for the individual, they’re good for the class as a whole – or at least that’s the ideal.

In practice, however, every line drawn is a calculated risk. If I tell a class that there’s to be no talking the rest of the hour, I’d better know exactly what I’m willing to do about it if they talk anyway. As any parent knows, once you’ve repeated your expectations without getting the desired results a few times, you’d better have something else in your arsenal or you’ve just announced to the 12-year old that from here on out, they’re in charge. Since most of us can’t spank our students or send them to their rooms without supper, we’re left with less direct alternatives.

Generally speaking, teachers use a concoction of authority, relationship, and reason to prompt student cooperation. The mix won’t look the same from teacher to teacher or even from class to class throughout the day, but most effective teachers have all three in there somewhere.

Authority comes from the position. If you don’t cooperate, I’ll call your mom. I’ll write you up. I’ll give you detention. Authority by itself is a blunt instrument, but one you have to be willing to use for it to mean anything. Ideally, however, you rely on it as little as possible after the first month or so. Authority lets you win battles, but it does little to promote excellence or creativity or taking productive risks.

One things governors and mayors have had to do recently that we don’t see very often is use their authority to tell citizens what they can and can’t do. Not everyone was even sure how it worked – when was the last time you had to worry that the Mayor might find out that you REALLY went to Wal-Mart for a picture frame and only bought canned goods so you wouldn’t look guilty?

No Paint Brushes For You!Relationships are far more subtle. Many non-educators assume teachers get to know our kids because we’re all touchy-feely little snowflake-builders who just want everyone to feel loved. Sure, most of us care what happens to our kids, but that’s not the underlying reason relationships are essential. Without relationships, the only thing I’ve got to motivate them to cooperate are rules and reason. I don’t know if you’ve met an American teenager lately, but they’re not all fond of rules, and as a culture we’re not so great with “reason.”

It’s not about being their “friend” – it’s about wooing, cajoling, inspiring, badgering, or otherwise figuring out what motivates each kid to come to the damned water and DRINK! We’re being measured by little Johnny’s reading scores, however, so one way or the other we’re going to try to figure out what makes him refuse to tick – even if that means we have to get to know him.

Finally, there’s the issue of “buy-in.” Do the rules make sense to those expected to follow them? I can tell my kids to quiet down and most probably will, but it’s not simply because I have authority, although that helps. It matters that I’ve invested in getting to know them – they don’t all love me, but we have mostly positive relationships. What clinches the deal is that most of them accept on a fundamental level that a quiet environment is sometimes reasonable and normal in class. They may not always cooperate, but few would argue with conviction that moving around and more random outbursts would really help them focus on their reading. 

With enough relationship and/or authority, I can sometimes get “buy-in” on things they don’t yet understand or see the value of. OK, Mr. Cereal – we’re not sure what you’re up to here, but you’ve mostly been OK up until now, so we’ll go along with it for a bit and see how it plays out.” It’s actually deceptively easy to stumble deep into the pedagogical woods before you turn around and realize no one’s coming with you. You can play the “authority” card all you like at that point, and the best you’ll get is external compliance minus all real learning or enthusiasm. Often, you won’t even get that – especially if they start to notice that others among them feel the same.

It can turn. Quickly. Ask any teacher.

Snowflake MakerThis is the part presenting the biggest challenge to local authorities at the moment as they try to figure out how long to keep some things closed, or – like the poor Governor of Michigan – how to let you go to Wal-Mart for car parts and milk but make sure you don’t grab a few $5 DVDs while you’re there because those aren’t “essential.”

Sure, there are folks at each extreme – some insist the virus is no big deal because people die of other stuff all the time, while others bleach their mail before opening it. Most, however, are somewhere in between. They’re willing to mostly stay at home, and practice a certain amount of “social distancing,” and wait this out for a few more days. Maybe even weeks. They may not like it, and may not always follow the rules, but they subscribe the basic concept – we don’t want people to get sick and die.

Just like my students, however, we’re starting to see the backlash when authority lacks relationship or people no longer buy the reasoning. Why can’t we just…? What about…? And surely you can’t tell me not to…? It’s not a failure of mayors or governors, it’s human nature when it comes to unfamiliar rules and people you may not know or like much telling you what to do. I’m not sure mayors or governors are used to being in the position of having to win folks over once they’ve taken office, particularly not when it comes to matters of public health or emergency measures. They have my sympathy – even the ones I usually disagree with.

I suggest taking a breath and starting fresh tomorrow. Be ready to bust out the authority, if you have it and are willing to use it, and try to listen to representatives from the disaffected. If that’s not enough, however, they’ll need to do a much better job persuading the majority that their reasons and policies make sense for everyone – that they have a plan and it will pay off, if only we’ll play along. If not, you should consider calling everyone’s moms. You’d be surprised how often that works.

