Questioning the default “no”

Would women have been granted the right to vote if they hadn’t asked for it? (Schlesinger Library)

It’s 1:00 PM on a Monday — time for electives at The Little Middle School. This week, students can choose between photography, catapult-building, and creative writing.

However, one eighth-grader comes up to a member of our teaching team with a request. “Can I do some more math instead?”

As the adult in charge, it’s so easy to say no. It’s easy to justify that decision, too. We could say that our students should be open to learning new things even if they’re not immediately interested. We could point out the unfairness or inconvenience of granting a special request to one student.

Being in a position of power, we don’t even have to justify saying no. It can be our default response, our easiest and most streamlined path forward.

However, in this case, “No” is not in line with our values as a school. Our goal is to help each of our students to take charge of their own education. And this eighth grader is doing that. Why would we block her path?

I’ll tell you why. We would do it out of habit. We would do it because it’s less work. We would do it because we assume, as adults, that we know best. We would do it because we, ourselves, were raised in an educational culture that rewarded conformity, obedience, and tradition. Perhaps none of these reasons would be conscious, but that doesn’t mean that they wouldn’t be present.

It’s true that accommodating individual needs takes time. But that’s exactly the kind of investment that benefits the student in the long run. Instead of automatically saying no, we can engage in a conversation with the student to encourage her to advocate for herself and her position. Even if we must ultimately decline her request, we can work together to find solutions for the future. This empowers the student, rewards her for her initiative, and builds trust.

When there is trust between members of a community — and between the leaders and members — the leader can function as a coach or a colleague rather than an enforcer. The result is a group that is a lot less work to maintain and more fun to be a part of. Further, the group will accomplish its goals more quickly.

If that trust is not present, those in charge may get compliance and cooperation for awhile, but it’s on a shaky foundation that won’t support the intense work required to create transformation. In a school, this is a giant missed opportunity. What’s the point of education if students aren’t going to grow and change?

With every interaction, teachers have a decision to make. They can make their default answer “no” and save themselves hours of time and energy. On the other hand, they can investigate questions and challenges with curiosity, looking for ways to develop relationships, make improvements to systems, and find win-win solutions.

Teachers may not always give students exactly what they want. But they can always say “yes” to treating their students with thoughtfulness, humanity, and generosity. They can look for ways to teach not just the subject at hand but the art of learning and growth. They can choose to see, in a student’s inquiry, the seeds of independent thinking and the boldness to push against the status quo in order to make something happen. Inconvenient as these traits may be to a teacher who wants to maintain order, it’s an educator’s role to nourish those seeds to full maturity. Those are just the attributes we need in our next generation of leaders.