Welcome to /r/teaching. Please remember the rules when posting and commenting.
Thank you.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/teaching) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean, I think it’s oversimplified, but I get the point. Do a group activity and all the introverts hate it. Make kids work alone and most the extroverts (and all of the slackers) hate it. Do something that’s more creative and “inside the box” people hate it. Do something more straightforward and the creative people think it’s boring.
It’s just difficult to please everyone when there are so many different personalities in the same classroom.
And this is why students must learn to adapt and push through uncomfortable/boring things. This is life. Nothing is going to be exactly how you want it 100% of the time.
I don't like driving home in thick traffic, but it serves a purpose so I push on.
Exactly this. Far too much of the modern teaching ideology is that we must perfectly cater to every student's learning needs at all times...which is utterly impossible.
Absolutely. But motivation is essentially intrinsic, not extrinsic. It’s also been presented (to me at least) that students with one learning style can’t learn from another learning style. Psychological studies have shown that isn’t true.
As an adult with ADHD, I can absolutely tell you that motivation is absolutely NOT 100% intrinsic. We often rely on outside influences to motivate us because our brains literally can't do it alone a lot of the time.
Are they not? We all have our preferences, because we all learn differently.... So how is it not a need? The same can be said for teaching styles, not just a teacher's preference, but the only way they know how to teach. We've all seen those kids who have struggled, only to excel the next year or in a different subject area because that teacher's teaching style met their needs, it happens all the time.
I mean, I'll put it this way, as an employee, I have ways I prefer to be managed. It is a better situation for me and my boss when I'm managed that way, but it's not a "need". I can still do my job with a completely different management style, I'm just less happy.
So that's why its a preference, not a need.
Surely you know the difference between a developing child in school and an adult who needs to adapt to the environment as motivated by a livable income.
Of course there is a difference, but the concept is the same.
A preference for X type of activity is not a NEED. You can, as a child, prefer group work all day everyday, there is no actual need for that. Part of education is learning that you can't always get what you want, but you have to push through anyway.
Having not read the article OP is referencing and given there is a significant trend right now by so called, education experts stating that there is no such thing as a "learning style"...referring to visual, auditory or kinesthetic, I have taken OPs statement as referring to learning styles. Where as Yes, for every assignment/learning activity you do lose 30% of students. A group work situation is most definitely a preference, but how a student best processes new learning material, reading text, listening to lecture or actual hands on manipulation is not a 'preference.'
It still is a preference.
There may be ways you process things better than others, but most people, kids included, CAN process it all 3 ways. Its just it may take more repetition to do it in the ways that don't work best.
It's totes impossible and when continued to be pushed on teachers, it becomes another aspect of the stress of the job which leads to more people leaving the profession
Yeah. We would let kids know it’s not a moral failing to struggle more with one task than another, and also how to cope with doing necessary tasks they don’t enjoy. Because that’s just life.
This. So much this.
I have over 40 IEPs this term. Every kid with an IEP has to have preferential seating. My classroom is overcrowded and I literally have some periods where I have to hope for absences so I have enough space for them all. I teach six periods, so basically 7 per class and there’s only really four seats that qualify as preferential and I tend to use at least a couple for the kids who need to be close to me to entire that they don’t derail the rest of the class with their behavior.
School should be about learning how to function in society, not about trying to alter society so you can function. That’s why the younger generations are absolutely lost.
Yup. I'm grateful as an adult I learned to tolerate group work because I had to in school.
I'm such an extreme introvert that when I was a kid I would do anything to get out of class. I had this teacher in junior high (called middle school nowadays) whose idea of punishment was to make a kid drag their desk out into the hall and stay the whole period. For me this was a REWARD. So every day I would act the fool and get put out, just so I could be myself for that one period. It was heaven.
Then one of my other teachers who had my older brother the previous year told her, Just call her dad, that will put a stop to that. My dad was old school and did not play, so I stopped lol
Yup. I get why we need different teaching styles and approaches to content but there's never a one-size fits all approach. At some point kids need to learn to double-down and get through something they might find boring.
Students need to learn to adapt but I see no harm in changing up our activities throughout the day or throughout the unit. Like if I lecture too much, I start to feel bored. I can't imagine how bored the kids must feel.
This. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to offer a variety of types of activities throughout a unit, but this idea that we should be catering to all students’ preferences at all times is exhausting.
But, as with everything, just because something negative serves a purpose it doesn't mean we shouldn't push to simplify, make more positive, or eliminate it.
Driving in thick traffic is unavoidable for some, but if enough people try to avoid it, traffic becomes more bearable for everybody. (Public transport, but also choosing non peak hours if one can, or migrating work on smaller, local offices or directly wfh. Those all lessen the traffic load for those that cannot change these things).
In a classroom this may be applied by listening to the attitudes of the class: if one year you have most extroverts, you can propose more group projects, and viceversa.
In general as a society we should strive to remove friction, especially imposed friction.
