25 Biggest Mistakes Teachers Make and How to Avoid Them (13 page)

Competent teachers are well aware of the power of recognition and praise. They would make every effort to acknowledge every student who wanted to contribute to the class discussion and offer acceptance of the answer, praise when appropriate, or assistance when needed. They try to create a supportive environment that encourages participation. Resourceful teachers would develop some systematic technique for making sure that each student is called on at some point in time (Weinstein, 1996).

The purpose of questioning is to ascertain a student’s level of understanding. This includes all students, not just the popular students or the smart students. Wise teachers would never assume that the lower achieving students would probably have wrong or “silly” answers and avoid calling on them. On the contrary, they realize that such assumptions and behavior might cause the student to become a nonparticipating member of the class (Harvard University, 1988). Caring teachers know that it is humiliating and hurtful for children to raise their hands again and again and never be recognized.

SCENARIO 4.3
Adding Insult to an Unjust Injury

In sixth grade, my teacher embarrassed me in front of the class because he thought I was talking and he made me stand in the corner! He then asked me to apologize in front of everyone. I refused and walked out of the class. I was in an honors program and I had to get out because if I stayed in, I would have had to take his class. He then had the nerve to deny to the principal that this incident ever happened. Of course, they believed him.

This scenario is a classic case of adding insult to injury. After erroneously punishing the student very publicly, the teacher baited the student into insubordination and misconduct by demanding a public apology. The indirect consequence of the student dropping out of the honors program was an unforeseeable injustice. The denial of his actions makes this teacher’s motives suspect.

Most teachers are honorable and their intentions are good but they sometimes make mistakes. Sagacious educators know that they are not infallible and that there are times when they might be mistaken. These teachers would never draw so much attention to such a minor offense as talking. The disruptive effects of conflict and confrontation far outweigh any positive benefits that may be gained from public censure. This unfortunate event could have been avoided with private reprimand or what MacDonald (1991) referred to as the use of I-messages in a private one-on-one conference. In the conference, the teacher would have found out that the child had not been talking. It would have been easier for the teacher to apologize, in private.

SCENARIO 4.4
Saving a Red Face

The worst experience I had in school was when my sixth-grade teacher ridiculed me and made fun of my answer. Then I made a comment to her that was rude and she made me stay after school and write dialogue out of a book verbatim. I was literally punished for trying.

It takes courage for a student to raise her hand to answer a question and risk the embarrassment of giving the wrong answer. Students’ worst fears are realized when a teacher publicly ridicules their answers. In this scenario, the teacher’s cavalier disparagement of the student goaded the child into some discourteous face-saving behavior. The subsequent punishment deflated the student’s attempts to save face and salvage her self-esteem. The injustice of it all was mentally tucked away to be nurtured for years and years.

Truly professional educators would never ridicule a child’s answer. They know their job is to help children come up with the correct answer. They employ a variety of techniques to achieve this outcome. An effective approach to handling student responses is to offer students cues or prompts, to accept part of the answer, or to look for something positive about the response to move the student closer to the correct response.

SCENARIO 4.5
Old School—1899 or New School—1999?

My family moved so I had to start second grade as a new student. I was scared. I didn’t know anyone at my new school. Everything was fine until PE class that first day of school. In PE, the coach asked the class to line up and the lines were supposed to start on designated little circles. Needless to say, I wasn’t accustomed to their style of lining up, so I formed my own individual line that wasn’t on a circle. Unfortunately, the coach noticed I was out of line, so he yelled at me and rudely asked me to follow his directions, not knowing that this was my first day of class. My self-esteem dropped at that moment. He didn’t realize that I was trying to meet his request but misinterpreted his directions.

Outdated, antiquated, passé, or archaic, by
any
name the practice of having students line up on specific circles and follow specific directions is a relic of a bygone era. Turn-of-the-century teaching (1890s–1930s) featured a similar technique where students had to literally toe the line and recite their lessons. During this period, teachers told students how and where to sit or stand, if and when to talk, and so on. Students often waited for the teacher to give the signal to start and the student “body” was expected to move in lock-step fashion as one (Cuban, 1984). The coach publicly ridiculed the unsuspecting student who was unaware of the practice. Perhaps the coach would have been a little more lenient if he had been aware that the student was new, but given his strong need for control and his tendency toward loud reprimand, I doubt it.

“There is an objection to reproving the pupil publicly. . . . Ridicule is another weapon that should never be used. . . . It is the modest, conscientious child that is most affected,” (McFee, 1918). These quotes are evidence that perceptive, sensible teachers were around at the turn of the century. This old-fashioned advice is timeless and timely. Effective teachers are aware of the effects of public ridicule and shaming on a student’s self-esteem and usually avoid it in favor of soft, private reprimands. In addition, they would have rules or practices posted or they would offer a new student orientation.

SCENARIO 4.6
If You Muse, You Lose

In fourth grade, I was not paying close attention when the teacher was reading a story to the class. At the end of the story, another boy and I were asked to come to the front of the room and repeat as much of the story as possible. I had to go first and needless to say, did not recall much of the story. The boy did very well. I remember how embarrassed I was.

There are two apparent problems in this scenario. One, the student was inattentive, and two, the teacher’s response to the student’s lack of attention was to make him embarrass himself in front of the class. I think the teacher’s objective was to encourage students to pay attention so she set this student up as an example. Sprinthall et al. (1994) view such public shaming as an inappropriate, miseducative experience.

The effective teacher would not begin her lesson until she had everyone’s attention. Gagne (1977) points out that gaining attention is the foremost activity in the events of learning. Informed practitioners are well aware that some fourth graders are easily distracted. They would have a variety of methods to bring their strays back into the academic fold. They could ask distracted students if they are on the same page. They could direct everyone’s attention to a picture in the book. If the students did not have a book, the teacher could warn them, saying that they need to pay close attention because they will be called on later. If they cannot get the children to pay attention, a private, soft reprimand, known only to the individual student, could be effective (O’Leary & O’Leary, 1972).

SCENARIO 4.7
To Laugh or Not to Laugh, That Is the Question

In third grade, the teacher was talking about Pearl Harbor. She talked about the bombing and the deaths. I was totally involved, paying total attention. When she finished, she had summarized a very important day in U.S. history. Then she asked for questions. I raised my hand and asked, “Did she die?” She asked, “Did who die?” I said, “Pearl Harbor.” She and the entire class laughed; it seemed like forever. I didn’t ask a question again for a long time and I am still afraid the question I have may be stupid and I’ll be laughed at. Now I know better and try to teach my students that your question can’t be stupid if you don’t know the answer.

Human ignorance is exceptional fodder for comedy and entertainment. A talk show host recently increased his comedy offerings to include interviews with people in a mall, asking them questions such as, “Where is Pearl Harbor?” and “Where did we drop the atomic bomb?” Their less-than-knowledgeable responses bring guffaws, hoots, and peals of laughter, much like the student and teacher responses in this scenario. This behavior humiliates the person who gave the ridiculous answer. Although teachers cannot stop their students from laughing, they can set the tone and duration of the laughing response. In this case, the teacher joined in with the students, thereby prolonging and condoning the laughter.