It’s A Structural Thing

~ Blue Cereal

Drill SergeantI’m sure it will surprise absolutely no one to learn that I’m not naturally the strict, by-the-book authoritarian type. In fact, I traditionally hate doing things that way – I really do.

That doesn’t mean I think those who manage their classrooms (or families, or companies) that way are necessarily doing anything wrong. I’ve worked with teachers who care deeply about each and every child in front of them but would nonetheless rather burst into flames than hang a motivational poster, let alone bend a rule. It’s their very consistency that works for them. (It’s hard to feel picked on or abused when the Superintendent’s kid is serving the same after-school detention you are for being the same 23 seconds late after lunch a second time.)

One of the best pieces of advice I was given as a student teacher (or as anything else, for that matter) was from a soccer coach and social studies educator who wasn’t even my assigned mentor at the time. It’s been over twenty years, but I remember his name (Coach Kinzer), his voice, and even his face as he spoke. I even remember the school library where we talked while his kids worked on a project of some sort. (The project I don’t actually remember.)

That stuff they cover in teacher school, that’s fine, I guess, but you’ll quickly discover not everything works that way once you’re actually doing it. So, here’s my advice, if you want it:

Figure out what’s going to work for you in how you’re gonna run your classroom, and then stick to it. Don’t draw lines you can’t or won’t hold or make promises you can’t keep. 

Now, me – I’m a hard-@ss. I don’t really see that working for you. But however you’re going to handle your classroom when it’s yours, make sure it’s something you’re willing to maintain all the time, because you can only fake it someone else’s way for just so long before it all falls apart.

I’ve had a few groups over the years which required more structure than others. And just because I prefer an informal approach to management and discipline doesn’t mean there aren’t critical boundaries. It’s not like I’m in tie-dye and wearing my gray hair in a ponytail every day, flipping the peace sign to the kids while they cuss me out, throw heavy objects, and light things on fire.

Hippie TeacherWhat it does mean is that I don’t tend to be rigid about things. Most issues I address only if they become a distraction or a safety issue, or when the school or district is particularly fixated on something. Historically, I’ve been pretty flippant with my kids as well. It’s high school, they’re practically people, and the more you abuse many of them, the more convinced they are that you’re establishing a true and lasting rapport. The crap I get away with saying just to poke at them would shock and horrify anyone who doesn’t actually work with young people, but for some reason it seemed to work. 

This choice comes with an obligation in return not to freak completely out when a student misreads the appropriate limits of such interactions and, in return, crosses lines which to the rest of us are still obvious. Sometimes they go from friendly barbs to tacky comments (which don’t crush my spirit but might negatively impact bystanders). Other times one of them will argue past the point of typical whining and it has to be shut down. The most common issue is that they simply haven’t developed a good natrual balance between “look at us building essential relationships” and the “shut up and get to work this is school.”

Each of those must be addressed, but if I’m going to play Mr. Flexible Cool-Teacher, I can’t respond to every poor choice by trying to become that “hard-@ss” Coach Kinzer was so good at. I’m particularly unwilling to escalate it beyond the doors of my classroom without multiple efforts to steer them back into the Realm of Reasonably Structured Learning.

It doesn’t always work. I’ve written referrals – even sent kids straight to an office a time or two, with a quick call and “paperwork to follow.” I’ve called parents, talked to administration, etc., when necessary… but I don’t like it. I’ve always figured I should be able to handle most of it with a little pluck and creativity. Well, that and their undying love for me based on how genuinely they know I care about them, whatever their weird personal issues. Honestly, I’ve always sort of taken pride in pushing my kids academically and personally based on love and mutual respect.

But you probably know that bit about what pride comes before…

Mr. KotterI’m in a new school and a new district this year, teaching a new subject (English Language Arts – *waves-to-ELA-peeps*) This is not like any place I’ve worked before, and it probably makes sense that comes with some limitations on my tried-and-true approaches to relationships and classroom management.

Please understand, I really like the school. I like the kids (so far). I wouldn’t have taken the gig if I wasn’t 100% enamored with the head principal’s philosophy and approach to, well… everything in the school day. None of the learning curve I’m about to share is criticism of any of my new little darlings – and certainly not of my colleagues. They’re pretty much miracle-workers, based on what I’ve seen so far.

That said, this is not a group with whom my “loose management” style is working, or going to work. Not any time soon. In fact, despite my efforts to be Mr. Consistency from Day One, I’ve already experienced the natural consequences of presuming preparation they haven’t had, internal mechanisms they haven’t developed, and a rapport they don’t want. It hasn’t been a total disaster or anything, but…

Well, some of it has. But not mostly.

