r/DetroitMichiganECE

What are some unconventional/silly strategies you use for teaching or classroom management? One of my favorites is whenever a kid gets hurt but it’s not something that needs ice or a bandaid, I always say “Do you want me to sprinkle some pixie dust on it?” and I’ll reach in my pocket and pretend to sprinkle pixie dust on their booboo and go “pspsps” and 9/10 times they giggle and go back to playing.

>So, this is my question: what if we thought of the classroom as a moral entity? That is, what if we thought the essence of the classroom is the nature and quality of the relationship among people?

>Sympathy is love, respect, concern, empathy, and compassion in action. They are all forms of generosity; they are the glue of connection; they’re the fabric of authenticity and openness; they put us in the present; they give us a presence; they are an expansiveness that brings us out from our tunnel vision imposed by label, stereotype, and generality; they make life happen in the classroom.

>Each is limitless fuel. Each operates more and more for the good of both each of us and each of them. Each offers deeper and deeper ethical and moral insight. Each challenges taboos, rejects conventional mores, opposes traditional stances. Each rips out labels and destroys the scaffolds of stereotype and generality. Each allows us to slip gently into another person’s life. And, each is a stronger and stronger foundation of dedication, commitment, and perseverance. The irony is that in their sweat equity is an unbelievable liberation for both student and teacher. It is simply committing the Golden rule to living your life rather than committing it to memory.

>the way we see each student is the way we treat each of them, and the way we treat them is what they become in our eyes.

>I am convinced that a teacher should be a transformer, not merely a transmitter; that she or he should help a student become a better person, not just get a better grade.

>I am convinced more than ever that we teachers, as futurists, should use our teaching talents for something that will outlast us. Each day we should sacrifice what “is” for what “can become.” To use a gardening analogy, the true meaning of teaching is to plant the seeds for a forest through which we won’t stroll.

>A teacher is like a flame; she or he can warm, but she or he can also burn.

>Effort is not something to be diligently avoided. To wish for a classroom free of challenges, to be dismayed when things aren’t as you wish, to be frustrated that you cannot control circumstances, is to wish for a life in which it would be impossible to find anywhere any time.

>No matter how much you plan, life in the classroom will throw you a curve ball. Learn to hit it. Within every pitch thrown at you there’s an opportunity to make a hit and become a better batter.

>Be happy with the little “victories,” and they soon add up to big accomplishments; appreciate and value every moment, and they will add up to a great treasure. There’s no such thing as a small step in a great journey; no such thing as a small attempt in a great effort. No such thing as a small kindness in loving.

>just who among us is ever so complete at any moment in our life that we have no need to grow, change, and transform?

>There is so much more snap, crackle, and pop in the classroom, there is so much more adventure, imagination, creativity, allure, fun, and excitement if it is a dance among equals

>As I always have said, we teach who we are; we are the perceptions we have; we are the questions we ask. All this means that who we are is inseparable from what we feel and what we do.

>A recent New York Times piece reports on a new trend: public school districts investing in marketing and parent outreach. They’re rebranding, launching ad campaigns, and even hiring outreach coordinators to knock on doors like politicians in a tight race. They’re giving out nearly $1,000 bounties for anyone who can attract families back.

>Too often, education debates caricature competition as a zero-sum cage match: four schools enter, one school leaves. But that’s not how competition works in any real-world sector.

>When you can’t use the force of government, truancy laws, and other top-down mechanisms to capture customers, you are left with only the ability to compete over service, convenience, price, and experience. We saw this after airlines were deregulated. We saw this after mail delivery was de-monopolized to allow for companies like UPS and FedEx. We saw this in telecom when that was deregulated. In each case, de-monopolization led to differentiation. Brands carved out niches and consumers found services that actually matched their preferences. And consumers benefitted enormously.

>What we’re seeing in education is the emergence of that same market dynamic. As families gain the power to leave, via ESAs, low-cost options like micro- and hybrid schools, and homeschooling, districts are realizing they can no longer take enrollment for granted. And so, they’re doing something radical: they’re treating families like customers.

>This is Albert O. Hirschman 101. In his seminal theory, Hirschman argued that consumers have two ways to respond to dissatisfaction: exit (leave) or voice (complain). In monopoly systems, you don’t have exit, so your only option is voice, which often gets ignored. But when exit becomes viable, voice suddenly matters again.

>When families can walk away, schools must ask: Why should they stay? That’s when organizations shift from serving the system to serving the customer. They start identifying underserved segments. They iterate. They build trust. They find their niche.

>Yes, that means marketing. But it also means listening. It means design. It means innovation.

>In other words: it means schooling starts looking like every other sector that prioritizes people over bureaucracy.

>the district superintendent noted that the district needed to be more competitive and look into district-run charter schools and microschools. “In order to stay competitive, we’re going to have to be innovative,” the superintendent said. “We’re going to have to change how public education looks.”

>There are many, many well-intentioned reformers who for years have tried to sway districts to adopt this perspective without having to open them up to that icky school choice stuff. I have said then and I will say now that the only reason districts are feeling compelled to do these things is because of the threat of losing families to those options. It is not because of really great white papers or the two hours every two weeks that got carved out for consultants to come in and do a redesign effort. It is because parents now have more of an ability to exit.

>School choice doesn’t just introduce new options. It reshapes the behavior of existing ones. It forces everyone to ask: What are we offering? For whom? And why should they choose us?