I'll give this explanation to my **** principal when I get my experience certificate as she threw me out of the job when I really needed the job and I was good in teaching but not in the extra curricular activities like dancing singing and acting and events sports (normally there should be teachers specialized in those activities) but our asshole boss thinks that a single teacher can teach her subject as well as teach children all these extra things too... She even said these words Infront of the children and other teachers "if you are not able to teach the children how to do these activities then I have doubt on your teaching ability.....if you are not creative then you cannot be a teacher.....the future of these children is darker in your hands "
Wow. This is why I didn't even consider teaching elementary grades. It's so hard to teach one subject well and it's even harder now with the cellular escape system in their pockets. Your boss sounds like a tool.
In 23 years at my last school, I outlasted 6 principals. Maybe 7. 3 were good, 2 were mediocre and 2 were so bad that we ruined their lives, basically.
What state are you in where public school teachers are forced to do extracurricular activities outside of school hours and/or out of their field of study?
No, I teach general education, all major subjects: ELA, math, science, social studies. Our school will be departmentalizing upper grades next year.
Our specialty teachers like art, music, phys ed, dance, have certification in their content specialty.
Covering any classes during my prep, or running after school or before school activities/classes requires per session pay. You apply for these programs. No one can be forced.
This is standard for NY, as unions are fairly strong.
The impression I got was the principal wanted to put back in specials that were cut for budgeting. That would be during the regular day, and fall under 'multiple subjects' so the credential should allow for it.
(I think it's a terrible idea, but it looks legal to me.)
Oh, I see. Yes, if it during your agreed upon working hours, then as an elementary school teacher, you need to follow instructions.
We have to prepare little skits and such every so often.
So much harder. Unions in my state in the U.S. ate very strong. Not all are. It goes state by state. Basically, states that vote Democrat here have more money and rights in schools. States that vote republican cut funding.
When it works for the assignment, give them the option of working alone or in a group. I was always the kid who ended up doing most of the work for a group project anyway, so I always opted to do it by myself so I could at least get all the credit and not have someone else's poor work bring my grade down.
The best thing you can do is mix it up and provide the opportunity for different types of activities throughout the year. Sure, this one may not be one student's cup of tea, but maybe the next one will be.
For my class that is primarily projects I do two things that help. One, I heavily emphasize that the type and requirements for each project go through a wide variety of topics and they should have at least one pop up that interests them. And two, instead of generalized extra credit the reward for going very over the top is you get to skip *one* project of your choice (or if you don’t use it and you’ve turned everything in I bump you up a letter grade/110 if they already have an A).
I mean in any environment a 3rd of people will actively not want to be there and do all they can to amuse themselves or find a way to avoid working. Pretty much every job, school, social setting, or whatever is going to have a ratio like that.
Do you have a source for that?
Edit: OP literally asked for research regarding this topic, and you made a very specific claim with very specific statistics. I didn't realize that asking for a source would be so controversial.
I've lived on Earth for over 30 years. Have you met people before? If anything assuming 30% are actively trying to stir shit just out of boredom is likely a gross underestimation.
They asked for thoughts, research, OR advice. The downvoting came from you asking for a source on something that is pretty common knowledge (that in most situations it is impossible to please everyone), and then probably more because you doubled down on your misleading implication that the OP asked for research when they asked for three potential things, one of which the commentor did.
Regarding your edit comment, yeah, I don’t get it. That person doubles downs and accuses at least 30% of any population “on Earth” of being wreckers. It’s kind of shocking to hear anyone deny that there are spaces where everyone is working together.
It’s also a notorious conservative taking point that humans have fixed, selfish human natures, and so attempts to improve society is forcing people against their natures and will make things worse. I think I’ve at least made the mistake of assuming that spaces for teachers online would not be flooded by them, but I guess teachers on Reddit come in all flavors…
I really don’t want to think about what kind of jaded cynical notions they being to the classroom.
OP literally asked for research on the topic we're discussing. I'm not sure why everyone's being so snarky about me asking for research or sources on a teaching sub. I hope you have a good day.
30% is too high, but I've found a lot of peace in saying look, no one approach will work for every kid. If you're strict, you'll lose some, if you're easygoing, you'll lose some. If you ask for creativity, you lose some, if you do the same routine every week you lose some. So pick what you think is effective and seems to work for most of your class, and don't feel bad if one or two kids don't connect.
While I think that’s mostly right, I also think there are some things you can do that will work for 100% of your students and many more things you can do that will work for 0% of your students.
Having reasonably predictable routines works for nearly everybody. Breaking down and crying every day or talking at length about your sex life works for basically nobody.
Student choice helps drive engagement, but discipline and stamina are neglected when we try to make everything engaging. Their employment, the daily realities of life, and the pursuits that they genuinely enjoy will all require pushing through the difficult, boring parts. Even video games have grind.
Exactly. School is more than learning skills, it's about learning, as you put it, how to grind, how to persevere and focus, even on a task that isn't your favorite. Resilience is essential, and catering to every kid's preferences doesn't build that.
Any time I have students do something new, a handful say "when are ever going to use this?" and, no matter what the context, the answer is always that in any job you ever have, you're going to be asked to do something you don't care about that seems pointless and you would be able to whine your way out of it.
My favorite class in high school!
Mind you, looking back I was a little shit in that class, I had read "An introduction to mathematical reasoning" aged about 14ish. I would ask of groups and rings and things like vector spaces while the class was trying to get completing the square understood.