These aren’t bad kids. Most of them aren’t consciously trying to drive me out of the profession. Nor do I believe they need for me to be angrier or more uptight or unreasonably restrictive about every detail. Structure isn’t about being loud. It’s not emotional. In fact, you establish structure so that you don’t have to be loud or emotional. It may require “winning,” but winning isn’t the goal.

I’ve never bought into the whole “don’t smile until Christmas” thing, but there’s some truth to the idea that there are times it’s more important that your class be a solid place – reliable, predictable, perhaps even unbending – than a warm-fuzzy zone. There’s much truth to the idea that some kids desperately need structure, and may never have experienced clear rules with immediate consequences but zero ugliness or personal judgment. I’ve worked with teachers who are GREAT at that stuff – it’s just never been me.

Framing Tiny HouseIt’s going to have to be this year. Not for me, and not for the state tests (which are a big issue in a school on all the wrong lists). I need to find that solidity. That almost detached, seemingly unsympathetic frame of mind necessary to have real school over time. It’s doable, and it’s the right thing to do in this case, for these students in this situation. It’s still nowhere near my natural way of doing things.

Then again, it’s not supposed to be about me and my preferred way of doing things. It’s not really supposed to be about me, period. I read a teacher book, once – I know some stuff. And I have a blog; that makes me an EXPERT!

But this is, like… hard. I’ve already had enough things in recent years be hard. I’d like to sit back and wisely counsel others on dealing with adversity – I’ve no time for more of it personally. The learning happens in the struggle, sure… but can I not just read a book or something and we’ll call it even? 

I’m not mad at anyone (well, myself sometimes) and I sure as hell don’t want to send any signals that I dislike or resent my kids – I don’t. I really, really don’t. (Some of them are already quite lovable, including the young man I’ve called security on twice already.) They need me to handle this well, and to be predictable, and to calmly make them mad by enforcing the policies, and to quietly assume the best about them when they’re trying to convince me otherwise, and to let them not like me because I’m so very “unfair.”

They need me to step back and not push relationship unless they decide they want it. To neither stereotype nor patronize them by believing I am in any way “down with kids.” (I’m so totally not.) Where my instinct is to connect, they need me to first be willing to contain. It kicks against everything I’ve loved about the gig for twenty years to so often and so calmly say, “no” and stand by it because anything else is chaos right now.

But I’m learning. And some of them are already asking some interesting questions. Not about English or History, unfortunately, but I suppose that will come. I don’t know them or their worlds and can’t read them the way I could so many others before, but in a way that’s probably just as well. This is going to take a while, and I should absolutely let it.

RELATED POST: Why Don’t You Just MAKE Them?

RELATED POST: Why Kids Learn (a.k.a. ‘The Seven Reasons Every Teacher Must Know WHY Kids Learn!’)

RELATED POST: Rules & Rulers

Classroom Control, Part I (Historical Guest Blog)

~ Blue Cereal

Old Classroom 1

Today’s Historical Guest Blog comes to us from Corinne A. Seeds, A.M., Principal of the Training School, Assistant Supervisor of Training, University of California at Los Angeles, with the cooperation of Milo B. Hillegas, Ph.D., LL.D., Professor of Education, Teachers College, Columbia University. I am not aware that either has a blog of their own, and as the material used here was published in 1927-28 (in Volume I of the 12-Volume series, The Class Room Teacher), chances are good both have gone to that great Teachers’ Lounge in the sky to mimeograph with the angels, as it were.

Their advice is nonetheless timeless – or at least amusing – and is shared here in excited anticipation of the upcoming semester.

Classroom Control: Methods of Control

The problem of classroom control is most vital and of outstanding, far-reaching importance. The future welfare of our country depends largely upon the methods of control used upon its future citizens. By these very methods teachers can produce anything from slaves who obey their masters explicitly without thinking, to freemen who make their choices only after careful deliberation and discussion. Thus it is of the utmost importance that teachers should know what types of control are best for the future welfare of a democracy.

“…a conglomerate mass of individuals at all stages…”

Our democracy is composed of a conglomerate mass of individuals at all stages of ethical development, from those who obey the laws made by the group for the welfare of all only when they are forced to do so to those unselfish souls who realize that their highest development and happiness are reached only as they consider all and act according to the best interests of the whole group. Midway between these two extremes we find those who obey only because they have been trained to do so, some who conform because of fear of the disapproval of their fellow men, and still others who act in accord because they long for approbation.

