Pity Party Pedagogy Is a Disaster for Students
In this video, Dr. Justin Baeder argues that lowering expectations out of pity for students' circumstances does them a profound disservice.
Key Takeaways
- Pity isn't compassion - Lowering standards because you feel sorry for students communicates that you don't believe in their potential
- It hurts the students it's meant to help - Students who need the most support instead receive the least rigor
- High expectations are the truly compassionate response - Believing students can meet high standards and supporting them to get there is real caring
Transcript
Pity party pedagogy is what happens when people feel sorry for their students and yet don't respond by committing to the practices that will most help their students, but instead respond in some other way to deal with personal guilt.
If you have a student who is uncomfortable talking in class and developing that proficiency with oral language, the pity party pedagogy approach is to just not call on that student just don't make them talk don't make them use language don't make them get comfortable with talking in class just don't call on them anymore and i saw this very approach being argued for in a long thread on twitter about how terrible teach like a champion is and if you're not familiar with teach like a champion it's one of the best-selling books in education by Doug Lamov has helped thousands and thousands of teachers, millions and millions of students with very practical techniques that get students engaged, that make sure that they're actually engaged in learning and not opting out, not just sitting there, not sleeping on their desk, but actually learning.
And pity party pedagogy says it's actually kinder to let the kid put their head down on their desk and not learn anything or, you know, just kind of, you know, hunker down and not participate.
And I have to wonder, like, what outcomes are we going for?
Are we going for comfort in the moment?
And I'm not saying we should, like, put kids on the spot and terrorize them or anything.
But, like, get kids to participate if you want them to learn and if you care about them.
I'm not really sure what people think the endgame is here.
And I see this as fundamentally an act of selfishness to give in to pity party pedagogy.
Because it's just a concern for one's own feelings, right?
Like, I feel bad pushing this student.
If you don't believe in pushing students, if you don't believe in having high expectations, if you don't believe in getting students to work hard, maybe don't be an educator.
Maybe log off.
Maybe go try something in your community to see if you can help some kids.
But this philosophy that's out there now just has...
no grounding in any kind of research.
I mean, you know, if you look at cognitive behavioral therapy and some of the actual treatments for things like anxiety, they're the opposite of what pity party pedagogy advocates.
And they're the opposite of what everybody knows good teaching is and what we have always practiced.
So let me know what you think.
Are you seeing pity party pedagogy?