"And remember, children, always subvert the dominant paradigm..."
April 16, 2013 7:49 PM Subscribe
Is it possible to be a public school teacher if you have a strong anti-authoritarian mentality?
I'm in a master's program with the intention of teaching middle school science. I've done a bit of student teaching so far, but the bulk of it is coming up soon.
I'm realizing that I still have strong ideological objections to the authoritarian structures which I have observed in schools (even really good ones) which demand obedience and conformity at the expense of independent thinking.
I know not all schools are bad, I know some schools are making great strides and doing cool and interesting things...but there's a core of it ("Sit down and do what we say") which just doesn't seem ethical to me. In addition, I'm particularly unsettled by students' future job prospects, and I don't have the confidence to tell them that if they just work hard and compete for a spot in a good college, that they'll be rewarded.
My advisors have given me some recommendations for private schools to investigate, but I wanted to hear people's experiences in the public setting which allowed them to transcend the types of worries and objections I'm having. I don't want to just give up on the idea of working in a public setting.
I'm in a master's program with the intention of teaching middle school science. I've done a bit of student teaching so far, but the bulk of it is coming up soon.
I'm realizing that I still have strong ideological objections to the authoritarian structures which I have observed in schools (even really good ones) which demand obedience and conformity at the expense of independent thinking.
I know not all schools are bad, I know some schools are making great strides and doing cool and interesting things...but there's a core of it ("Sit down and do what we say") which just doesn't seem ethical to me. In addition, I'm particularly unsettled by students' future job prospects, and I don't have the confidence to tell them that if they just work hard and compete for a spot in a good college, that they'll be rewarded.
My advisors have given me some recommendations for private schools to investigate, but I wanted to hear people's experiences in the public setting which allowed them to transcend the types of worries and objections I'm having. I don't want to just give up on the idea of working in a public setting.
There are alternative schools which you may want to look into. My experience knowing many teachers is that the ones who are very good at what they do are good at doing things like getting the whole class "on the same page," and that requires (or fosters) a personality in the teacher that is suspicious or intolerant of open defiance or inability to take part in the shared classroom endeavor while admiring and fostering students who learn to "get with the program."
This is one of those things where a societal system needs all sorts of personality types to function, and the personality type for "mainstream school teacher" isn't necessarily the one that is a best fit for your skills. There may be a niche somewhere in the public school system for you, but a mainstream classroom is a place where even if you go into it with your "ideological objections to the authoritarian structures", over time you will start to shed them in favor of a set of beliefs and personality traits that will allow you to succeed professionally.
posted by deanc at 8:13 PM on April 16, 2013 [3 favorites]
This is one of those things where a societal system needs all sorts of personality types to function, and the personality type for "mainstream school teacher" isn't necessarily the one that is a best fit for your skills. There may be a niche somewhere in the public school system for you, but a mainstream classroom is a place where even if you go into it with your "ideological objections to the authoritarian structures", over time you will start to shed them in favor of a set of beliefs and personality traits that will allow you to succeed professionally.
posted by deanc at 8:13 PM on April 16, 2013 [3 favorites]
If you haven't already, read Paolo Friere and bell hooks.
I personally wasn't strong enough to keep teaching in the system. Some people are -- some of them were my colleagues, working in the same situation I was in, and I still have a lot of respect for them. One of those people might be you.
posted by HeroZero at 8:14 PM on April 16, 2013 [2 favorites]
I personally wasn't strong enough to keep teaching in the system. Some people are -- some of them were my colleagues, working in the same situation I was in, and I still have a lot of respect for them. One of those people might be you.
posted by HeroZero at 8:14 PM on April 16, 2013 [2 favorites]
Not everyone is meant to go to college. This is contrary to my school's message, but I am not shy about disagreeing. We do our students a disservice when we lie and say everything is going to be alright. However...
I believe in pushing the envelope and breaking rules on occasion, but there are times that you jusr have to follow the rules (even if they are stupid), or face the consequences. School is a game. Learn to play the game, and you'll get the prize. Refuse to play the game and you'll have to reap the consequences (which may also be stupid).
The larger schools require each team of teachers (for example, all English 1 teachers) to be in lock-step. The same curriculum, taught the same way, on the same day. Little to no flexibility is allowed for the differences between taching styles, learning styles, time of day, etc. I hated it. Smaller schools may have only one teacher for a particular course. For example, I was given a textbook, a suggested timeline, required milestones (finish chapter 9 before a certain date, etc), and then set loose. But I can change how I teach from block to block, or switch tactics in the middle of the year without asking permission.
You can be an innovative thinker and creative problem solver while following "the rules". The challenge is finding ways to create that kind of learning space within the very flawed and broken system that is in place.
But every job where you have a boss is going to have politics and structure. You have to toe the line, or at least know when to stop pushing the envelope, or the Administrators will show you the door when they get tired of dealing with you.
