Paul Emerich

Focusing on teacher wellness makes teachers the problem

We instead need to analyze the systems that play that require teachers to teach unsustainably.

I ask you: what practices make your life harder? What would make your life easier?

Good teachers differentiate. It’s really that simple.

How you differentiate… that is a completely different story. And I would be the first to say that our implementation of differentiation over the past 10 to 15 years has created a lot of problems for us.

I have seen multiple posts now encouraging teachers to stop meeting kids where they are. It concerns me deeply.

I have been in countless classrooms, where teachers are trying to teach grade level skills when students lack the prerequisite skills to even understand what they’re trying to teach. It’s basic cognitive science: it’s schema theory. We need to be able to connect to our students’ prior knowledge.

This might be unpopular, but sometimes that means lowering the expectations. Sometimes the bar is too high. It doesn’t mean we are lowering our overall expectations of the student themselves; it just means that we are filling in prerequisite gaps by modifying the goal. This needs to happen sometimes.

Now, just because a student is behind doesn’t mean that we automatically go to the grade level prior or even lower. We have to use professional judgment. It’s possible, even if they’re behind, that’s some simple scaffolding will help them access the lesson. But if that doesn’t work, it’s highly possible that they will need instruction in prerequisites.

We need to stop making this a black-and-white issue. It’s not a black-and-white issue, and anyone who makes it that really loses credibility in my book.

Sustainable teaching models should be good for both learners AND TEACHERS

Comment the word SIMPLE, and I will send you a free PDF that outlines the “Simple View of Teaching.” You can also read about this on my Substack sustainteaching.substack.com at the link in my bio

While the conditions in our profession are challenging, to put it softly, there are levers teachers can pull: there are decisions about pedagogy and culture that are truly within teachers’ loci of control—yes, even those teachers who feel they are working within rigid, compliance-based systems with high-stakes accountability metrics and top-down administrations.

If we take a Simple View of Teaching, we can begin to see where those levers are, which we’d like to pull, and then observe sustainable shifts in our instruction, depicted in the image in the video.

Masterful pedagogy is defined by curricular minimalism, process-oriented assessment, and flexible instruction. Human-full culture is defined by psychological safety, collaborative learning, and shared decision-making. The table below summarizes each of these elements as “levers” teachers can pull to work towards greater sustainability.

The intention here is not that teachers focus on each of these at once. That would defeat the purpose of a sustainability goal. Our path towards sustainability must, in and of itself, be sustainable.

Tell me what I missed, and most importantly, tell me if you think this is actually simple.

3 systems that will make teachers’ lives easier

It’s not harmful to recommend self-care to teachers, but it won’t actually solve the systemic problems that make teachers’ lives challenging

DM me the word INTERNALIZE if you missed my internalization template. This aligns with the first system for curriculum development, internalization, and monitoring.

Second system is clear assessment system. Assessment should be supporting all stakeholders, and it should be providing clarity around what students know and are able to do.

The third system is a behavior management system. I hear from countless teachers that behavior is out of control. We can all work together to support students in self regulation if we are all on the same plan.

What systems did I miss? What makes your life as a teacher harder? And more importantly, what systems have made it easier?

Easiest thing you’ll ever try

It’s actually quite simple to get kids writing reflections down. You can give them a simple sentence frame like “I want to…”

Check out this example from a seventh grade English classroom. The student set a very clear intention.

If you want my full list of “Stop and Jot” reflections, just COMMENT the word WRITE and I’ll send it to you for free!

Try cognitive writing tomorrow with little to no planning

And COMMENT the word WRITE and I’ll send you my free “stop and jot” resource

Student writing tells us so much about what kids are thinking. It also tells us how they are structuring their thinking.

Check out the red text at the bottom of the page. This is from a feedback protocol where students circulate around the room and write feedback in each other’s journals.

Do you see how easy this is to do? Try it tomorrow!

No, not all people at tech companies are bad. That’s not what I’m trying to say.

What I am trying to say is the primary motive of any company is to turn a profit. That is the point of a company. That means education technology companies are also trying to turn a profit. As someone pointed out on my Substack, there are some tech companies that do provide good products that actually help kids. But I’m gonna be honest, most of them are fulfilling a superficial demand, not an evidentiary need.

This is a huge difference! A huge, huge difference!

Tell me: which tech tools that you use are fulfilling an evidentiary need?

And if you would like my free education, technology audit, DM me EDTECH AUDIT and I’ll send it to you.

Which teaching style are you?

Authoritarian teachers want compliance and control.

Neglectful teachers to be left alone.

Permissive teachers want to keep the peace.

Authoritative teachers are focused on productive learning environments.

Which are you? How do you know?

We are way too afraid of our students.

We are way too afraid to say no, we are way too afraid to set boundaries, and we are way too afraid to sit with them while they experience the uncomfortable emotions that accompany natural consequences.

I am not trying to paint all restorative practices with a broad brush. The nature of rupture and repair is something we can all learn from, but we often forget that repair after a rupture is not as simple as “I’m sorry, I won’t do it again.” Restorative practice is not a matter of simply saying “I trust you” when the child has very clearly shown that they cannot yet be trusted with their own independence. Restorative practice requires replacing maladaptive behaviors with adaptive, appropriate ones, only allowing trust and autonomy to be “restored” after the child shows that they are capable of handling their new responsibility.

I know that the intentions behind “gentle parenting”—and by proxy, “gentle teaching”—are good. In fact, the tenets of “gentle parenting” are pretty sound. Building a strong relationship, setting boundaries, and avoiding superficial rewards? All sounds like a good plan to me. I would go so far to say that I share the goal of every “gentle” advocate: to move away from the shaming, punitive practices of the past.

But when the implementation results in permissive behavior management, it’s time to take a hard look at not only what we’re doing, but also what we are calling this style of behavior management. By calling our approach ‘gentle,’ we have inadvertently invited a culture of permissiveness that leaves both the teacher and the child unanchored. We don’t need gentle teachers; we need confident authority figures who are kind enough to connect, but firm enough to hold the line.

Because firmness is actually the highest form of care.

Firmness is actually more child-centered than the gentle nature of permissive behavior management.

Full text at sustainteaching.substack.com