Your mindset in and out of the classroom can affect more people than you think.

Filed Under Dealing With Stress, SOS for Teachers, Teacher Support, Well being | Leave a Comment

Your mindset in and out of the classroom affects more people than you think. Monique Valcour argues people’s mindsets at work not only impact their coworkers but also impact people’s partners, their family members, their networks and even the larger community. She explains people take work related stress home and it negatively impacts the well being of family members, and it can even affect children’s school performance. Valcour illustrates this point by giving us the following example: Individuals with a distrustful mindset who are very competitive at work and try to get ahead by taking credit, withholding or distorting information, assigning blame, or shifting allegiances undermine the organization’s effectiveness by driving up stress and burnout in others.

I totally agree with Valcour. I’ve worked with educators who’ve had negative mindsets and their negativity did affect me negatively at work and at home. I’m sure you can think of instances when you’ve been affected negatively by a colleagues negative mindset. On the other hand, I’ve worked with educators who’ve had positive mindsets such as the mindsets of openness, trust and generosity. These mindsets affected me positively at work and affected my family positively at home. I’m sure you can think of times when you’ve been affected positively by colleagues’ positive mindsets. I can also think of times when I might of had a less than positive mindset and affected others negatively. I regret those instances but what can I say except I’m not perfect.

I just thought of an example when I changed my mindset about something felt much better about my situation at work and went home happy and much less stressed. Bruce (not his real name) and I taught the same subject for years. When we first started working together, I had hoped we could work together and create materials to use in our classes. I’d worked with a colleague before in just this way and absolutely loved co-creating or creating and sharing lessons, handouts, etc. Unfortunately, Bruce and I didn’t have this type of working relationship. Bruce would simply take the lessons, handouts etc. I’d created and use them but not give me any in return. I thought that was so unfair and developed the mindset that Bruce was exploiting me. I became very stressed by this. I talked about “the Bruce situation” all the time. My husband (bless him) finally told me he didn’t want to hear any more about Bruce- so you get the picture. One day, for some reason, I decided I would just share everything with Bruce that I created and not expect anything in return. I felt so great after I’d made that decision. I don’t know why I felt that way but the stress and resentment was gone. It was so easy once I changed my mindset about “the Bruce situation” from resentment to generosity. I still don’t quite understand it, but being generous brought me well being.

It is astonishing how important the positive mindsets of our coworkers are to our well being. Valcour, citing Adam Grant , shares data from a 20-year longitudinal study of healthy people that reported people with social support from co-workers were two and a half times less likely to die prematurely than individuals who didn’t have positive co-worker support. I’d come to realize over the years that positive support from my colleagues was psychologically beneficial , but I had no idea positive support from colleagues was that important for my physical well being.

Obviously a positive mindset is better for us and everyone around us. My question is how do you recognize your negative mindsets and how do you go about changing them? Any suggestions?

Enjoyed reading this post? Subscribe to Teachers at Risk.

May

11

We need nothing less than a revolution in the education system

Filed Under School reform, Teacher Support, The way I see it, underachieving students | Leave a Comment

Ken Robinson argues education needs to nurture the seeds of possibility in all students. If the conditions in schools are right for students they’ll flourish. Robinson points out the high-performing education systems in the world such as Finland, Australia, South Korea and Singapore individualize teaching and learning to engage students’ curiosity, individuality, and creativity. He argues a more broad approach in education is needed. Schools need to stop obsessing on science, technology, engineering and math and focus more on physical education, humanities and the arts. Robinson explains:

(T)ake an area, a school, a district, you change the conditions, give people a different sense of possibilities, a different set of expectations, a broader range of opportunities, you cherish and value the relationships between teachers and learners, you offer people the discretion to be creative and to innovate in what they do, and schools that were once bereft spring to life.

Robinson explains we could learn other lessons about improving our education. The high-performing education systems in the world attribute a high status to the teaching profession. Robinson explains you need great people to teach and give them the ongoing support and professional development they need to do their best. He argues that professional development is not a cost; professional development is an investment.

I agree with Ken Robinson. What can I say. He has hit the nail right on the head ( my Dad was a carpenter). Schools need to respect students’ curiosity, individuality, and creativity and give them a different range of possibilities, expectations and opportunities so they can flourish as students. The education system also needs to respect the teaching profession by ensuring the best people become teachers and provide them with the on going support and professional development they need so they can flourish as teachers.

I’ve posted the Ken Robinson video below so you can hear and see him speak. Robinson is very entertaining as he calls for a revolution in the education system.

Enjoyed reading this post? Subscribe to Teachers at Risk.

May

3

Public schools need to educate the whole child including the spiritual dimension of the child

Filed Under spirituality and teens, Spirituality in public schools, Spirituality in the classroom, spirituality void in teens | Leave a Comment

There continues to be much discussion about what students need to know for the 21st century, but there is little discussion about how students need to be in the 21st century. More and more students are becoming depressed, suicidal, addicted to such substances as alcohol, drugs or have eating disorders (Kessler, 2000). Many of the students I have taught had these issues and found it difficult to stay focused in class, to complete and submit assignments, or even to attend school and eventually many of these students dropped out of school before graduating. Some time ago when I served on the School Success Committee, the committee determined approximately ten percent of the student population was academically at-risk and in danger of dropping out of school before graduating.

