I teach high schoolers, and in order to make sure that my class runs as is necessary to accomplish the objectives set, I need to have routines and expectations. Every workplace has them. In some they are more than others. Rules are not a bad thing. Just as fostering creativity isn’t. But you can’t have one without the other.

“Do we praise students for following their own interests? Choosing their own goals? Developing and testing ideas and theories? Experimenting, building networks, identifying problems, pushing back against conventional wisdom? If not, why not?”

I think we do these things with students as good educators…sometimes while they are standing in lines being responsible citizens.

http://bit.ly/5QSjNv

Nancy Flanagan’s comment over there resonated the most with me:

“Oh, come on.

You know where Scott was going with that one: his post was not about respect, community, safety or order.

It was about the things we often take for granted: students must educated in groups, doing the same things at the same time, following rules (whether they’re good rules or bad rules) for the purposes of inculcating compliance, power for those in authority in the school and later, the workplace.

In the 70s, people pulled their kids out of schools because they saw them as factories, built on the wrong values– mindless deference to/fear of authority, numbing sameness, reproduction of social class. Homeschoolers are still looking for the flexibility, attention to personalized learning, time to pursue individual passions rather than lockstep scheduling, and so on.

I taught for 30 years in a school known for excellent discipline. Our middle schoolers lined up to go to lunch and for assemblies. Kids who transferred in from other schools frequently commented on how our school was even more prison-like than their previous school (smiling). Did I like this vibe? You bet. It certainly facilitated instruction of 65 13-year olds with musical instruments.

But when we’re suggesting that straight hallway lines have a causal relationship with higher test scores–and that high test scores are our most worthy educational goal–we’ve crossed a very different line. Do we praise students for following their own interests? Choosing their own goals? Developing and testing ideas and theories? Experimenting, building networks, identifying problems, pushing back against conventional wisdom? If not, why not?”

That said, rarely do people get praise for doing the socially considerate thing, and I think that the teacher did something wonderful there.

Knowing several preschool teachers very well, I know that these kiddos have had the reasons for lining up: consideration for nearby classes, easy sharing of space, etc., explained to them and are doing this either because the teacher said to and they like complying or because they espouse the consideration they are showing. The difference is purely in how self-reflective the students are able to be.

I teach high schoolers and they are at an age where they have to be reminded that it is okay to be considerate, even though it looks like mindless compliance. I often explain to my students that the reason we adults “follow the rules” is out of consideration for others, not just as mindless followers, and that they cannot judge a motivation by the way it looks to their suspicious minds.

I’m not saying that you did judge a motivation by the way it looks/sounds to your suspicious mind … but I’m wondering what would have happened if you had asked a question rather than assuming an answer.

It seems to me the impetus for having them line up should be about locus of control; kids need to line up NOT because lining up is a virtue, but the effects of lining up–order, quiet, accountability–are a virtue. Once kids know the expectations included in lining up, and those expectations have been internalized, they don’t have to line up, and they know why!

Make sense? I wrote this during my 3-minute bathroom break.

I see a lot of similarities to my job as a HS BB coach. One of my focuses both on offense and defense is to create a structure of expectations and “rules” that all of the players must follow. By doing this, there is a web of understanding created that allows and optimizes effective interaction. In other words, everyone is able to be on the same page. Random running, dribbling, and passing does not allow that to happen – even if all five team members believe they are individually doing the best thing at the time. Defensively we all have to have the same philosophy in mind or we create holes that allow the opponent an advantage. Two people playing a 2-3 zone while 3 play man to man doesn’t really work well. Now (all of) that said, I also encourage some level of interpretation given the circumstances. The offensive player that finds himself one on one with a weaker defender should be looking to score or calling for the ball. The defensive player that sees an opportunity for a steal should make the attempt and recover if unsuccessful. If a teammate gets beaten on a drive, the philosophy has to allow another player to help and expect that another teammate will in turn rotate to cover that vacated assignment. In basketball, like life, we have to have some level of mutual expectation in order to be successful and yet allow some flexibility to make decisions on our own. Many times I have told my athletes that we are better off to have everyone doing the “wrong” thing together than a variety of players doing different “right” things.