You should look at charters, private schools, and very small public schools. But I think you'll have a hard time working within the current system.
posted by rakaidan at 8:15 PM on April 16, 2013 [6 favorites]
I believe in pushing the envelope and breaking rules on occasion, but there are times that you jusr have to follow the rules (even if they are stupid), or face the consequences. School is a game. Learn to play the game, and you'll get the prize. Refuse to play the game and you'll have to reap the consequences (which may also be stupid).
The larger schools require each team of teachers (for example, all English 1 teachers) to be in lock-step. The same curriculum, taught the same way, on the same day. Little to no flexibility is allowed for the differences between taching styles, learning styles, time of day, etc. I hated it. Smaller schools may have only one teacher for a particular course. For example, I was given a textbook, a suggested timeline, required milestones (finish chapter 9 before a certain date, etc), and then set loose. But I can change how I teach from block to block, or switch tactics in the middle of the year without asking permission.
You can be an innovative thinker and creative problem solver while following "the rules". The challenge is finding ways to create that kind of learning space within the very flawed and broken system that is in place.
But every job where you have a boss is going to have politics and structure. You have to toe the line, or at least know when to stop pushing the envelope, or the Administrators will show you the door when they get tired of dealing with you.
You should look at charters, private schools, and very small public schools. But I think you'll have a hard time working within the current system.
posted by rakaidan at 8:15 PM on April 16, 2013 [6 favorites]
Yes, but you must do so carefully and measuredly. I got my M.Ed from a university dedicated to training teachers to have your mindset; feel free to message me and I will gladly share some of the texts we read and I can also put you in touch with some professors whose minds you can pick.
posted by These Birds of a Feather at 8:17 PM on April 16, 2013
posted by These Birds of a Feather at 8:17 PM on April 16, 2013
I think you may develop a stronger appreciation for those authoritarian structures when your practical teaching periods come up. Whilst some teachers are authoritarian for funsies, many if not most do it because they need to and have to.
What and see how you find prac - you will get a pretty good idea if teaching is for you or not after that. Make sure your supervising teacher gives you plenty of room to sink or swim.
A word of warning, though: the student/teacher relationship can encompass but is different and much more than the friend/friend mentor/mentee colleague/colleague relationship.
Kids, even bright high school kids, are kids in a particular society that encourages particular interactions. Authoritarianism is a tool, and can be used lightly or heavily in many different ways. If you have an intellectual objection to the entire edifice of education and the way that pedagogy currently works in school environments, I would think twice. You will change before it does.
posted by smoke at 8:17 PM on April 16, 2013 [2 favorites]
What and see how you find prac - you will get a pretty good idea if teaching is for you or not after that. Make sure your supervising teacher gives you plenty of room to sink or swim.
A word of warning, though: the student/teacher relationship can encompass but is different and much more than the friend/friend mentor/mentee colleague/colleague relationship.
Kids, even bright high school kids, are kids in a particular society that encourages particular interactions. Authoritarianism is a tool, and can be used lightly or heavily in many different ways. If you have an intellectual objection to the entire edifice of education and the way that pedagogy currently works in school environments, I would think twice. You will change before it does.
posted by smoke at 8:17 PM on April 16, 2013 [2 favorites]
Is it possible to be a public school teacher if you have a strong anti-authoritarian mentality?
I wanted to hear people's experiences in the public setting which allowed them to transcend the types of worries and objections I'm having.
Another item for your reading list is "Teacher Man" by Frank McCourt. He touches on this, but from an angle that is less political/sociological, and more personal/interactive.
As a former teacher I cannot answer positively to either question, but that's not because of personal bias or experience.
If you want to be a public school teacher you need to make that decision on criteria that are more essential than this issue. Teachers are just people and have all the variety of values that you can find. Some are pessimists about the future of society, but evangelical about their subject area. Many speak for change because no one else will, and maybe they don't last long in the institution, but without their voice how could any progress be made?
Do you like your subject area & sharing it with others? Can you manage & guide a crowd of middle schoolers that likely don't share your enthusiasm (yet!)? These are you ultimate professional responsibilities & are examples of what will determine your success & happiness in any classroom. If you can take care of that for 2-3 years your personal social/political bias will rub off anyway, & you will have influenced their individual lives in many more important ways than their opinion about 'the system".
posted by TDIpod at 8:32 PM on April 16, 2013
I wanted to hear people's experiences in the public setting which allowed them to transcend the types of worries and objections I'm having.
Another item for your reading list is "Teacher Man" by Frank McCourt. He touches on this, but from an angle that is less political/sociological, and more personal/interactive.
As a former teacher I cannot answer positively to either question, but that's not because of personal bias or experience.
If you want to be a public school teacher you need to make that decision on criteria that are more essential than this issue. Teachers are just people and have all the variety of values that you can find. Some are pessimists about the future of society, but evangelical about their subject area. Many speak for change because no one else will, and maybe they don't last long in the institution, but without their voice how could any progress be made?