Taking into consideration all of these classes of people with such different attitudes towards control, it would be folly to assume that one method of control, even the ideal, would prove sufficient to promote the best interests of the group. There should be as many types of control as there are attitudes toward it. While it is necessary at times to use the lower forms of control, yet it should be the hope of the democracy that in the dim distant future, through our methods of education, the ideal can be truly reached – “a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.” 

Old Classroom 2

“…the highest control is that which comes from within…”

The problem of control which the classroom teacher must meet is a miniature of the greater problem which confronts the democracy.  It is not easy for the teacher to know how to manage Mexican Pedro, whose father digs in the street, Isadore, the son of the Rabbi, Mary Evelyn, whose mother is president of the philosophical society, and forty others who differ more or less in native and acquired characteristics, so that they may live richly and cooperatively together in their school community and grow into better, happier boys and girls. Like the democracy she should be cognizant of the fact that the highest control is that which comes from within as a result of reason, and she should strive toward that as her ideal. But she should not be utterly crushed if at times she has to resort to coercion in order to promote the greatest good for the greatest number.

In order to meet the control problems found in the typical American classrooms, teachers use methods based upon the following general types or combinations of two or more types:

(1) No control, wherein the children all do as they please.

(2) Teacher control, wherein rules are made and enforced by the teacher.

(3) Group control, wherein rules are made and enforced by the group working together for a common purpose.

(4) Unselfish self-control, wherein each person considers the good of the whole.

Old Classroom 3

NO CONTROL – Example:

The teacher is attempting to carry on a class recitation with one group of children while the others are supposed to be studying. Two or three large boys are lying on the floor with their feet propped against the stove. They are reading fiction which does not contribute in any way to their assignment. They later show a lack of knowledge as to the lesson content. Several girls are holding an animated conversation about the ways of securing pictures of the favorite “movie” actresses. The children who are trying to study have to dodge continual volleys of chalk, paper-wads, and even an eraser now and then. A note of unsavory character is passed about among the older children who laugh heartily at its contents.

The room is in an uproar; the recitation is a complete failure; but the teacher smilingly assures the visitor that she believes in “freedom.” 

Discussion:

There can be no defense for such lack of control, even when masquerading under cover of the term “freedom.” The teacher might as well not be there at all. The result of no control is always chaos; children are denied the right to feel happiness in real achievement; habits and attitudes are formed during these years in the school room which may tend to make of them, in later life, unreasoning, selfish, and lawless citizens.

Perhaps it might be well to state that true freedom would not allow such an infringement upon the rights and liberties of others. True freedom is something which should be earned and bestowed only upon those who can use it wisely. All teachers should be very careful to distinguish between real freedom and merely allowing children to do as they please. Real freedom leads toward right and true happiness; while allowing children to do as they please leads toward wrong and toward future sorrow.

Old Classroom 4

ABSOLUTE TEACHER CONTROL – Example:

When the class assembles on the first day of school, the teacher firmly informs the children that they are there for business and she is there to see that they attend to this business of learning. In order to accomplish this, certain tasks must be finished each day before they leave school. Anything which interferes with the work of school, such as talking without permission, whispering, giggling, or writing notes to one another will be carefully noted and punished by the teacher.

Ever after the children study the lessons assigned by the teacher, answer her questions, and accept the punishment she doles out for misdemeanors and errors. They usually do no more than they are asked, and frequently they misbehave when the teacher is not looking.

The teacher’s life is one of constant watchfulness. Her profession is not teaching; it is policing. She must be continually alert to catch the law-breakers, fair enough to pronounce just punishment, and persevering enough to see that punishment once pronounced is executed.

Discussion:

Such a method is far preferable to the preceding no-control type and should be used, especially by the inexperienced teacher, until she can determine the type best suited to her class of children. If used by a teacher who is always just and fair, the class achievement is usually good and the children rather happy. If, perchance, the teacher is a benign tyrant, the children will often vote this type of control the best of all, because, like many adults, some children dislike sharing responsibility and making choices.

Under this system the children usually do the right thing, not because they know it is the right or why it is the right, but because they are trained to obey blindly. The great danger her lies in the fact that they may form habits of following blindly, and later may unthinkingly follow unworthy leaders.

No teacher should be content to use this type continually unless she is handling groups, who, because of limited capacities, will always be obliged to “follow a leader.” As soon as possible each group of children should be given a share of the responsibility for its own mental and moral achievement. The teacher should covet the position of guide and advisor rather than one of policeman.

Old Classroom 9

Next: Part Two – “The Ideal Solution,” in which it is revealed that…

“Daise was sobbing too much to talk, but the indignant lad and a dozen others could tell. John had given Daise a branch of Japanese cherry blossoms to bribe her not to report him. Before the investigation was over it developed that eight-year-old Daise had become richer by a box of raisins, two candied cherries, and a chocolate bar – all for not doing her duty.”