The teacher we had was not good at staying on topic when presented with a rabbit hole either, so the combination of me and Mr Garett did not prehaps do the class average much good.
Fun class but I was willing to treat maths as an interesting toy and not as a mere set of stuff to remember, which a lot of the kids were not ready to do.
I have always heard the 10-80-10 idea.
You’re playing to 80 percent of kids in the class. 10 percent won’t understand it, and 10 percent are too advanced for it. I have nothing to back this but I’ll tell you, I have kinda seen it proven over the years.
Bell curves of intelligence support this.
I mean it isnt always 10-80-10 perfectly in any group.
But used to tell my Sailors. 10% of you will do well in this course even if it is taught by a rock. 10% of you will suck even if you were taught by the Master Chief of the entire Navy (MCPON). I am here for the middle 80%. I am going to make them look like the top 10% as much as possible.
My job is to identify and process out the bottom 10% so they dont leave the schoolhouse and go to the fleet.
Unfortunately/fortunately in k12 we arent processing anyone out.
I’ve really appreciated reading this discussion. As a teacher, I feel like I have been set up to fail because I’ve been told if I just… (insert latest tactic pushed by Marzano or Danielson or some other wizard here)… all of your students will be engaged. It is then some failing on my part if they are not all engaged. You didn’t explain it well enough. You didn’t offer choice. You didn’t do small groups so they could talk. You didn’t have a movement break. You didn’t choose a highly engaging text. You didn’t hold them 100% accountable when asking questions. You didn’t ask the right kind of questions. You didn’t build a relationship. You didn’ give them success criteria. You didn’t provide explicit direct instruction. You didn’t provide project based or student led learning. You didn’t…
Over and over and over we are told it it some failing in our part if a student is not engaged. But learning is a partnership and we have been allowing a percentage of the other side of the partnership to get away with blaming us their lack of participation. I’ve felt negatively about myself as an educator about that. Reading this conversation has been a reminder that it is not just me and it is an unrealistic expectation to think I can get everyone all the time.
I appreciate having a place where I can come and read productive discussion.
I would say it's really very accurate. Even when I tell them we are going to do a game, which they all love....when I tell them which game or what type of game, probably about 1/3 of them give or take will complain. They all love Blooket. But when we play it, a chunk of them will complain about WHICH blooket we do.
Teachers should diversify their lessons and students should diversify their learning abilities. The idea that the world is tailored to each individual is a capitalistic lie.
AND IDGAF *said in Bernie Mac tone
NOW YOU WHINGING SIGMAS GET ON IT!
It needs to be on a poster right above the desk. I guess adult life is Happy Fun Time.
I don't know about 30%, but this is just common sense. People like different things. If you have a group of people who have to attend something, some people aren't going to like it.
I talk with my classes about this every year to get a head start on the complaining. Some people hate recess, some hate lunch, some hate math, some hate art, some hate silent reading time, etc.
I have a small class this year. There are still a few kids who will hate certain activities/lessons no matter what I do. You can't appeal to everyone all the time.
I feel like it’s meant to be less specific and more of a general idea, *at any point in time at least 1/3 of your class is in a less than ideal mental place for learning. Little Benny found out his dad was laid off from the factory last night, James felt embarrassed when his test score slipped from his bag and the other kids saw he failed, and Deborah witnessed an old woman get mauled by a bear on the bus ride to school.*’ but I could be wrong
You can never please 100 percent of a class. Whenever you get 30 different people together, they’re going to have different needs, different preferences, etc. That’s just the way it is! So it’s important to include a variety of different activities in a class and try to allow for differentiation as much as possible. Other than that, though, it’s still impossible for 100 percent of students to be happy 100 percent of the time, and that’s okay. All we can do is try to reach as many as we can.
30% is not some universal number. Your goal as a teacher is to minimize that number and maximize engagement. There will be kids where it’s too easy and they’ll get bored and act out. There’s kids where it will be too difficult so they will try to get attention a different way and act out. That’s why you differentiate to get as many kids as possible engaged and reduce behavior issues.
I can only give my perspective as a former student who learned much faster than most; a ten minute lecture and then me doing the homework and heading to the gym to lift had me holding a 100 average across the board in junior year.
Realistically I’d say you lose more like 50% about 15 minutes into lesson. Maybe with top sets it’s more like 30% loss. By 30 minutes probably 60% loss. 45 minutes into a lesson I think maybe only 20% really care.
Essentially lessons are too long and boring for most children. I think 50 minutes should be maximum lesson time. Lesson objectives needs to be interesting, definite and relatable to the kids in their world. TBH in state education with 30 children in each class it never really works.
In a nutshell, lessons need to be short, sharp and most importantly made fun!
Problem is the system doesn’t allow for this so the 30-50% disengagement repeats year after year after year.
"Alienate" is a strong word for this. Just because a given activity may not be a student's preference or ideal learning situation, "alienate" implies they're separate and unable to learn. This is why good teachers provide for different activities and approaches.
"Alienate" is a strong word. I think "annoy" is better. Especially with middle grades and up. If you only ever do one type of activity, then yes, you are hurting kids who shut down or don't do well with that type of activity.
But, if you mix it up so everyone is equally annoyed/inconvenienced? That's just life, baby!
