Book Review: Crazy Like a Fox

I recently finished Crazy Like a Fox by Dr. Ben Chavis. He is one of the many principals whose "inspiring" stories make him a darling to both the left and the right.  To the left, he is an icon of what a minority can do in a low-income area.  To the right, he is a return of the tough-love approach, a critic of political correctness and a call to accountability. 

Honestly, books like this typically make me angry and this one was no exception.  Some of the shaming techniques he uses toward students would get me fired. Yet, it's a common narrative that Americans want to believe.  It's the idea of a lone ranger coming to town, raising hell and fixing a complacent system into a well-running machine.

Many of these tough-as-nails stories have similar behaviorist philosophies.  Punish students who are bad (indeed, Chavis often embaresses students) and reward achievement.  Create a hyper-structured environemnt. Kick out the ones who cause problems. It's as common sense as Glenn Beck and Dr. Phil.  (Incidentally, I'm not a firm believer in common sense - unless one is referring to the quasi-anarchist book by Thomas Paine) I have four major issues I want to address:

1. False Premise: I am always skeptical about such "tough love" approaches, because behaviorism is like a steroid.  The results are quick, but the long-term consequences are disastrous.  If a student wants to go to school and enjoys learning and then finds out that it is a chore that demands a reward, the intrinsic motivation will decrease. In nearly every reward system (Alfie Kohn has done some great research here) the immediate results are a spike in achievement, but over the long term, the achievement drops below the original level. If you want to guarantee a child won't read independently in middle school, reward him in the fourth grade with pizza coupons.

2. Gaps in the story:  When a "tough love" approach exists and schools start kicking out behavioral problems, they often kick out low-motivated students.  Students who don't want to be there are most likely the ones to act out.  If I said, "This principal did a great job of finding the highest motivated students and helping them achieve results," it wouldn't exactly seem amazing anymore.  Here locally, I have seen three high schools improve academically by making it easier to expel students.  Should that really be a measure of success?

3. The Ultimate Goal: What happens to students of highly-structured environments when they move on?  If they have not become self-directed learners and critical thinkers, I am doubtful that they will be able to succeed outside of the highly-structured environment of a "tough love" school. It's a poor analogy, but compare it to a hyper-sheltered child from a very strict home.  What happens when that child goes to college? If a child learns obedience to rules rather than adherence to justice and a larger moral philosophy, the results will be either rebellion or a subservient self-concept.

4. Stereotypes: I am concerned with the way books present inner-city, low-income students.  If a wealthy school has a food fight, society says, "wow, middle school kids are tough."  If the same thing happens in the city, people think, "it's a ghetto mentality.  We need to change it." I hear people say, "In the inner-city, you need a special discipline, a tougher approach.  These kids are rough."  Any time there is a "these kids," it's a red flag (and any time a blogger uses the term "red flag" it's a sign of cliche). 

***

I am no guru, but I have had a solid track record on discipline and achievement levels.  As a social studies teacher, my students had the highest scores on common assessments.  We've painted murals, created documentaries and have a pretty impressive class blog.  I've only written two referrals in the last three years.  I am by no means a Teacher of the Year, but I'm also not a Packet-Master burnout. My approach is different:

1. Rules: Teach students why rules exist and how it affects who they are as a person. When a student breaks a rule, have a conversation about a better way to approach it the next time. Discuss why that rule makes a difference in the learning of others. I would add to this 

2. Procedures: Streamline procedures so that they are few but effective.  I use a procedure grid that has worked pretty well for me.

3. Instruction and Motivation: Create assignments that require rigor, critical thinking and creativity. Make it personal and engage students in metacognition so they can tell me why they are learning what they are learning.  Use humor and, dare I say this, have a little fun. When this occurs, students will rise to the high expectations. Yes, seventh graders can read Brave New World and they don't need a free pizza coupon as a result.

4. Intervention / Enrichment: Some students are goofing off because they are too far ahead or too far behind.  I try and create a system of interventions and enrichment activities for students who might get bored. Honestly, this can be a challenge and it does require time.  However, it's time well-spent compared to doing parent phone calls or filling out detention slips.

4. Model Respect: I try my best to talk to students respectfully.  When I fail, I apologize. I've made a ton of mistakes in this area, but students will generally forgive.

5. Trust: I trust students and try and model this.  I take them at their word.  I allow them near my desk. But I also know that humans are shifty (including myself) so I take some precautions along the way (for example, I never have anything super-valuable in my desk).