(Coming Soon… Maybe)

“Experiencing These Effects And Sinking Under Them” (Edu-vice from 1850)

~ Blue Cereal ~ 2 Comments

Ira Mayhew CoverWhat follows are excerpts from Popular Education: For The Use Of Parents And Teachers, And For Young Persons Of Both Sexes. Prepared and Published in Accordance with a Resolution of the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, by By Ira Mayhew, A.M. – Superintendent of Public Instruction (New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers, 82 Cliff Street. 1850)

Say what you like about old books, they sure titled their titles. 

And 1850? Let’s get a little perspective on that date… 

The very concept of taxpayer-funded public schooling was less than a generation old, and all but non-existent in many areas – including most of the South. Millard Fillmore was President. California became the 31st State of the Union. Slavery was still entrenched in half the nation, and Harriet Tubman was beginning her work as a ‘conductor’ on the ‘Underground Railroad’ in defiance thereof. P.T. Barnum was screwing people out of their nickels and dimes – a much less romantic pursuit than we seem to have made of it postmortem. Electricity wasn’t really a thing yet, nor was recorded music, radio, etc. Fancy travel meant your wagon was covered, or in rare cases you rode on a train. Internet was still dial-up. 

It was a long #$%@ing time ago is what I’m saying. 

And Supt. Mayhew was commissioned – by an act of the State Legislature, no less – to write a book on learnin’. Which he did. 

He breaks down a proper education into three critical elements – the physical (health and body), the intellectual (brain stuff), and the moral (used interchangeably with spiritual). Other than the anachronisms associated with his constant reference to scripture and man’s soul, it’s fairly dry reading – until I got to this part. I ‘bout spilt my coffee in recognition of the issues confronting Supt. Mayhew and his teachers in 1850. 

Excerpt from Chapter V: The Nature of Intellectual and Moral Education

It is generally known that the eye, when tasked beyond its strength, becomes insensible to light, and ceases to convey impressions to the mind. The brain, in like manner, when much exhausted, becomes incapable of thought, and consciousness is well-nigh lost in a feeling of utter confusion. At any time in life, excessive and continued mental exertion is hurtful; but in infancy and early youth, when the structure of the brain is still immature and delicate, permanent injury is more easily produced by injudicious treatment than at any subsequent period… 

I don’t actually know how physiologically true this is, but experientially I at least get the ‘tired brain’ part. I do know enough about early childhood development (hey, I had to take those classes in teacher school same as you) to know there are certain things kids just can’t do at some stages, and that it’s generally harmful to over-try. 

It’s interesting to me how similar this language was to arguments explaining why girls shouldn’t be given complicated toys, like puzzles, or be allowed to over-exert themselves physically by doing things like swimming for more than eight seconds at a time – they might be damaged, you see. I bring this up despite it detracting from the case I’m about to make, partly because I’m SO intellectually honest, but mostly because – like so many things – it’s all about best guesses on sliding scales. Balance in a changing world. 

In this respect, the analogy is complete between the brain and the other parts of the body, as we have already seen exemplified in the injurious effects of premature exercise of the bones and muscles. Scrofulous and rickety children are the most usual sufferers in this way. They are generally remarkable for large heads, great precocity of understanding, and small, delicate bodies. 

OK, I mostly just kept this part because I’m amused by the phrase “scrofulous and rickety children” and picturing their big ol’ heads. Yes, you may add that to the list of reasons I’m probably going to teacher hell. 

But in such instances, the great size of the brain, and the acuteness of the mind, are the results of morbid growth, and even with the best management, the child passes the first years of its life constantly on the brink of active disease. Instead, however, of trying to repress its mental activity, as they should, the fond parents, misled by the promise of genius, too often excite it still further by unceasing cultivation and the never-failing stimulus of praise; and finding its progress, for a time, equal to their warmest wishes, they look forward with ecstasy to the day when its talents will break forth and shed a luster on their name.  

This is when I first began to recognize tendencies not unfamiliar today – although the over-achieving parent stereotype is fading a bit as we’ve begun to recall there being more to life than GPA and college prep in kindergarten. But as a culture of ‘reform’ and ‘high standards’, we are certainly still enthralled by the potential of over-farming young soil. 

But in exact proportion as the picture becomes brighter to their fancy, the probability of its becoming realized becomes less; for the brain, worn out by premature exertion, either becomes diseased or loses its tone, leaving the mental powers feeble and depressed for the remainder of life. The expected prodigy is thus, in the end, easily outstripped in the social race by many whose dull outset promised him an easy victory.