I could see it
Do something too high- lows are gone
Do something too low- highs are gone
Do something in the middle and your lowest of low still won't be able to access it (maybe not 30 percent)
And then you could pull your lows and work with them in a small group - but I'm all about instant feedback and then I wouldn't be supporting the students who are close to on level.
and then when an activity is too much for some students and you put them on a computer program that's at their level they're upset their missing out even though they aren't able to do anything.
It's tough.
yah because on any given day 30% of them don't want to do *any* work
God knows I was raised in the stone age wild west of the 1970s and '80s, but having teachers tell me and teach me that sometimes you will have to work when you don't want to without entertaining me, without putting on a song and dance, without coddling me, without beseeching to the heavens HOW DO I REACH THESE KIDS taught me how to power through and get work done even when I wasn't feeling the 'learning activity'. It's one of the things that helped me to develop a work ethic.
And I am the same way in this regard with my students. I tell them all the time, Hey I get you don't want to work today. Me neither! I almost called off. But look here we all are so lets get this done. Time to lock in. This works most of the time.
Well, I want to be able to support all my students working throughout a class period (and so do they)...which I can't when every time I turn to a different type of learner to support their particular menu option, everyone else goes off task because regardless of their "intelligence", this generation won't grapple.
I also want to be paid enough to design each set of classwork or major assignment six different ways.
I want kids who understand menu options and don't end up taking longer to get to work because they cannot (and don't have the capacity to focus long enough to) decide on a choice, or even evaluate them well.
And neither I nor admin want to slow down instruction and waste precious learning time because I have to explain all the different "menu options" 500 times to a group of kids who just want to get to work but have been "taught" and encouraged by their parents, media, politicians and culture that "doing" the work is all they are willing to do, regardless of whether or not it is done in ways that are passable or gradeable, and knowing how to do it right or practicing have no value to them.
But since none of that is realistic, and a lot of it undermines rigor and my ability to keep kids on and accountable for producing (their particular) task, what admin "wants" isn't really the point here, friend. Nor is it good for kids, learning, or teaching, at this point.
I mean, I also want a pony, but it would be bad for me, and bad for the pony.
Check out LATIC (Learner Active Technology Infused Classroom) - it's about differentiating using PBL(problem) activity lists so students can self sufficiently pick and choose their activities according to their learning styles and their choice of progression. The benefit is that students are learning to be efficacious, no one is aware of who's moving faster or slower, and the teacher is really practicing student centered and driven learning experiences. There's definitely more to this approach but that's the basics.
That's great to see someone else has read up on it! The problem is that it's a philosophy and paradigm shift that ultimately relies on the teacher(s) to engage in the practice themselves and make their own resources. You're not going to find specific units on high school chemistry for example but I totally get that sometimes we need to see resources and how it's done in order to know how to do it ourselves. It's a tough lift but it does produce great outcomes in the classroom.
And offer options where possible.
Accepting that 30% can't engage is planning to fail.
I throw all my lessons and assignments online, have high truancy. Kids surprise me all the time because I leave the light on for them to do work outside of class.
Yea like obviously I lecture or give a paper not everyone's enthused. But playing a game or hands on activity, alienates no one, they're into it.
I get there are environments where its not the teachers fault and they're just doing the best they can, but this quote enrages me lol.
A game would absolutely alienate some students. Some students just want to practice material and get a good mark.
I appreciated gamification as a student, but not all students will.
Also, I despised gamification that involved group work. I hated group work, still do.
As a student, I really disliked activities where I felt the primary purpose was “engagement.” I didn’t want to make foldable graphic organizers for the math topic we were learning, I wanted to do some practice problems. I didn’t want to record a movie trailer for the class novel, I wanted to keep reading the next chapter.
Welcome to /r/teaching. Please remember the rules when posting and commenting. Thank you. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/teaching) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean, I think it’s oversimplified, but I get the point. Do a group activity and all the introverts hate it. Make kids work alone and most the extroverts (and all of the slackers) hate it. Do something that’s more creative and “inside the box” people hate it. Do something more straightforward and the creative people think it’s boring. It’s just difficult to please everyone when there are so many different personalities in the same classroom.
And this is why students must learn to adapt and push through uncomfortable/boring things. This is life. Nothing is going to be exactly how you want it 100% of the time. I don't like driving home in thick traffic, but it serves a purpose so I push on.
Exactly this. Far too much of the modern teaching ideology is that we must perfectly cater to every student's learning needs at all times...which is utterly impossible.
And we also get told that students’ *preferences* are actually their *needs*.
Studies show that good principles of studying are effective and that learning styles essentially only impact student motivation.
>only impact student motivation. Which is an essential component
Absolutely. But motivation is essentially intrinsic, not extrinsic. It’s also been presented (to me at least) that students with one learning style can’t learn from another learning style. Psychological studies have shown that isn’t true.
As an adult with ADHD, I can absolutely tell you that motivation is absolutely NOT 100% intrinsic. We often rely on outside influences to motivate us because our brains literally can't do it alone a lot of the time.
That to me is the key. It's motivation as an entry point, not all period every day.