Do you like your subject area & sharing it with others? Can you manage & guide a crowd of middle schoolers that likely don't share your enthusiasm (yet!)? These are you ultimate professional responsibilities & are examples of what will determine your success & happiness in any classroom. If you can take care of that for 2-3 years your personal social/political bias will rub off anyway, & you will have influenced their individual lives in many more important ways than their opinion about 'the system".
posted by TDIpod at 8:32 PM on April 16, 2013
Having access to minds when they are young and malleable is arguably the best way to subvert the dominant paradigm.
posted by SpecialK at 8:34 PM on April 16, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by SpecialK at 8:34 PM on April 16, 2013 [2 favorites]
I will second the above advice on waiting until you're fully in charge of a classroom or classrooms long term (day after day after day...) before you decide you'd like to try a classroom with a lax attitude toward behavior management or few traditional authoritative structures.
I know some kids really behave productively, perform to the best of their ability, and feel great about school in an environment with a de-emphasis on the kind of traditional authority structures and hierarchies you're alluding to. However, I am not sure this is the best approach for all of the students, nor for you as a teacher managing them. Some students really need the structure of a daily routine and procedures to succeed, and classroom management in general should be a cornerstone of any teacher development program.
Also, another idea that you may take or discard as you like... I personally believe that as a teacher it is your job to try to get all of your students on the path to the next step in what represents success for them. Of course every single one of your middle school science students aren't going to go to college. Some won't even graduate high school, or worse. However, because you've chosen teaching as your profession, that means that you have to do your best to help each and every student under your care to do better at what you're teaching them to the best of their abilities.
I am not sure this is the type of input you are looking for, but I also want to say that I am saying all of this as someone who has worked in public schools in the US as a "yard duty," teacher's aide, substitute teacher, and now a teacher for about five years, fwiw.
Good luck and thank you for considering such a challenging career. Teaching (well) is hard, but very very worth it for everyone involved.
posted by Temeraria at 9:01 PM on April 16, 2013 [1 favorite]
I know some kids really behave productively, perform to the best of their ability, and feel great about school in an environment with a de-emphasis on the kind of traditional authority structures and hierarchies you're alluding to. However, I am not sure this is the best approach for all of the students, nor for you as a teacher managing them. Some students really need the structure of a daily routine and procedures to succeed, and classroom management in general should be a cornerstone of any teacher development program.
Also, another idea that you may take or discard as you like... I personally believe that as a teacher it is your job to try to get all of your students on the path to the next step in what represents success for them. Of course every single one of your middle school science students aren't going to go to college. Some won't even graduate high school, or worse. However, because you've chosen teaching as your profession, that means that you have to do your best to help each and every student under your care to do better at what you're teaching them to the best of their abilities.
I am not sure this is the type of input you are looking for, but I also want to say that I am saying all of this as someone who has worked in public schools in the US as a "yard duty," teacher's aide, substitute teacher, and now a teacher for about five years, fwiw.
Good luck and thank you for considering such a challenging career. Teaching (well) is hard, but very very worth it for everyone involved.
posted by Temeraria at 9:01 PM on April 16, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't think you can be a public school teacher if you have a strong "anti-authoritarian" mentality because you are approaching teaching with a selfish agenda rather than focusing on doing what's right - making sure kids learn, and, ideally, learn to think.
I'm a former teacher. I love teaching. But there is a reason why there are rules and classroom management strategies: you're dealing with children, and children often need a highly structured environment in order to succeed.
For many kids at the "concrete operational" stage, there is no fuzzy logic, and an unknown variables throw them for a loop.
Kids do best when they know how to achieve success, and you build on that success to do more sophisticated things. Unfortunately, part of the process is breaking things down - sit in rows, copy your notes, do the spelling test. But these little things are easy to succeed at for the kids, and once you establish the base, you can do great things.
But getting there is really hard to do as a teacher. Can you do it?
And another thing - there is this idea that what's in the textbook is important, and that we're somehow transmitting canon via textbooks.
That's not the case. As a teacher, you're teaching *how to* read, *how to* remember, *how to* analyze.
If you can get them to remember facts and figures for life, that would be amazing, but it doesn't work that way.
Some kids will temporarily remember the facts and figures, and then they go out into the world to get all of their info from television and Facebook, the lessons of school forgotten.
Other kids remember how to read, how to make connections, how to synthesize. By that point they're going to form their own worldview based on data.
And that's the best you can hope to do as a teacher - to help students think and speak out.
If you are against the system, being a teacher is great.
posted by KokuRyu at 9:10 PM on April 16, 2013 [7 favorites]
I'm a former teacher. I love teaching. But there is a reason why there are rules and classroom management strategies: you're dealing with children, and children often need a highly structured environment in order to succeed.
For many kids at the "concrete operational" stage, there is no fuzzy logic, and an unknown variables throw them for a loop.
Kids do best when they know how to achieve success, and you build on that success to do more sophisticated things. Unfortunately, part of the process is breaking things down - sit in rows, copy your notes, do the spelling test. But these little things are easy to succeed at for the kids, and once you establish the base, you can do great things.
But getting there is really hard to do as a teacher. Can you do it?