Again I must question the physiology of this statement, while supporting its spirit. Whether or not the young brain becomes ‘diseased’ or ‘loses its tone’ through excessive intellectual demands in early development, the young brain-owner may certainly become disconnected, and lose his or her connection to the wonders of learning in those early years (when they still liked us and wanted to know stuff – secondary people forget this was ever a thing). When we beat our young pegs so incessantly into pre-shaped holes, we may get some of them wedged in, but we lose them in all the important ways.

We lose them for a long, long time – sometimes for life.

Those allowed to develop at a more flexible pace, nurtured but not machine-tilled, often not only catch up but sail right on past the rest. Not always, but enough that those high stakes 3rd grade tests look pretty stupid in retrospect. 

One of my favorite stories from a former state superintendent was her account during a TV interview of her own son, who struggled to learn as a kid and had all sorts of trouble in school. He was never ‘held back’, but instead was surrounded by dedicated teachers who supported and encouraged him until, one year, he suddenly started to ‘get it’. By high school he was on level and above in every area and is now a happy, employed, successful citizen. That’s how it works sometimes.

(This story was told as evidence we should hold kids back in an eternal 3rd grade loop of shame and disparagement, which I didn’t really understand – but then, she was an odd duck like that.) 

I’m going to skip ahead a bit. It’s a history thing – we pick and choose the bits of evidence that make our case and ignore the rest. We learned it from our friends who teach science. 

There can be little doubt but that ignorance on the part of parents and teachers is the principal cause that leads to the too early and excessive cultivation of the minds of children, and especially of such as are precocious and delicate. Hence the necessity of imparting instruction on this subject to both parents and teachers, and to all persons who are in any way charged with the care and education of the young.

As in, state legislators? 

This necessity becomes the more imperative from the fact that the cupidity of authors and publishers has led to the preparation of “children’s books,” many of which are announced as purposely prepared “for children from two to three years old!” I might instance advertisements of “Infant Manuals” of Botany, Geometry, and Astronomy! 

He was kidding. Imagine him visiting The Learning Tree today!

There’s also a Common Core joke just waiting to be made here, but it just seems like piling on at this point – like making fun of Nixon, or a good ‘Ozzy Osbourne’ joke. 

In not a few isolated families, but in many neighborhoods, villages, and cities, in various parts of the country, children under three years of age are not only required to commit to memory many verses, texts of Scripture, and stories, but are frequently sent to school for six hours a day. Few children are kept back later than the age of four, unless they reside a great distance from school, and some not even then. 

Imagine what it took in a big city in 1850 to seem like you were being TOO HARD on young people. We’re not that far past Dickens or much ahead of Newsies here – these were not years of pampered youth. Send them to the factories and coal mines if you must, but DON’T BE SO CRUEL AS TO OVERDO THE TEST PREP at such a young age!

Perspective, much? 

At home, too, they are induced by all sorts of excitement to learn additional tasks, or peruse juvenile books and magazines, till the nervous system becomes enfeebled and the health broken. “I have myself,” says Dr. Brigham, “seen many children who are supposed to possess almost miraculous mental powers, experiencing these effects and sinking under them. 

What a powerful phrase – “experiencing these effects and sinking under them.” Take a moment and mourn over that. 

Some of them died early, when but six or eight years of age… Their minds, like some of the fairest flowers, were ‘no sooner blown than blasted;’ others have grown up to manhood, but with feeble bodies and disordered nervous system, which subjected them to hypochondriasis, dyspepsy, and all the Protean forms of nervous disease; others of the class of early prodigies exhibit in manhood but small mental powers, and are the mere passive instruments of those who in early life were accounted far their inferiors.” 

Imagine a society in which that early cult of accomplishment led to stressed out high schoolers trying to make it into the right stressed out colleges to get the stressed out jobs where they must accomplish pass do prove make achieve… what? What’s the end goal? What’s the point of any of it? What test is the last one before you ‘win’?

Good thing we headed that off in 1850. Close call, that. 

Jumping ahead again…

In youth, too, much mischief is done by the long daily periods of attendance at school, and the continued application of mind which the ordinary system of education requires. 

I realize letting your kid play outside results in visits from the police and DHS these days, but it’s still a pretty good idea. 

The law of exercise already more than once repeated, that long-sustained action exhausts the vital powers of an organ, applies as well to the brain as to the muscles. Hence the necessity of varying the occupations of the young, and allowing frequent intervals of active exercise in the open air, instead of enforcing the continued confinement now so common. This exclusive attention to mental culture fails, as might be expected, even in its essential object; for all experience shows that, with a rational distribution of employment and exercise, a child will make greater progress in a given period than in double the time employed in continuous mental exertion. 

