What is the possible outcome of this disempowering mindset in the classroom? Like teachers, administrators often become overwhelmed (Farkas, Johnson, Duffett, & Foleno, 2001). If teachers and administrators do not work together to support student behaviors and outcomes, some students will fall through the net of the education system, experiencing low grades, inappropriate placement in special education, dropping out of school, or even incarceration. As a result, as adults, these youths will likely need additional supports or assistance.
“I Get Nervous About Students’ Reactions When I Try to Hold Them Accountable”
Unintended enablers may shy away from holding certain students accountable for their work and actions because the teachers are afraid of the students’ reactions— physically or emotionally (Klei Borrero & Canter, 2018). Furthermore, these teachers haven’t learned the strategies to support a student who might talk back, argue, or become defiant. Their fear of a student’s reaction to being held accountable becomes an excuse and a reason unintended enablers give up on certain students and don’t hold them accountable—they give up in order to keep peace in the classroom.
Some common attributes or relationship-building strategies of unintended enablers include the following.
What is the possible outcome of this disempowering mindset in the classroom? These attributes corrupt the students’ ability to achieve and the teachers’ ability to make a difference in their lives (Duncan-Andrade, 2007; Steele, 2004). The cool or friend persona often accounts for mediocre expectations and aligned outcomes. Students don’t tend to respect teachers they see as their peers; this can be quite challenging when a mentoring relationship of mutual respect is necessary between teacher and student. Without a respectful relationship, classrooms can become volatile and learning doesn’t reach its full potential.
“I Can’t Expect Students With So Many Challenges to Achieve”
Many teachers fall victim to the “soft bigotry of low expectations” (“Excerpts from Bush’s speech,” 1999). They believe their students face so many challenges, such as poverty, neglect, parental demands, or societal pressures, that lowering their demands on students seems fair and compassionate (Farr, 2010).
Unintended enablers often make excuses for their students because they feel sorry for them. The challenges these students encounter—poverty, bullying, and pressures experienced with social media, violence, unstable households, unattainable demands from family members, illness, and trauma—are real. Do these challenges make it harder for them to be successful at school? Of course they do! But what is the cost of lowering expectations for these students? They miss educational opportunities, thus limiting their choices and opportunities for the rest of their lives (Jussim & Harber, 2005; Rosenthall & Jacobson, 1968; Tenenbaum & Ruck, 2007).
With this disempowered mindset, unintended enablers may hesitate to push students academically because they feel sorry for their circumstances at home or in the community, or for medical reasons, as in the following examples.
Norman has a really hard life. His grandparents are raising him, and he really misses his mom. How can I expect him to complete all of his homework?
Shayla has always struggled in school. Now that she’s in tenth grade, how can I expect her to keep up with the class?
I don’t think Jake’s parents ever read to him. This first-grade work is developmentally inappropriate for him.
Zach’s attention deficit hyperactivity disorder is so severe, I am just happy when he stays in his seat and isn’t disruptive to the other students’ learning.
Katie’s dad is so hard on her. He expects straight As and extra homework. I need to go easier on Katie while she is at school. Otherwise, she will burn out before high school.
What is the possible outcome of this disempowering mindset in the classroom? While this compassion is commendable, and circumstances may be tough for some students, when we lower our expectations, each year students fall further and further behind academically (Milner, 2007). This often has crippling effects on their future academics, especially after a year or two of experiencing teachers with lowered expectations. For some students, after a few years of lowered expectations, they will struggle throughout their academic careers (Jussim & Harber, 2005; Rosenthall & Jacobson, 1968; Tenenbaum & Ruck, 2007). Excuses (instead of solutions) further disempower students and rob them of educational opportunities. Demands on students are real, and if teachers don’t help them navigate these demands, they will fall further and further behind in what is necessary to achieve in a 21st century learning environment and job market.
Unintended enablers have their hearts in the right place, but they often compromise their impact. When students are exposed to these types of teachers over time, they will fall further and further behind academically and miss opportunities for achievement. Ultimately, this relationship-building paradigm can lead students to believe that adults hold low expectations for them, which transfers to how they see and perceive themselves throughout school and life (Steele, 2004).
Negative Controllers
While unintended enablers share some qualities with negative controllers, these relationship-building paradigms tend to be quite different; however, both adversely impact students and teachers over time.
As a student (or now as a teacher), you may have had some teachers exhibit negative, controlling attitudes when interacting with you or other students in class. Negative controllers tend to be overly strict and unpredictable in their consequences, and they tend to pick on certain students while letting others slide. Negative controllers also tend to be intolerant of certain student needs or behaviors and struggle to understand the importance of relationships in a learning environment. Their intolerance and lack or absence of relationships may show up as aggressively advocating for zero-tolerance discipline policies that put their needs before those of their students in order to keep controlled, disruption-free classrooms (Duncan-Andrade, 2007).
While teachers with negative controlling attributes often lack fairness, they do want students to succeed and strive to have the quiet classroom their administrators and colleagues admire. The disempowered mindsets of negative controllers denote their need for control and lack of relationships with students because of their negativity. Examining some of the common mindsets of this relationship-building paradigm will help you examine your own mindsets about the students you serve and support.
“It’s Impossible to Expect 100 Percent of Students to Be Engaged 100 Percent of the Time”
Negative controllers often struggle with their relationships with students. Instead of being accountable for those struggles, these teachers often place blame on their students’ circumstances, the challenges they face, or the students themselves.
Negative controllers tend to believe in self-motivated students, but if students need or expect extra assistance, teachers often leave them behind for the greater good of the class. You might hear these teachers make statements such as: