[what does your ideal school look like?]
My mom asked me this question as we were driving to work the other day: What does your ideal school look like?
I thought about it for a second and then starting listing things like “more money for the arts” and “more balance between arts and athletics” and then quickly stopped myself, unsatisfied by my incredibly superficial answers.
I took a second, and thought about it again.
What makes a school? Is it the programs that they have? No.
5 seconds later, I opened my mouth again, “a school where teachers are trained in the social emotional stuff.”
Another 5 seconds later I told her, “if it was up to me, all teachers would go through 3 weeks of RA training.”
There are varying types of “good teachers.” Some are experts in their field and know their subject inside and out. Others are able to support individual students in whatever area they need the most support, whether it is academic, social, emotional, or all.
Many teachers, I find, fail to embody the latter description of a “good teacher.” Granted, it would be best if both descriptions came in one package – and such teachers DO exist. But if you’re going to be a teacher, I assume you at least know something about your subject, so then really the issue becomes the latter description.
They used to tell us in RA training that in many cases, when your resident starts failing a class, not caring about academics, or just seems to fail to show up, more than likely there is something else going on with the resident – usually emotional. They remind us that before we chastise a resident for being a bad student, try to figure out the root of what is going on rather than jump to conclusion.
From what I’ve seen – and this is in my whole life, not just the school I work at currently – some teachers are quick to assume that if a student is failing their class, they are just plain lazy or don’t like the teacher. Sure, in some cases this might be true. But those same teachers fail to see what else might be causing this student’s steady decline.
There’s a chance that with some people, they are incapable of making that connection. For others, I believe, they have every intention to be their for their students emotionally, but they just don’t know how to begin that personal conversation that will allow them to explore a student’s life beyond just their class.
So why not train teachers to notice the signs or be able to start a conversation that is unrelated to school?
It seems like a silly question, it really does. But your teachers are probably the other set of adults you see most often for lengthy periods of time besides your family. If they’re paying attention, they should be able to notice a change in behavior through daily interactions.
In RA training, QPR’s might be the worst but most useful training we get. While it seems extreme, just knowing that you’ve had a few mock conversation asking someone if they’ve ever considered suicide is a big load off of your shoulders. And from experience, you can expect to have at least one of those in your life time. So while training is grueling, better be prepared than not.
Maybe the biggest issue you would encounter as a teacher is that your student is heart broken, but is it too much to ask to have a teacher that isn’t afraid to ask you how you’re doing and sit through snot and tears? I hope not.
As a school, you cannot be compassionate or inquisitive or generous or kind if your educators cannot embody those qualities. Students will take cues from their teachers, and if their teachers are incapable of listening, at the bare minimum, relationships cannot be made. Unless the teachers embody compassion and kindness, how can we expect students to exemplify the same?
Shouldn’t that social emotional element of education be given as much importance as teaching a subject matter?
Call me ideal. Call me young. Call me inexperienced. But seriously, why not?
Pingback: [mi riflekshuns fr this wik in kendrgartin] « Hippie In Bloom