If a long-dead superintendent from 1850 understood the value of a varied, balanced life – not only for personal happiness, but because it MAKES YOU A BETTER STUDENT – why are we so stubbornly ignorant of this 165 years later?

Tell your kids – your own, personal kids – to skip their homework tonight and go play outside, or ride their bikes, or exercise. Not video games or even books – although both are yay – but go DO something. Take fewer AP classes so they can stay in Drama or Soccer. Be happy with that state university so they have time to hang out with friends from church or volunteer at the animal shelter. 

Chill the f#$% out. It’s better for them. Ira said so:

It is worse than folly to shut our eyes to the truth, and to act as if we could, by denying it, alter the constitution of nature, and thereby escape the consequences of our own misconduct… Such persons might be saved to themselves and to society by early instruction in the nature and laws of the animal economy. They mean well, but err from ignorance more than from headstrong zeal. 

RELATED POST: Classroom Management, 1920’s Style (Part One)

RELATED POST: Classroom Management, 1920’s Style (Part Two)

Classroom Management, 1920’s Style (Part Two)

~ Blue Cereal ~ 2 Comments

Old Classroom1I’ve been revisiting the chapter on “Classroom Control” from Vol. I of the 12-volume The Class Room Teacher (1927-28). We were introduced last time to a very listy list of possible methods: 

(1) No control, wherein the children all do as they please. 

(2) Teacher control, wherein rules are made and enforced by the teacher. 

(3) Group control, wherein rules are made and enforced by the group working together for a common purpose. 

(4) Unselfish self-control, wherein each person considers the good of the whole. 

Has much changed in 90 years? 

NO CONTROL – Example: 

1920's ActressThe teacher is attempting to carry on a class recitation with one group of children while the others are supposed to be studying. Two or three large boys are lying on the floor with their feet propped against the stove. They are reading fiction which does not contribute in any way to their assignment. They later show a lack of knowledge as to the lesson content. Several girls are holding an animated conversation about the ways of securing pictures of the favorite “movie” actresses.  

This passage is golden. 

The chaos meant to be implied by those ‘large boys’ with the feet on the stove would be a dream come true in many classrooms today. And ‘reading fiction which does not contribute in any way to their assignment’ is almost an oxymoron in 2015 – ANY reading is cause for cupcakes and stickers. But don’t sue me when you burn your feet. 

And aren’t you curious about what sundry, presumably devious means might have been utilized to secure those pictures? Can you even imagine a time you weren’t inundated with celebrity photo spreads every time you had to pick up a few things at the grocery store? Or when girls worried about illicit pics meant b&w head shots of actresses? Monday, Tuesday, Happy Days… 

The children who are trying to study have to dodge continual volleys of chalk, paper-wads, and even an eraser now and then. A note of unsavory character is passed about among the older children who laugh heartily at its contents. 

Out of Control ClassroomIn case we’re not sufficiently horrified by the stove thing, here comes a barrage of projectiles and dirty notes. I KNEW we should never have allowed pens and paper in the classroom – such technology has no place in school without careful controls in place! It’s too distracting!

The room is in an uproar; the recitation is a complete failure; but the teacher smilingly assures the visitor that she believes in “freedom.” 

Oh god, I know those teachers. I thought they were products of the 1970’s – I didn’t know they existed almost two generations before.

Discussion: 

The result of no control is always chaos; children are denied the right to feel happiness in real achievement; habits and attitudes are formed during these years in the school room which may tend to make of them, in later life, unreasoning, selfish, and lawless citizens.

This is a point which could stand to be made more often and more loudly today – the deepest happiness, the most meaningful learning, real character comes from actually accomplishing something. Guide them, yes; encourage them, definitely; but unless they’re allowed actual risk – a real opportunity to fail – they’re being deprived of a legitimate opportunity to succeed. 

Why is this so easy to understand with our football teams and debate competitions, but so controversial in reference to academics? 

Perhaps it might be well to state that true freedom would not allow such an infringement upon the rights and liberties of others. 

There’s a year’s worth of socio-political debate for you.

[[{“type”:”media”,”view_mode”:”media_small”,”fid”:”879″,”attributes”:{“alt”:””,”class”:”media-image”,”typeof”:”foaf:Image”}}]] 

True freedom is something which should be earned and bestowed only upon those who can use it wisely. All teachers should be very careful to distinguish between real freedom and merely allowing children to do as they please. Real freedom leads toward right and true happiness; while allowing children to do as they please leads toward wrong and toward future sorrow. 

“True freedom is something which should be earned and bestowed only upon those who can use it wisely.” 

