Learning is about relationships - not obedience
Everything used to be better, children still listened to the teacher! I heard this phrase 17 years ago when I started teaching as a young and inexperienced teacher. «No more cuddly pedagogy!» was a headline that went viral at the time. As a young teacher, I thought this was a criticism of me, of our school. Over time, however, I realised that this statement usually had a completely different background. Even today, I still hear it from time to time: «In the past, she/he would have been slapped in the face and she/he would work again.»
Where do statements like «It used to be better» or even «People used to learn at school» come from? I remember that there were always situations in my school career that were not at all «better» than today.
A different understanding of discipline
I'll take the liberty of interpreting what might be behind these statements, perhaps a little cheekily, I apologise if you take it that way. The differences between today's school and «yesterday's» school - whenever that yesterday was - are, in my view, rooted more in a different understanding of discipline. There are different views of what discipline is and how it should be dealt with, or at best demanded: on the one hand, absolute obedience and, on the other, a participative understanding of discipline in the sense of joint performance.
The understanding of discipline as absolute obedience, to put it more casually, a military understanding of discipline, sees participative relationship work as a weakness, a loss of the will to perform. Absolute obedience is efficient and clear. It makes it possible to act quickly and purposefully in crises, without delay and without «friction loss». That is why it is also important in the military, because it protects and supports us in a crisis. If the students are absolutely obedient, I can hold many lessons without disruption. The question arises as to how absolute obedience can be maintained. The answer is simple: with punishment. From my point of view, however, there is then a rather anxious atmosphere in the classroom, disruptions and mistakes are not permitted. As a teacher, I have the power to punish if my instructions are not followed. So the teacher has «authority» - that's what we want, isn't it?
Not at any price
Educator, psychologist and author Jürg Rüedi takes a slightly different view. Discipline is the agreement of all those involved to follow common rules and thus be efficient, he says. However, the rules should not be enforced at all costs. Rüedi assumes that success at school is the result of jointly achieved discipline. Everyone involved has fulfilled their task, i.e. has behaved in a disciplined manner and, ideally, has fulfilled their task with dedication. I have done the teaching and the pupils have done the learning. He even specifies that discipline must not be enforced at all costs, as this would only be possible through humiliation. The teacher is in a position of power due to their function and task, so the pupils are humiliated. Humiliation, however, creates resistance. This resistance would have to be «crushed» with even more repression. A vicious circle.
Success at school is the result of discipline achieved together, says educationalist Jürg Rüedi.
Jürg Rüedi assumes a relationship based on trust and cooperation. In principle, everyone involved should feel understood and supported, which is how a fruitful collaboration develops, he explains. The focus is on relationship work. So is it possible without absolute obedience? I think so.
Team player, independent and autonomous
The curriculum stipulates that we should educate our pupils to become independent and self-reliant people who are able to deal with conflict. The call for independent and team-oriented employees is also becoming ever louder in the business world. If these skills are to become more central to pupils' future, schools must be a training ground for them. I am therefore doubly challenged to promote this. However, this creates a conflict of objectives, because as a teacher I also have a duty to achieve and assess the achievement of subject-specific competences. I am therefore obliged to write examinations with the learners, which also select, enable or prevent careers. In addition, children and young people do not all develop at the same time and at the same pace. I am therefore not faced with «one class», but with 20 to 25 individuals - or even over 30! Regardless of whether I work in cycle 1, at an integrated upper secondary school or at a lower secondary school, a class is never homogeneous. Or do you know two children of the same age who «tick» in exactly the same way? That's definitely not the case with me.
Taking your counterpart seriously
I am convinced that children need guidance and direction. However, I am also convinced that children need to be shown understanding and unconditional appreciation at the same time. The aim of my relationship work is to show the young people entrusted to me that my intentions are benevolent.
Yes, it takes a lot of energy to invest in this relationship work, but it's worth it. There will always be disruptions, but if I can deal with them in a more relaxed way, everyone wins. It is important for me to emphasise that a relaxed approach does not mean doing nothing or not reacting. It means taking your counterpart seriously and approaching the situation with mutual respect. It is not a loss of authority if a pupil is disruptive, because it is not about me, it is about the child. From this perspective, I do not lose authority if pupils are disruptive.
What does it take for everyone involved to play their part? What does it take to show discipline? Not absolute obedience, but the will to learn something. Then I can also show my willingness to teach something more successfully. And yes: positive will is non-negotiable, it is needed from all sides. Thank you, dear parents, for your co-operation in this challenging but exciting task.