And another thing - there is this idea that what's in the textbook is important, and that we're somehow transmitting canon via textbooks.
That's not the case. As a teacher, you're teaching *how to* read, *how to* remember, *how to* analyze.
If you can get them to remember facts and figures for life, that would be amazing, but it doesn't work that way.
Some kids will temporarily remember the facts and figures, and then they go out into the world to get all of their info from television and Facebook, the lessons of school forgotten.
Other kids remember how to read, how to make connections, how to synthesize. By that point they're going to form their own worldview based on data.
And that's the best you can hope to do as a teacher - to help students think and speak out.
If you are against the system, being a teacher is great.
posted by KokuRyu at 9:10 PM on April 16, 2013 [7 favorites]
Just a note: I teach middle school science (though I am not actually a teacher, long story) and the science classroom is particularly fraught when it comes to behavior management because of the inherent dangers of various tools and substances. Even if the students aren't using labware, chemicals, etc. it's important to lay the groundwork for respect for the laboratory environment before they hit high school.
However, it is mega awesome to see students learning through discovery and experimentation, especially lower-proficiency students who aren't necessarily experiencing success in other parts of the curriculum.
posted by charmcityblues at 9:10 PM on April 16, 2013
However, it is mega awesome to see students learning through discovery and experimentation, especially lower-proficiency students who aren't necessarily experiencing success in other parts of the curriculum.
posted by charmcityblues at 9:10 PM on April 16, 2013
I believe in pushing the envelope and breaking rules on occasion, but there are times that you jusr have to follow the rules (even if they are stupid), or face the consequences. School is a game. Learn to play the game, and you'll get the prize. Refuse to play the game and you'll have to reap the consequences (which may also be stupid).
When I was in grade school, I ran into both teachers and classmates who believed and repeated this mantra. The teachers who repeated it were the least engaging educators I've ever had, and the students who repeated it were some of the least effective study partners and lab buddies.
If school is just a twisted game and the teacher is always right in every way, factually and morally, by definition, well, we're just back to the mental asylum. And those who believe that 12 years in a mental asylum that was engineered by adults is a natural and necessary part of becoming an adult yourself — they deserve compassion and kindness. That's a twisted mindset, and that kind of schooling surely tends to produce malingering, manipulative, calculating, petty little tyrants, like any other kind of emotional abuse does.
I put this kind of thinking on par with "I understand the concepts just fine, I just don't know how to apply them." Guess what: that's not understanding. That's just pretending to understand. By the same token, that kind of "teaching" is definitely not teaching, and that kind of "learning" is definitely not learning. You move to the music, but you're not dancing.
So please do teach. Give it a shot. I give you a 75% chance of burnout in under five years. But if you survive, and get enough support, and have colleagues you like and respect, you will find your joy. I've had teachers like you. They were awesome.
posted by Nomyte at 9:43 PM on April 16, 2013 [5 favorites]
When I was in grade school, I ran into both teachers and classmates who believed and repeated this mantra. The teachers who repeated it were the least engaging educators I've ever had, and the students who repeated it were some of the least effective study partners and lab buddies.
If school is just a twisted game and the teacher is always right in every way, factually and morally, by definition, well, we're just back to the mental asylum. And those who believe that 12 years in a mental asylum that was engineered by adults is a natural and necessary part of becoming an adult yourself — they deserve compassion and kindness. That's a twisted mindset, and that kind of schooling surely tends to produce malingering, manipulative, calculating, petty little tyrants, like any other kind of emotional abuse does.
I put this kind of thinking on par with "I understand the concepts just fine, I just don't know how to apply them." Guess what: that's not understanding. That's just pretending to understand. By the same token, that kind of "teaching" is definitely not teaching, and that kind of "learning" is definitely not learning. You move to the music, but you're not dancing.
So please do teach. Give it a shot. I give you a 75% chance of burnout in under five years. But if you survive, and get enough support, and have colleagues you like and respect, you will find your joy. I've had teachers like you. They were awesome.
posted by Nomyte at 9:43 PM on April 16, 2013 [5 favorites]
Yes, but you have to be willing to play within the system. I think it's worth distinguishing or differentiating between anti-authoritarian politics and personalities. My late advisor was one of the most personally conservative people I've ever known, in terms of his public behavior, but he was also considered a radical Marxist in our field. On the other hand, I know people who are politically quite milquetoast who are extremely confrontational and suffer problems professionally because of it.
For my part, I'm a college instructor at the most conservative public university in the U.S., and also consider myself aligned with radical politics. Personally, I want to fly off the handle, but have to restrain myself often. You have to play the long game in this sort of thing, and be there for the kinds of students who really need someone like us to look up to.
posted by LukeLockhart at 10:58 PM on April 16, 2013
For my part, I'm a college instructor at the most conservative public university in the U.S., and also consider myself aligned with radical politics. Personally, I want to fly off the handle, but have to restrain myself often. You have to play the long game in this sort of thing, and be there for the kinds of students who really need someone like us to look up to.
posted by LukeLockhart at 10:58 PM on April 16, 2013
I think there are two interrelated yet distinct things here, and that seems to be reflected in the answers you're getting.
Thing 1 is about the use of authority by the teacher to manage student behaviour.
Thing 2 is about passing on your belief that skepticism and challenge of authority are healthy behaviours.
I'd strongly second what KokuRyu has said
I'd also say that Thing 2 is good from a teacher-student perspective, while Thing 1 is fraught with danger.
I've heard it said often by some really great teachers that it's ten times harder to regain control later than it is to get control of the classroom situation in the first place. And you need control from the start; this is not a situation that's about proving yourself worthy and gradually earning respect. Save the more free-thinking, democratic approach to teaching until you've got a few years of successful teaching under your belt. Children are not always fully rational beings with their own best interests at heart; they're not ready-made little adults waiting to bloom. Many are chaotic, self-interested, stubborn creatures with very little foresight or compassion. Not to mention the hormones. Allowing free expression of all of that and not establishing rules and boundaries and consequences is a bit like throwing a lump of clay into a kiln and hoping that it'll come out as a pot. It's not a contradiction to be an authority figure while simultaneously encouraging a questioning or anti-authoritarian attitude.
What's more, if you know much about how children think, you'll know that they want structure. They test boundaries because they want to know how to coexist successfully with their fellow humans. Not providing an enforced set of guidelines for behaviour in your class can be confusing and even distressing for students.
Having rules and boundaries that are not arbitrary is essential to teaching. If you can always say 'I need to you do this because these rules keep us safe', or 'This is a rule because it allows us all to work together without conflict', then you should feel comfortable about enforcing those rules, and even about imposing sanctions to discourage lapses in behaviour. This is all preparation for playing the 'game' of society.
To shorten this ramble to a single point: obedience and conformity are an intrinsic part of human behaviour, and a successful teacher can use them appropriately whilst still encouraging their students to adopt a challenging approach.
posted by pipeski at 2:09 AM on April 17, 2013 [4 favorites]
Thing 1 is about the use of authority by the teacher to manage student behaviour.
Thing 2 is about passing on your belief that skepticism and challenge of authority are healthy behaviours.
I'd strongly second what KokuRyu has said
I'd also say that Thing 2 is good from a teacher-student perspective, while Thing 1 is fraught with danger.
I've heard it said often by some really great teachers that it's ten times harder to regain control later than it is to get control of the classroom situation in the first place. And you need control from the start; this is not a situation that's about proving yourself worthy and gradually earning respect. Save the more free-thinking, democratic approach to teaching until you've got a few years of successful teaching under your belt. Children are not always fully rational beings with their own best interests at heart; they're not ready-made little adults waiting to bloom. Many are chaotic, self-interested, stubborn creatures with very little foresight or compassion. Not to mention the hormones. Allowing free expression of all of that and not establishing rules and boundaries and consequences is a bit like throwing a lump of clay into a kiln and hoping that it'll come out as a pot. It's not a contradiction to be an authority figure while simultaneously encouraging a questioning or anti-authoritarian attitude.
What's more, if you know much about how children think, you'll know that they want structure. They test boundaries because they want to know how to coexist successfully with their fellow humans. Not providing an enforced set of guidelines for behaviour in your class can be confusing and even distressing for students.
Having rules and boundaries that are not arbitrary is essential to teaching. If you can always say 'I need to you do this because these rules keep us safe', or 'This is a rule because it allows us all to work together without conflict', then you should feel comfortable about enforcing those rules, and even about imposing sanctions to discourage lapses in behaviour. This is all preparation for playing the 'game' of society.
To shorten this ramble to a single point: obedience and conformity are an intrinsic part of human behaviour, and a successful teacher can use them appropriately whilst still encouraging their students to adopt a challenging approach.
posted by pipeski at 2:09 AM on April 17, 2013 [4 favorites]
Beware the bias of assuming structure is always top-down and authoritarian. Structure can be bottom up, and structure can be internal rather than external. Montessori is an example of a system that people often mistake for having no structure when in fact it has a different type of structure (but of course still has order, rules, routines, expectations, etc.). I've observed among Montessori students that some do very well with that system, and others don't. Likewise, no doubt in a traditional school it would be found that some kids do well with traditional structure and others don't.
posted by Dansaman at 2:43 AM on April 17, 2013
posted by Dansaman at 2:43 AM on April 17, 2013
I feel like I am an anti-authoritarian thinker and yes, I did struggle at times with feeling like a State 'pig' when I started teaching life.
I think the best way to counter the authority that you are given as a teacher is to think more of yourself being 'authoritative' rather than 'authoritarian.' I supervise and mentor M.Ed, B.Ed. Dip.Ed students and I say repeatedly that the most effective classroom persona that I have seen in my time, is an authoritative, warm responsiveness. The sense of authority, coupled with warmth, comes from your sense of having a great command of your subject, confidence that your lessons were creatively conceived by you to provide discovery, student centred approaches, engagement for all types of learners etc. You have exerted yourself creatively and meaningfully to engineer a great learning situation, and you believe in it. Students constantly tell me in interview that their best teachers 'know their shit' and they respect them for it. The authority is not directed at submission but creating warm engagement with the world of learning.
I don't think teachers stick at the profession if they can't find a way to unite their creativity with their 'work' - the feeling of being a soul-sucking 'pig' can be both confronting and mind-numbingly boring. I recommend thinking about your future roles in schools in a slightly different way because the real empowerment comes when great teachers centre their thinking on how to make learning great, relevant, child-centred, and its own reward. That comes from aware individuals like you deciding to use your critical faculties to gradually shift the way education is generally done in our era.
posted by honey-barbara at 4:45 AM on April 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think the best way to counter the authority that you are given as a teacher is to think more of yourself being 'authoritative' rather than 'authoritarian.' I supervise and mentor M.Ed, B.Ed. Dip.Ed students and I say repeatedly that the most effective classroom persona that I have seen in my time, is an authoritative, warm responsiveness. The sense of authority, coupled with warmth, comes from your sense of having a great command of your subject, confidence that your lessons were creatively conceived by you to provide discovery, student centred approaches, engagement for all types of learners etc. You have exerted yourself creatively and meaningfully to engineer a great learning situation, and you believe in it. Students constantly tell me in interview that their best teachers 'know their shit' and they respect them for it. The authority is not directed at submission but creating warm engagement with the world of learning.
I don't think teachers stick at the profession if they can't find a way to unite their creativity with their 'work' - the feeling of being a soul-sucking 'pig' can be both confronting and mind-numbingly boring. I recommend thinking about your future roles in schools in a slightly different way because the real empowerment comes when great teachers centre their thinking on how to make learning great, relevant, child-centred, and its own reward. That comes from aware individuals like you deciding to use your critical faculties to gradually shift the way education is generally done in our era.
posted by honey-barbara at 4:45 AM on April 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
As I think back, my favorite teachers in junior high and high school were the teachers who clearly weren't on board with being a company man, so to speak. However, that was 30 years ago when teachers had a lot more flexibility in the classroom because they weren't being evaluated on standardized test scores.
However, even back then, I'm pretty sure none of them made it to retirement as a public school teacher. They all changed careers.
posted by COD at 4:54 AM on April 17, 2013
However, even back then, I'm pretty sure none of them made it to retirement as a public school teacher. They all changed careers.
posted by COD at 4:54 AM on April 17, 2013
I think when you ARE the teacher and you need 34 people to be doing a task or mastering some concept and do that 5x a day while making sure garbage isn't dropped on the floor and no one is touching each other- your anti-authoritarian stance may change. 11 years NYC schools...
posted by bquarters at 5:49 AM on April 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by bquarters at 5:49 AM on April 17, 2013 [1 favorite]
Response by poster: Thank you so much for the responses so far. Anything else you can think of, or more specific examples if possible, are deeply appreciated.
RogerB, I have read Gatto's work and agree with most of what he has to say (although he seems to be against the teaching of evolution), but Gatto's pretty firmly made up his mind that there's no saving that system, so he's uniformly negative.
Also, one point of clarification: my anti-authoritarian leanings aren't really political in nature. They're more "interpersonal" if that makes sense.
I don't have a problem with rules, particularly for safety and order. The Constitution is a bunch of rules and it's a darn good thing. "Good" rules are logical, just, transparent, and subject to careful re-examination. "Bad" rules on the other hand are arbitrary, opaque, labile and unequally enforced. Rules, yes! But good ones.
posted by overeducated_alligator at 5:49 AM on April 17, 2013
RogerB, I have read Gatto's work and agree with most of what he has to say (although he seems to be against the teaching of evolution), but Gatto's pretty firmly made up his mind that there's no saving that system, so he's uniformly negative.
Also, one point of clarification: my anti-authoritarian leanings aren't really political in nature. They're more "interpersonal" if that makes sense.
I don't have a problem with rules, particularly for safety and order. The Constitution is a bunch of rules and it's a darn good thing. "Good" rules are logical, just, transparent, and subject to careful re-examination. "Bad" rules on the other hand are arbitrary, opaque, labile and unequally enforced. Rules, yes! But good ones.
posted by overeducated_alligator at 5:49 AM on April 17, 2013
I think all teachers are in favor of 'good rules' so you won't have too much dissention there. Good luck. NB First year teaching is very stressful and political or non-political anti-authoritarian leanings may be the least of your concerns once you start!
posted by bquarters at 6:04 AM on April 17, 2013
posted by bquarters at 6:04 AM on April 17, 2013
In a perfect world all of your students will be engaged in your lessons and eager to learn.
In the real world it will be you against 36-40 kids in one classroom (but don't worry, they won't all come at one time!)
When I taught, I encouraged a very engaged mindset, which is all well and good. I had tables instead of desks, we used art, music and anything else I could think of to teach English.
At the end of the day though, it's much too easy for the 12-14 year-old kid to start floating out of his/her chair and start dancing on the ceiling.
The way public schools are today, you need to be the classroom authority because you ARE the authority. You have the knowledge that they need to understand, and the way they get it is not only by your sharing it, but by being in the right frame of mind to receive it.
Kids like to know that there's someone in charge, someone who will protect them and advocate for them. It's not fair to let one kid disrupt the other from the learning process. One kid can derail your class faster than you can say "Jack Robinson".
I remember that kids would come to my class and complain that another teacher would let the kids run wild in her class, "Miss! She doesn't know how to manage her classroom! I hate that class, it's too noisy."
The first semester I taught, I was that teacher. I had a nervous breakdown every day. I could not believe how disrespectful and nasty my kids were.
Oddly enough, when I learned classroom management, the kids and I were a whole lot happier.
There are a bazillion things wrong with the American Educational system. The model is a total FUBAR. But proper, authority driven, classroom management isn't one of those things.
Do your student teaching, see what we're talking about, then make your decision.
FWIW, if I thought something was stupid, I'd say so. If a kid hated academics and wanted to learn a trade, I'd help him out to make that happen. I spoke my total mind to those kids on a daily basis. I was my true, authentic self in the classroom. Ask any of the kids who sat through my FCAT prep classes. I'd start each day out saying, "FCAT is a terrible test, even I have problems with it and I'm an AWESOME test taker. This material is beyond boring. I'm going to do my best to help you deal with it, and to get us through this together, but I need your help. We're never going to have fun with this, but I think we can make it bearable."
It didn't hurt that I let them listen to music while we worked our practice tests.
You'll be amazed at how autonomous you are in the classroom. I had my own fiefdom in there.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 7:08 AM on April 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
In the real world it will be you against 36-40 kids in one classroom (but don't worry, they won't all come at one time!)
When I taught, I encouraged a very engaged mindset, which is all well and good. I had tables instead of desks, we used art, music and anything else I could think of to teach English.
At the end of the day though, it's much too easy for the 12-14 year-old kid to start floating out of his/her chair and start dancing on the ceiling.
The way public schools are today, you need to be the classroom authority because you ARE the authority. You have the knowledge that they need to understand, and the way they get it is not only by your sharing it, but by being in the right frame of mind to receive it.
Kids like to know that there's someone in charge, someone who will protect them and advocate for them. It's not fair to let one kid disrupt the other from the learning process. One kid can derail your class faster than you can say "Jack Robinson".
I remember that kids would come to my class and complain that another teacher would let the kids run wild in her class, "Miss! She doesn't know how to manage her classroom! I hate that class, it's too noisy."
The first semester I taught, I was that teacher. I had a nervous breakdown every day. I could not believe how disrespectful and nasty my kids were.
Oddly enough, when I learned classroom management, the kids and I were a whole lot happier.
There are a bazillion things wrong with the American Educational system. The model is a total FUBAR. But proper, authority driven, classroom management isn't one of those things.
Do your student teaching, see what we're talking about, then make your decision.
FWIW, if I thought something was stupid, I'd say so. If a kid hated academics and wanted to learn a trade, I'd help him out to make that happen. I spoke my total mind to those kids on a daily basis. I was my true, authentic self in the classroom. Ask any of the kids who sat through my FCAT prep classes. I'd start each day out saying, "FCAT is a terrible test, even I have problems with it and I'm an AWESOME test taker. This material is beyond boring. I'm going to do my best to help you deal with it, and to get us through this together, but I need your help. We're never going to have fun with this, but I think we can make it bearable."
It didn't hurt that I let them listen to music while we worked our practice tests.
You'll be amazed at how autonomous you are in the classroom. I had my own fiefdom in there.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 7:08 AM on April 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
"Good" rules are logical, just, transparent, and subject to careful re-examination. "Bad" rules on the other hand are arbitrary, opaque, labile and unequally enforced. Rules, yes! But good ones.
The person making the rules always thinks that their rules are good. The person subject to the rules is going to think that a lot of the rules are arbitrary or non sensical. What seems like a valid exception or fair accommodation to you will look like an "arbitrary application of the rules" to someone else.
I would kind of feel better about your question if you anti-authoritarian leanings were political in nature. Because classroom management does require an interpersonal acknowledgment of the teacher's role as a leader and the students' role as people following the guidance of the instructor.
And the teachers who are good at their jobs reflect those attitudes in their personality. They have a respect for the sort of person who is able to pick up the social cues about when, "everyone needs to get on the same page and follow my lead." They enjoy, as Ruthless Bunny says, having "my own fiefdom in there." How comfortable do you think you are going to be in that role? Honestly, while teaching may be your thing, the kind of teaching that goes on in a traditional classroom is going to change your beliefs about anti-authoritarian interpersonal interactions. So you might want to be prepared for that if that's the direction you want to go in.
posted by deanc at 7:59 AM on April 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
The person making the rules always thinks that their rules are good. The person subject to the rules is going to think that a lot of the rules are arbitrary or non sensical. What seems like a valid exception or fair accommodation to you will look like an "arbitrary application of the rules" to someone else.