The Ministry of Education established an alternative program for students called the Student Success Program to support academically at risk students so they would graduate from high school. I taught the Student Success class for two semesters and found it was a good support for some students but it was not a good support many students. In one of my MEd courses a couple of years ago, I learned “Good teaching cannot be reduced to technique; good teaching comes from the identity and integrity of the teacher (Palmer 2007, p10). I agree with Palmer good teaching is more than good technique, and good teaching comes from the identity and integrity of the teacher. But, I’m not convinced good teaching leads to student learning. The teacher is only one factor in student learning. The education system is giving students intellectual support. But, my teaching experience leads me to think giving intellectual support to students is not sufficient. Kessler (2000) suggests students need spiritual support as well as intellectual support in order for them to do their best. So, I have to ask: why is the education system not giving students spiritual support? Kessler (2000) maintains that the education system has purposely excluded heart and soul from the curriculum and the classroom. Kessler explains: “Many communities decided years ago that the inner life of our children was simply not the business of public schools” (p. xii). When the heart and soul is excluded from the curriculum, Kessler (2000) notes: “Students in growing numbers become depressed, attempt suicide, or succumb to eating disorders and substance abuse. Students struggle to find motivation to stay in school or to keep their attention on what is before them” (p. xii). Students need safe, emotional spaces in school where they can explore answers to questions such as: Why am I here? What gives meaning to life? Does anyone really love me? Nash (2002) suggests “spiritual teaching can lead to passionate learning”(p. 198). It would be prudent then for schools to provide spiritual teaching for students if spiritual teaching did indeed lead to passionate learning.

Until recently, I didn’t have a good working definition of spirituality- certainly not a definition that would let me make sense of what spirituality in my classroom might look like. I knew being spiritual was not necessarily being religious. Jones (2005) and Nash (2002) helped me refine my definition of spirituality. Spirituality in education (Jones, 2005) is the deep connection teachers and students make with one another other and a given subject “Religion is head; spirituality is heart” (Nash, p. 166). As I stated earlier, I didn’t have a definition of spirituality that really made sense to me; similarly, I didn’t have a definition of soul that made sense to me either. I had a vague notion the soul was something inside of me that felt good sometimes and not so good at other times. I’ve used the expression that something is sucking the soul out of me meaning that I something has deflated me in some way.

Kessler (2000)and Miller (2000) have helped me refine my definition of soul so that it makes sense to me. Kessler (2000) defines the soul as a dimension of inner life, of human experience, of longing for something more than the ordinary, materialistic, fragmented life we lead while Miller(2000) defines the soul as an animating energy or process that we can feel. When I combine Kessler’s definition for soul and Miller’s definition for soul, I have a definition for soul that makes sense to me. I have felt that inner longing for something more than the ordinary, materialistic, fragmented life the 21^st century encourages, and I have felt that animating energy called soul as well.

Student learning needs to include spiritual learning to help students better develop the spiritual dimension of their being. Intellectual development may be thwarted by a lack of spiritual development. Schools need to support students’ spiritual dimension by implementing a soulful curriculum Miller (2000) says “a soulful curriculum would provide a nourishing environment for the soul’s expansion and animation.” What would a soulful curriculum entail? There are many suggestions for what should constitute a soulful curriculum. Miller (2000) suggests a soulful curriculum should include “guided imagery, mediation, dreamwork, journal writing, the arts and a study of Earth. Nash (2002) suggests a soulful curriculum should include personal narrative, and Kessler (2000) suggests soulful education should include the practical strategies derived from the language and framework of seven gateways to the soul.

I think public education system needs to educate the whole child. The whole child consists of a cognitive dimension as well as a spiritual dimension. There are many students who do not do well because they have a spiritual void that prevents them from achieving their potential. But, I don’t know what a spiritual but not religious curriculum would look like. Any ideas?

Miller, J. P. (2000). Education and the soul: Toward a spiritual curriculum. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Nash, R. J. (2002). Spirituality, ethics, religions, and teaching: A professor’s journey. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc.

Palmer, P. J., & Scribner, M. (2007). The courage to teach guide for reflection and renewal. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Palmer, P. J. (2007). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Enjoyed reading this post? Subscribe to Teachers at Risk.

Apr

22

Advertise an essay writing site on my blog- are you kidding.

Filed Under The way I see it | Leave a Comment

For the past few weeks I’ve been getting a whole slew of email requests for advertising space on my blog. This week I got an email asking me if I would like to advertise an essay writing site. I instantly saw “plagiarism” in large red letters in my minds eye. I am not going to promote plagiarism’. Obviously, I thought, they didn’t realize I was a teacher or they wouldn’t have asked me to consider promoting plagiarism. Then I thought perhaps someone was trying playing some kid of weird joke on me by asking if I would advertise an essay writing site. I wrote back and asked if the email was a joke and explained that I was a teacher and strongly opposed to plagiarism.I asked if the author of the email was kidding. The response was something to the effect ‘money is kidding”. I wrote back and said it was a matter of ethics not money.

Enjoyed reading this post? Subscribe to Teachers at Risk.

Subscribe to stay up to date. Teachers at Risk is informative. It's free.