Education

I am a teacher. I find myself liking smart and well-behaved kids more than the others, and praising their efforts more. Being attentive, concentrating, imagining and thinking vigorously are all morally good traits, right? But when it comes down to it, those things pretty much just amount to being smart. And it bothers me that I'm just praising kids for being smart, rather than praising kids who can't concentrate and feel bad about it, or kids who aren't smart but would like to be. What should I do? I can't understand the difference between trying to be smart and being smart.

Comments

First, I think you should cut yourself some slack. You won’t have the same chemistry with every child or with every class. Sometimes we just do like some people more than others.

Your concern seems to be that the children you enjoy are the ones who are “smart.” Presumably, their academic brightness and good behavior are not praiseworthy any more than the slowness and poor behavior of their fellows are blameworthy: they are, after all, are just children.

First, I would separate being smart from being well behaved. There is a case to be made for praising good behavior in that it positively reinforces and sets examples for others. Are the poorly behaved children, who perhaps are driven by uncontrollable, chemical compulsions to act out, being treated unfairly when you praise the attentive, calm listeners? I don’t think so. The trick for you will be to ‘catch’ the usually squirming, boisterous children doing something - anything - right and praise them lavishly. (“Johnny, you’ve sat at your desk for two minutes straight. Wonderful job!”)

Here’s why I think being smart and being well behaved are different: there are different kinds of intelligence. (Behavior, on the other hand, is a code of classroom decorum which you determine.) Even the class dunce has something he is good at. The trouble is, his talents may not be ones that are assessable in traditional academic terms. For example, the stereotype of the ‘dumb jock’ athlete gets it all wrong because being able to see a game in motion and insert your body at the right place and right time to intercept the ball involves tremendous physical intelligence - but this not an intelligence that will earn you a passing grade in school, where linguistic and mathematical intelligences are valued. Psychologist Howard Gardner has pioneered work on ‘multiple intelligences’ and has very creative, easily-implemented ideas for school teachers on how to acknowledge multiple intelligences in the classroom. Perhaps such an approach might get you to see the ‘unintelligent’ students in a new and more likeable light. Good luck!

Read another response by Lisa Cassidy

Read another response about Education