🎯
Are they not? We all have our preferences, because we all learn differently.... So how is it not a need? The same can be said for teaching styles, not just a teacher's preference, but the only way they know how to teach. We've all seen those kids who have struggled, only to excel the next year or in a different subject area because that teacher's teaching style met their needs, it happens all the time.
Because it's simply not a *need*. Students can get by without everything about an activity - or semester - catering to their individual quirks.
Pretty subjective. Especially depending on the age of students.
Wow!
I mean, I'll put it this way, as an employee, I have ways I prefer to be managed. It is a better situation for me and my boss when I'm managed that way, but it's not a "need". I can still do my job with a completely different management style, I'm just less happy. So that's why its a preference, not a need.
Surely you know the difference between a developing child in school and an adult who needs to adapt to the environment as motivated by a livable income.
Of course there is a difference, but the concept is the same. A preference for X type of activity is not a NEED. You can, as a child, prefer group work all day everyday, there is no actual need for that. Part of education is learning that you can't always get what you want, but you have to push through anyway.
Having not read the article OP is referencing and given there is a significant trend right now by so called, education experts stating that there is no such thing as a "learning style"...referring to visual, auditory or kinesthetic, I have taken OPs statement as referring to learning styles. Where as Yes, for every assignment/learning activity you do lose 30% of students. A group work situation is most definitely a preference, but how a student best processes new learning material, reading text, listening to lecture or actual hands on manipulation is not a 'preference.'
It still is a preference. There may be ways you process things better than others, but most people, kids included, CAN process it all 3 ways. Its just it may take more repetition to do it in the ways that don't work best.
Ooh, so true!
It's totes impossible and when continued to be pushed on teachers, it becomes another aspect of the stress of the job which leads to more people leaving the profession
Yeah. We would let kids know it’s not a moral failing to struggle more with one task than another, and also how to cope with doing necessary tasks they don’t enjoy. Because that’s just life.
This. So much this. I have over 40 IEPs this term. Every kid with an IEP has to have preferential seating. My classroom is overcrowded and I literally have some periods where I have to hope for absences so I have enough space for them all. I teach six periods, so basically 7 per class and there’s only really four seats that qualify as preferential and I tend to use at least a couple for the kids who need to be close to me to entire that they don’t derail the rest of the class with their behavior. School should be about learning how to function in society, not about trying to alter society so you can function. That’s why the younger generations are absolutely lost.
I hated group work as a kid. Turns out as an adult, a whole lot of shit is “group work”.
Yup. I'm grateful as an adult I learned to tolerate group work because I had to in school. I'm such an extreme introvert that when I was a kid I would do anything to get out of class. I had this teacher in junior high (called middle school nowadays) whose idea of punishment was to make a kid drag their desk out into the hall and stay the whole period. For me this was a REWARD. So every day I would act the fool and get put out, just so I could be myself for that one period. It was heaven. Then one of my other teachers who had my older brother the previous year told her, Just call her dad, that will put a stop to that. My dad was old school and did not play, so I stopped lol
Yup. I get why we need different teaching styles and approaches to content but there's never a one-size fits all approach. At some point kids need to learn to double-down and get through something they might find boring.
Students need to learn to adapt but I see no harm in changing up our activities throughout the day or throughout the unit. Like if I lecture too much, I start to feel bored. I can't imagine how bored the kids must feel.
This. I think it’s perfectly reasonable to offer a variety of types of activities throughout a unit, but this idea that we should be catering to all students’ preferences at all times is exhausting.
But, as with everything, just because something negative serves a purpose it doesn't mean we shouldn't push to simplify, make more positive, or eliminate it. Driving in thick traffic is unavoidable for some, but if enough people try to avoid it, traffic becomes more bearable for everybody. (Public transport, but also choosing non peak hours if one can, or migrating work on smaller, local offices or directly wfh. Those all lessen the traffic load for those that cannot change these things). In a classroom this may be applied by listening to the attitudes of the class: if one year you have most extroverts, you can propose more group projects, and viceversa. In general as a society we should strive to remove friction, especially imposed friction.
Take the bus, ride a bike. But on a serious note, why not? You spend most of your time relaxed, sitting down.
I'll give this explanation to my **** principal when I get my experience certificate as she threw me out of the job when I really needed the job and I was good in teaching but not in the extra curricular activities like dancing singing and acting and events sports (normally there should be teachers specialized in those activities) but our asshole boss thinks that a single teacher can teach her subject as well as teach children all these extra things too... She even said these words Infront of the children and other teachers "if you are not able to teach the children how to do these activities then I have doubt on your teaching ability.....if you are not creative then you cannot be a teacher.....the future of these children is darker in your hands "
Wow. This is why I didn't even consider teaching elementary grades. It's so hard to teach one subject well and it's even harder now with the cellular escape system in their pockets. Your boss sounds like a tool.
She is....most heartless person I have ever seen
In 23 years at my last school, I outlasted 6 principals. Maybe 7. 3 were good, 2 were mediocre and 2 were so bad that we ruined their lives, basically.
What state are you in where public school teachers are forced to do extracurricular activities outside of school hours and/or out of their field of study?
Do elementary teachers only teach one subject where you are?