Progressive HousewivesToday I believe that would qualify as a ‘controversial statement’. Keep in mind that the 1920’s were still enmeshed in Progressivism – regulating the sausage factories and establishing national parks and such. It was also the age of more direct control of all levels of government by the ‘common man’, in hopes this would prove, um… purifying. 

With this increased role of government in solving society’s problems came efforts to prevent recurrence of those same ills. Why bandage the wound but leave the sharp edge exposed? Why support a humidifier and a dehumidifier in the same room? It seemed only reasonable, for example, to require sterilization of those unable to provide for themselves or their offspring. 

If it’s cruel to allow stray animals to continuously breed (thus perpetuating their collective misery), why allow those among our own species who’ve clearly demonstrated an inability to care for themselves to make increasingly destructive choices about procreation? “If you want me to take care of you, there are conditions. If you want to make your own choices, you’ll need to learn to take care of yourself.” 

It seems so reasonable in regards to student management. As long as we don’t let what we’re doing in school impact real life…

ABSOLUTE TEACHER CONTROL – Example: When the class assembles on the first day of school, the teacher firmly informs the children that they are there for business and she is there to see that they attend to this business of learning. In order to accomplish this, certain tasks must be finished each day before they leave school. Anything which interferes with the work of school, such as talking without permission, whispering, giggling, or writing notes to one another will be carefully noted and punished by the teacher. 

Ah… so it’s a math class! 

SnapeEver after the children study the lessons assigned by the teacher, answer her questions, and accept the punishment she doles out for misdemeanors and errors. They usually do no more than they are asked, and frequently they misbehave when the teacher is not looking. 

The teacher’s life is one of constant watchfulness. Her profession is not teaching; it is policing. She must be continually alert to catch the law-breakers, fair enough to pronounce just punishment, and persevering enough to see that punishment once pronounced is executed. 

And a charter school at that! (Erin – I’m kidding! I’m kidding!) 

Discussion: 

Such a method is far preferable to the preceding no-control type and should be used, especially by the inexperienced teacher, until she can determine the type best suited to her class of children. If used by a teacher who is always just and fair, the class achievement is usually good and the children rather happy. If, perchance, the teacher is a benign tyrant, the children will often vote this type of control the best of all, because, like many adults, some children dislike sharing responsibility and making choices. 

Whoah, there, Sherriff – I was with you until that last little bit. 

Old Classroom 2As colorful a term as ‘benign tyrant’ may be, it’s a bit too loaded with connotation for my taste. One of the things too easily overlooked in our kneejerking any time those high-structure charters are discussed is that some students, in fact, do very well with so much structure.

There’s absolutely a problem when it’s abusive, and the racial issues inherent in some of these schools bother me, too – but let’s not write off the idea that there’s some security in knowing your day will be organized and methodical, your teacher tough but fair, and that the rules apply pretty much the same way to everyone, every day. Especially if you don’t have this in any other part of your world. 

As to “sharing responsibility and making choices,” recall that only a few lines before, freedom had to be earned. I know all you ex-hippies out there with your ponytails and elbow patches want your lil’ charges to discover the universe in their own special and wildly individualized ways, but there’s a name for that kind of freedom – “chaos.” Or, if you want to be more social-political-science-historical about it, “life in a state of nature.”  

Feel free to look it up. 

Under this system the children usually do the right thing, not because they know it is the right or why it is the right, but because they are trained to obey blindly. The great danger here lies in the fact that they may form habits of following blindly, and later may unthinkingly follow unworthy leaders. 

Wouldn’t THAT be a shame?

No teacher should be content to use this type continually unless she is handling groups, who, because of limited capacities, will always be obliged to “follow a leader.” 

Old Classroom 3Ah, she means (insert whatever political party you don’t belong to), doesn’t she?

As soon as possible each group of children should be given a share of the responsibility for its own mental and moral achievement. The teacher should covet the position of guide and advisor rather than one of policeman. 

Therein lies the rub. How do we transition students appropriately from compliant to independently responsible? I don’t know about the feet-on-the-stove issue, but THIS one resonates a century later. All too well, actually. 

Next Time – “The Ideal Solution,” in which it is revealed that… 

Daise was sobbing too much to talk, but the indignant lad and a dozen others could tell. John had given Daise a branch of Japanese cherry blossoms to bribe her not to report him. Before the investigation was over it developed that eight-year-old Daise had become richer by a box of raisins, two candied cherries, and a chocolate bar – all for not doing her duty. 

Dear god – it’s pure madness in there. And ladies, never trust a boy bearing Japanese cherry blossoms.

RELATED POST: Classroom Management, 1920’s Style (Part One)

RELATED POST: Classroom Management, 1920’s Style (Part Three)