I would kind of feel better about your question if you anti-authoritarian leanings were political in nature. Because classroom management does require an interpersonal acknowledgment of the teacher's role as a leader and the students' role as people following the guidance of the instructor.
And the teachers who are good at their jobs reflect those attitudes in their personality. They have a respect for the sort of person who is able to pick up the social cues about when, "everyone needs to get on the same page and follow my lead." They enjoy, as Ruthless Bunny says, having "my own fiefdom in there." How comfortable do you think you are going to be in that role? Honestly, while teaching may be your thing, the kind of teaching that goes on in a traditional classroom is going to change your beliefs about anti-authoritarian interpersonal interactions. So you might want to be prepared for that if that's the direction you want to go in.
posted by deanc at 7:59 AM on April 17, 2013 [2 favorites]
My son had a teacher with this streak, which I recognized because I have that same mindset. The guy was fine with the students but the administration and other teachers found him to be a huge pain in the butt, and thus, he spent more time dealing with them and those issues than anything else. That, coupled with Tiger Moms and Dads who expected a great deal from their kids and thus their teacher, drove him out of public schools. He didn't have a great deal of finesse when dealing with those types of parents, either.
posted by Ideefixe at 8:40 AM on April 17, 2013
posted by Ideefixe at 8:40 AM on April 17, 2013
One of the best teachers I had in my highly-rated public high school in suburban Maryland was fresh out of college when I started as a freshman, and probably aligns with some of your values. I'd have trouble telling you if his anti-authoritarian leanings were philosophical, or just political, but over the next 5 years I caught on that he was an ex straight edge Philly punk guitarist with socialist leanings, and he caught on that being a public school teacher and having an identifiable internet presence were more or less mutually exclusive. Ah, the late 90s!
What I can tell you is that he probably had a little more leeway in methodology by a) teaching foreign language, and b) being extraordinarily engaging. As an advanced student, I mostly disliked foreign language in high school because they were one of the few classes I took where students weren't put into as many different tracks - we had "regular" or "honors" Spanish, compared to "remedial/regular/honors/gifted/AP" for most other classes. Regardless of your thoughts on student tracking (which I understand can be controversial, though I certainly benefited from it), this meant that my Spanish classes always had a complete mix of student engagement levels - kids like me and my AP-taking peer group, who cared (a LOT) about learning, and kids whose attitudes towards school were closer to "doing enough to get by" or straight-up disengaged.
This particular teacher stuck out for always treating students like fellow humans, and expecting we'd reciprocate. He never ignored folks getting off-task, but strove to make it kind of annoying and not worthwhile for them to ignore him, whether that involved repeating himself, ribbing someone gently in front of the class, or, when necessary, telling g-rated stories about his crazy ex girlfriends that you could only understand if you were following along in the language we were supposed to be learning. I had him in his first year of teaching and his third, and quite frankly, I have no idea how he wasn't completely exhausted within the first 2 months. Sheer force of personality alone, I suspect.
In the event that Mr. V is actually a MeFite, I'd like to apologize for drawing undue attention to his band website in 1999 versus just letting him know it was searchable. It amused the hell out of me at the time, but in retrospect: kind of a shitty move, teenage me.
posted by deludingmyself at 9:21 PM on April 17, 2013
What I can tell you is that he probably had a little more leeway in methodology by a) teaching foreign language, and b) being extraordinarily engaging. As an advanced student, I mostly disliked foreign language in high school because they were one of the few classes I took where students weren't put into as many different tracks - we had "regular" or "honors" Spanish, compared to "remedial/regular/honors/gifted/AP" for most other classes. Regardless of your thoughts on student tracking (which I understand can be controversial, though I certainly benefited from it), this meant that my Spanish classes always had a complete mix of student engagement levels - kids like me and my AP-taking peer group, who cared (a LOT) about learning, and kids whose attitudes towards school were closer to "doing enough to get by" or straight-up disengaged.
This particular teacher stuck out for always treating students like fellow humans, and expecting we'd reciprocate. He never ignored folks getting off-task, but strove to make it kind of annoying and not worthwhile for them to ignore him, whether that involved repeating himself, ribbing someone gently in front of the class, or, when necessary, telling g-rated stories about his crazy ex girlfriends that you could only understand if you were following along in the language we were supposed to be learning. I had him in his first year of teaching and his third, and quite frankly, I have no idea how he wasn't completely exhausted within the first 2 months. Sheer force of personality alone, I suspect.
In the event that Mr. V is actually a MeFite, I'd like to apologize for drawing undue attention to his band website in 1999 versus just letting him know it was searchable. It amused the hell out of me at the time, but in retrospect: kind of a shitty move, teenage me.
posted by deludingmyself at 9:21 PM on April 17, 2013
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by RogerB at 7:55 PM on April 16, 2013 [2 favorites]