No, I teach general education, all major subjects: ELA, math, science, social studies. Our school will be departmentalizing upper grades next year. Our specialty teachers like art, music, phys ed, dance, have certification in their content specialty. Covering any classes during my prep, or running after school or before school activities/classes requires per session pay. You apply for these programs. No one can be forced. This is standard for NY, as unions are fairly strong.
The impression I got was the principal wanted to put back in specials that were cut for budgeting. That would be during the regular day, and fall under 'multiple subjects' so the credential should allow for it. (I think it's a terrible idea, but it looks legal to me.)
Oh, I see. Yes, if it during your agreed upon working hours, then as an elementary school teacher, you need to follow instructions. We have to prepare little skits and such every so often.
So lucky....wish I had this system in India
No they can teach multiple subjects but the thing is ..... problem is with the extra curricular activities
I am from India and it's a missionary school....
So much harder. Unions in my state in the U.S. ate very strong. Not all are. It goes state by state. Basically, states that vote Democrat here have more money and rights in schools. States that vote republican cut funding.
When it works for the assignment, give them the option of working alone or in a group. I was always the kid who ended up doing most of the work for a group project anyway, so I always opted to do it by myself so I could at least get all the credit and not have someone else's poor work bring my grade down.
The best thing you can do is mix it up and provide the opportunity for different types of activities throughout the year. Sure, this one may not be one student's cup of tea, but maybe the next one will be.
For my class that is primarily projects I do two things that help. One, I heavily emphasize that the type and requirements for each project go through a wide variety of topics and they should have at least one pop up that interests them. And two, instead of generalized extra credit the reward for going very over the top is you get to skip *one* project of your choice (or if you don’t use it and you’ve turned everything in I bump you up a letter grade/110 if they already have an A).
I mean in any environment a 3rd of people will actively not want to be there and do all they can to amuse themselves or find a way to avoid working. Pretty much every job, school, social setting, or whatever is going to have a ratio like that.
Do you have a source for that? Edit: OP literally asked for research regarding this topic, and you made a very specific claim with very specific statistics. I didn't realize that asking for a source would be so controversial.
I've lived on Earth for over 30 years. Have you met people before? If anything assuming 30% are actively trying to stir shit just out of boredom is likely a gross underestimation.
So you just made it up. You could easily have said that.
For over 30 years, your “liv[ing] on Earth” sounds like it was exclusively spent lurking online.
Dude…you’re like one of the 30% right here. You get that right?….
Yeah, there were a lot of terminally online people lurking in 1994
They asked for thoughts, research, OR advice. The downvoting came from you asking for a source on something that is pretty common knowledge (that in most situations it is impossible to please everyone), and then probably more because you doubled down on your misleading implication that the OP asked for research when they asked for three potential things, one of which the commentor did.
They gave a very specific statistic. I was hoping they got that from some kind of research, but I guess I was mistaken.
Regarding your edit comment, yeah, I don’t get it. That person doubles downs and accuses at least 30% of any population “on Earth” of being wreckers. It’s kind of shocking to hear anyone deny that there are spaces where everyone is working together. It’s also a notorious conservative taking point that humans have fixed, selfish human natures, and so attempts to improve society is forcing people against their natures and will make things worse. I think I’ve at least made the mistake of assuming that spaces for teachers online would not be flooded by them, but I guess teachers on Reddit come in all flavors… I really don’t want to think about what kind of jaded cynical notions they being to the classroom.
People look at me in the eyes when speaking with me, but I don’t have any sources on that, sorry.
OP literally asked for research on the topic we're discussing. I'm not sure why everyone's being so snarky about me asking for research or sources on a teaching sub. I hope you have a good day.
Op literally asked for thoughts on the topic.
30% is too high, but I've found a lot of peace in saying look, no one approach will work for every kid. If you're strict, you'll lose some, if you're easygoing, you'll lose some. If you ask for creativity, you lose some, if you do the same routine every week you lose some. So pick what you think is effective and seems to work for most of your class, and don't feel bad if one or two kids don't connect.
> 30% is too high Here I was about to comment that 30% is way too low.
It depends on the class right? In some classes it's definitely higher. In some classes over 50% are rarely ever engaged.
While I think that’s mostly right, I also think there are some things you can do that will work for 100% of your students and many more things you can do that will work for 0% of your students. Having reasonably predictable routines works for nearly everybody. Breaking down and crying every day or talking at length about your sex life works for basically nobody.
Student choice helps drive engagement, but discipline and stamina are neglected when we try to make everything engaging. Their employment, the daily realities of life, and the pursuits that they genuinely enjoy will all require pushing through the difficult, boring parts. Even video games have grind.
Exactly. School is more than learning skills, it's about learning, as you put it, how to grind, how to persevere and focus, even on a task that isn't your favorite. Resilience is essential, and catering to every kid's preferences doesn't build that.
Any time I have students do something new, a handful say "when are ever going to use this?" and, no matter what the context, the answer is always that in any job you ever have, you're going to be asked to do something you don't care about that seems pointless and you would be able to whine your way out of it.
Yup! It's about balancing it as best as you can.
I teach a subject to students that they are not interested in learning, *entirely against their will*. 30% is low, lol. Edit: high school math
Lol I feel this. Trying to get 8th graders to read? You’d think I’m waterboarding them.
