Triplett’s article on struggling readers seemed, to me, to be stating the obvious. When teachers establish personal relationships with their students, the students are more likely to engage. When a student feels like they have agency in the classroom and some level of control over the texts they are reading and using, they are more likely to have a positive, productive school experience. The fact that this article was published, however, made me think that these ideas, ones that I take for granted, might not be valued by many teachers. It seems like teachers often end up categorized as that friendly teacher who pals around with kids, doesn’t have high expectations for them, and doesn’t really challenge them, or they get categorized as the demanding teacher with high expectations who doesn’t foster personal relationships with students, wanting to be their teacher more than their friend. In my fieldwork at the high school and middle school, the teachers that kids liked tended to be less demanding, while the teachers they didn’t like were the ones that had high expectations, but little empathy for their students. I hope to avoid falling into either category. I think that students can enjoy being in class and have positive relationships with their teachers even when the teacher is demanding. Making school easy can win over students, but so can making school engaging.
One thing I found really interesting in the struggling readers article was Mitchell’s perception of his teachers as not enjoying teaching. I had never really thought about this. If a teacher clearly doesn’t want to be in the classroom, how can they expect the students to want to be there either? Looking back on my own experience, the teachers that I liked the most and from whom I think I learned the most were always engaged and excited to be in the classroom. The article made me think about first impressions both at the beginning of the year and at the start of every class. When I have a class of my own, I want to use my body language and energy level to immediately communicate to my students that I am excited to be there. I want to treat school like something interesting and exciting that we all get to do together instead of treating it like a chore we all have to deal with. In my fieldwork, a lot of the teachers took the attitude of, “Well we’re both stuck here. I don’t want to do this just as badly as you don’t want to do this. Don’t be mad at me, I hate this too.” While this definitely had a positive impact on how the students treated the teacher, it also made the entirety of school a chore, and nobody likes doing chores. Commiserating with students can be helpful sometimes, but I think empathizing is more effective. Instead of saying “this sucks for everyone”, I think it would be more productive to say, “I understand why you’re upset/struggling/angry, what can we do to make this more positive?”
All of this might seem really simple or overly optimistic, but I think that the little things like body language and a positive attitude, when communicated genuinely, can be really impactful.
I totally agree. I think a teacher’s attitude is really infectious, so their excitement or lack thereof becomes very obvious from the mood of the classroom. But it’s not just the subject they need to be excited about, or even just the students. I think teachers have to be truly excited to do both. I think that’s the only way students will both feel challenged—because the teacher will have a genuine interest in pushing them to understand something that he is passionate enough to want to pass on knowledge about—and supported—because the teacher is invested in nurturing them as people too.
That may have come out a bit jumbled, but what made me think of it was an example Erin gave last class about to react to a late student. Instead of waiting for students to get all their things out, start class right away, very energetically because your energy will be so infectious that kids will want to get started right away. That’s loving your subject and being rigorous.
The problem in my experience however is that those rigorous teachers are also the same ones who glare at you as you walk in late. They seem less concerned with students and more concerned with teaching their subject un-interrupted by bothersome students who can’t always conform to their standards.
But in my mind, a rigorous teacher who loved both his subject and his students would react exactly the way Erin suggested: “Oh I’m so glad you’re here, I wouldn’t have wanted to you to miss this because it’s really important!”
Just something to keep in mind as two essential parts of the equation. I know I’ve definitely been alienated by teachers who were either rigorous but not empathetic or nice but not hard, so it seems like both is key.