Its purpose is responsibility, not fun.
The assumption that schools and teachers need to focus on relationships seems to undermine the differences between a (personal) relationship and a teacher-student relationship.
The dirty word (friction)
Earlier I wrote about the implications of blurring the lines between educating children and raising children. More specifically I wrote about the consequences of not having a clear view on a ‘schools purpose’.
We live in a time where there’s two main tactics to deal with friction.
The first is lowering resistance (expectation). So whenever something gets too hard, lower the expectations and thereby the amount of resistance. We keep on doing this until we’ve reached a level of comfort but usually stop learning because of this.
The second is the external distribution of responsibility. This tactic simply refers to assigning a responsibility that’s yours, to someone or something else.
Both have an enormous impact on schools and education in general. Because learning at its very core is uncomfortable. So lowering the bar is counterproductive to the goal of a school. Fortunately, there are schools that still maintain a very high standard regardless of criticism and external pressure to change their standards. But a more threatening thing is happening, and it’s focused more on the soft side of education: relationships.
Why aren’t you raising my child?
The amount of times I’m reading posts on LinkedIn, attend administrative meetings or just having casual conversations with teachers and/or parents; the one thing that stands out is the word RELATIONSHIP.
Without relationship there is no learning.
While this is true, it’s a slippery slope when it comes to the definition of the word relationship.
A school exists to educate. Its relationships therefore are vastly different than those in your personal life. But somewhere along the way we lost this fundamental understanding and are left with a vague expectation of what a teacher-student relationship should look like. And with that, parents (even school boards) are reshaping their expectation into something it should never be:
Raising (their) children as opposed to educating them.
Asymmetry and conditional
Let’s take a look at how a (personal) relationship differs from a teacher-student relationship and what that changes in practice.
Asymmetrical
At the very core a teacher-student relationship is asymmetrical. It’s not based on equality but the opposite where the teacher has full responsibility. We’re not doing this as equals, but I am responsible for your wellbeing and safety.
Development is its aim
The relationship between a teacher and student - unlike a personal relationship - is not a goal in itself. Its goal is the development of the child. At its very foundation you’re not trying to be nice, you’re trying to do what is necessary.
The adult is in charge, it’s your job
You as a teacher are carrying the relationship. It’s your literal job to make sure you are available and trustworthy, not because there’s a mutual benefit but because these are necessities to learn. The student doesn’t carry the responsibility of maintaining the relationship. For them, it’s not their job.
Boundaries, boundaries, boundaries
You set the boundaries. Unlike a personal relationship, it’s your job to set boundaries and conditions. Nothing about a teacher-student relationship is unconditional. Since you are carrying the responsibility of the relationship, it’s up to you to set a goal. What’s the purpose of this relationship? Guard that by setting parameters to ensure the outcome of the goal. Which in this case has nothing to do with becoming friends, family or lovers. Which would imply a more unconditional approach as its goal is mutual benefit.
I don’t like you, you don’t like me, and that’s OK
Having a great connection with a student helps. Not only that, it’s a beautiful thing when that happens and in someway most of our teachers are looking to build up such a connection. But in reality a teacher-student relationship is not based around reciprocity. You don’t have to like a student, to take responsibility for its development. Nor does a student have to like you in order to learn. Just remember: it’s a professional relationship, not a friendship.
Conclusion
If we blur the lines between a personal relationship and a teacher-student relationship, we’re not only going to fail at the purpose of a school; we also adopt many of the responsibilities that parents have and ought to carry. We cannot agree to this growing assumption that parents can drop of a kid at school and expect them to raise and educate. It’s not what we’re designed to do. Nor should it be.
Education is about teaching not raising.
It’s about a collective of various kinds of knowledge, skills and values that fit the current society in which the child is growing up. In other words, it’s not about personal beliefs or anything that is solely the belief of the school. Raising a child is about your perceptions and values as a parent. Those aren’t to be attributed to a school.
So stop having endless conversations about how schools should prioritize relationships as if they are personal. They are not. There should be clear distinction.
For a parent that is: I know my child is being educated (not raised) at school.
For a teacher: I know my job is to educate your child, not raise them.
And in a perfect world we’d conclude:
I do my part, you do yours.