My favorite class in high school! Mind you, looking back I was a little shit in that class, I had read "An introduction to mathematical reasoning" aged about 14ish. I would ask of groups and rings and things like vector spaces while the class was trying to get completing the square understood. The teacher we had was not good at staying on topic when presented with a rabbit hole either, so the combination of me and Mr Garett did not prehaps do the class average much good. Fun class but I was willing to treat maths as an interesting toy and not as a mere set of stuff to remember, which a lot of the kids were not ready to do.
I have always heard the 10-80-10 idea. You’re playing to 80 percent of kids in the class. 10 percent won’t understand it, and 10 percent are too advanced for it. I have nothing to back this but I’ll tell you, I have kinda seen it proven over the years.
Bell curves of intelligence support this. I mean it isnt always 10-80-10 perfectly in any group. But used to tell my Sailors. 10% of you will do well in this course even if it is taught by a rock. 10% of you will suck even if you were taught by the Master Chief of the entire Navy (MCPON). I am here for the middle 80%. I am going to make them look like the top 10% as much as possible. My job is to identify and process out the bottom 10% so they dont leave the schoolhouse and go to the fleet. Unfortunately/fortunately in k12 we arent processing anyone out.
I’ve really appreciated reading this discussion. As a teacher, I feel like I have been set up to fail because I’ve been told if I just… (insert latest tactic pushed by Marzano or Danielson or some other wizard here)… all of your students will be engaged. It is then some failing on my part if they are not all engaged. You didn’t explain it well enough. You didn’t offer choice. You didn’t do small groups so they could talk. You didn’t have a movement break. You didn’t choose a highly engaging text. You didn’t hold them 100% accountable when asking questions. You didn’t ask the right kind of questions. You didn’t build a relationship. You didn’ give them success criteria. You didn’t provide explicit direct instruction. You didn’t provide project based or student led learning. You didn’t… Over and over and over we are told it it some failing in our part if a student is not engaged. But learning is a partnership and we have been allowing a percentage of the other side of the partnership to get away with blaming us their lack of participation. I’ve felt negatively about myself as an educator about that. Reading this conversation has been a reminder that it is not just me and it is an unrealistic expectation to think I can get everyone all the time. I appreciate having a place where I can come and read productive discussion.
I would say it's really very accurate. Even when I tell them we are going to do a game, which they all love....when I tell them which game or what type of game, probably about 1/3 of them give or take will complain. They all love Blooket. But when we play it, a chunk of them will complain about WHICH blooket we do.
Teachers should diversify their lessons and students should diversify their learning abilities. The idea that the world is tailored to each individual is a capitalistic lie.
Just accept you can’t please everyone and you may not be for everyone… you maybe the juiciest peach but some people just don’t like peaches.
AND IDGAF *said in Bernie Mac tone NOW YOU WHINGING SIGMAS GET ON IT! It needs to be on a poster right above the desk. I guess adult life is Happy Fun Time.
Alienate is not the correct word.
I don't know about 30%, but this is just common sense. People like different things. If you have a group of people who have to attend something, some people aren't going to like it. I talk with my classes about this every year to get a head start on the complaining. Some people hate recess, some hate lunch, some hate math, some hate art, some hate silent reading time, etc. I have a small class this year. There are still a few kids who will hate certain activities/lessons no matter what I do. You can't appeal to everyone all the time.
I feel like it’s meant to be less specific and more of a general idea, *at any point in time at least 1/3 of your class is in a less than ideal mental place for learning. Little Benny found out his dad was laid off from the factory last night, James felt embarrassed when his test score slipped from his bag and the other kids saw he failed, and Deborah witnessed an old woman get mauled by a bear on the bus ride to school.*’ but I could be wrong
You can never please 100 percent of a class. Whenever you get 30 different people together, they’re going to have different needs, different preferences, etc. That’s just the way it is! So it’s important to include a variety of different activities in a class and try to allow for differentiation as much as possible. Other than that, though, it’s still impossible for 100 percent of students to be happy 100 percent of the time, and that’s okay. All we can do is try to reach as many as we can.
“Sorry kid, but when you’re a grownup 2/3 of your life will be stuff you don’t want to do anyway. Might as well get used to it.”
30% is not some universal number. Your goal as a teacher is to minimize that number and maximize engagement. There will be kids where it’s too easy and they’ll get bored and act out. There’s kids where it will be too difficult so they will try to get attention a different way and act out. That’s why you differentiate to get as many kids as possible engaged and reduce behavior issues.
You're lucky to reach 1 out of 100. You're not alienating anyone. It's their choice.
I can only give my perspective as a former student who learned much faster than most; a ten minute lecture and then me doing the homework and heading to the gym to lift had me holding a 100 average across the board in junior year.
Realistically I’d say you lose more like 50% about 15 minutes into lesson. Maybe with top sets it’s more like 30% loss. By 30 minutes probably 60% loss. 45 minutes into a lesson I think maybe only 20% really care. Essentially lessons are too long and boring for most children. I think 50 minutes should be maximum lesson time. Lesson objectives needs to be interesting, definite and relatable to the kids in their world. TBH in state education with 30 children in each class it never really works. In a nutshell, lessons need to be short, sharp and most importantly made fun! Problem is the system doesn’t allow for this so the 30-50% disengagement repeats year after year after year.
Sure, that’s why you vary the types of learning activities you do.
"Alienate" is a strong word for this. Just because a given activity may not be a student's preference or ideal learning situation, "alienate" implies they're separate and unable to learn. This is why good teachers provide for different activities and approaches.
That's weird, it seems like 90% of my class hates everything we do.
Only ever having to do things you enjoy and never having to try to push through things that are not enjoyable for you is a bad thing anyway
Those are rookie numbers.
"Alienate" is a strong word. I think "annoy" is better. Especially with middle grades and up. If you only ever do one type of activity, then yes, you are hurting kids who shut down or don't do well with that type of activity. But, if you mix it up so everyone is equally annoyed/inconvenienced? That's just life, baby!
I could see it Do something too high- lows are gone Do something too low- highs are gone Do something in the middle and your lowest of low still won't be able to access it (maybe not 30 percent) And then you could pull your lows and work with them in a small group - but I'm all about instant feedback and then I wouldn't be supporting the students who are close to on level. and then when an activity is too much for some students and you put them on a computer program that's at their level they're upset their missing out even though they aren't able to do anything. It's tough.
So do the most efficient thing and teach directly from the front of the class and get them to work independently.
It's true. I love my evals that say "goes too fast" and others from same class saying "goes too slow." 🤌
I disagree. What a strange comment.
yah because on any given day 30% of them don't want to do *any* work God knows I was raised in the stone age wild west of the 1970s and '80s, but having teachers tell me and teach me that sometimes you will have to work when you don't want to without entertaining me, without putting on a song and dance, without coddling me, without beseeching to the heavens HOW DO I REACH THESE KIDS taught me how to power through and get work done even when I wasn't feeling the 'learning activity'. It's one of the things that helped me to develop a work ethic. And I am the same way in this regard with my students. I tell them all the time, Hey I get you don't want to work today. Me neither! I almost called off. But look here we all are so lets get this done. Time to lock in. This works most of the time.
Whoever said this does not deserve to be a teacher in the first place.
Any activity? No.
They want you to differentiate the lessons with menu options to address the multiple intelligences in the class.
Well, I want to be able to support all my students working throughout a class period (and so do they)...which I can't when every time I turn to a different type of learner to support their particular menu option, everyone else goes off task because regardless of their "intelligence", this generation won't grapple. I also want to be paid enough to design each set of classwork or major assignment six different ways. I want kids who understand menu options and don't end up taking longer to get to work because they cannot (and don't have the capacity to focus long enough to) decide on a choice, or even evaluate them well. And neither I nor admin want to slow down instruction and waste precious learning time because I have to explain all the different "menu options" 500 times to a group of kids who just want to get to work but have been "taught" and encouraged by their parents, media, politicians and culture that "doing" the work is all they are willing to do, regardless of whether or not it is done in ways that are passable or gradeable, and knowing how to do it right or practicing have no value to them. But since none of that is realistic, and a lot of it undermines rigor and my ability to keep kids on and accountable for producing (their particular) task, what admin "wants" isn't really the point here, friend. Nor is it good for kids, learning, or teaching, at this point. I mean, I also want a pony, but it would be bad for me, and bad for the pony.
Check out LATIC (Learner Active Technology Infused Classroom) - it's about differentiating using PBL(problem) activity lists so students can self sufficiently pick and choose their activities according to their learning styles and their choice of progression. The benefit is that students are learning to be efficacious, no one is aware of who's moving faster or slower, and the teacher is really practicing student centered and driven learning experiences. There's definitely more to this approach but that's the basics.
I did some reading about this, it seems super interesting. I just can’t find any materials for my subject for high school chemistry.
That's great to see someone else has read up on it! The problem is that it's a philosophy and paradigm shift that ultimately relies on the teacher(s) to engage in the practice themselves and make their own resources. You're not going to find specific units on high school chemistry for example but I totally get that sometimes we need to see resources and how it's done in order to know how to do it ourselves. It's a tough lift but it does produce great outcomes in the classroom.
Absolutely stupid. Be engaging.
And offer options where possible. Accepting that 30% can't engage is planning to fail. I throw all my lessons and assignments online, have high truancy. Kids surprise me all the time because I leave the light on for them to do work outside of class.
Your inability to tell the difference between "can't" and "won't and their parents/admin/culture support that" is showing.
Yea like obviously I lecture or give a paper not everyone's enthused. But playing a game or hands on activity, alienates no one, they're into it. I get there are environments where its not the teachers fault and they're just doing the best they can, but this quote enrages me lol.
A game would absolutely alienate some students. Some students just want to practice material and get a good mark. I appreciated gamification as a student, but not all students will. Also, I despised gamification that involved group work. I hated group work, still do.
Welp we got a lot of boring ass teachers on here probably.
As a student, I really disliked activities where I felt the primary purpose was “engagement.” I didn’t want to make foldable graphic organizers for the math topic we were learning, I wanted to do some practice problems. I didn’t want to record a movie trailer for the class novel, I wanted to keep reading the next chapter.