Classroom Management Resource Page – Shindler – School Climate – PLSI – Teaching - Workshops by JVS

Appendix J:

Examining The Use of the Term the “Real World” of School

Frequently, we hear teachers use the phrase, the “real world,” as in “that idea sounds nice, but it would not work in the real world.” On first listening, it sounds like it is coming from the voice of experience. They have been around the proverbial teaching “block” and can attest to how the “real world” works. But like the term “it works,” (discussed in ch.3) we need to listen carefully to the messages beneath the words. It may be harmless, but in essence they are instructing us to adopt their world-view. And it is certainly a convincing rhetorical devise. If one states, “Boy my students have a hard time being honest in class,” we might think, “Gosh, that teacher is struggling with that issue in their class. Good luck to them.” However, if one declares, “In the real world people will lie anytime they get the chance,” we come away convinced that it is a fact, and moreover taht we should stop trusting our students and any of those that we teach in the future. The truth is that a) the real world is rarely defined by adages that include the phrase the “real world, b) the use of the term the “real world” usually indicates a world-view that has been jaded and is fundamentally dysfunctional, and c) students are likely paying the price for it.

Figure 4.x represents a side-by-side comparison. The left column characterizes the use of the term “the real world,” implied by some as representing their reality. The right column represents an effort to honestly characterize the nature of reality.

Figure 4.x Comparison of the term the “real world” and what might more accurately characterize the real world.

The “Real World”	The Real World
My perception of what is achievable, given my beliefs, experiences, fears, and biases.	What is actually possible given the laws of nature and human behavior.
“The way things are” is fixed.	“The way things are” is socially constructed over time and can change as a result of the collective and individual choices and actions of the members of the group.
Students bring problems and deficiencies to the class that make certain teacher responses and behaviors inevitable.	While student can certainly bring certain energies and conditioned behavior into a class, in the end the teacher “makes the weather” in the classroom. Just about anything is possible with enough time, desire and skills.
Some students are not capable of learning. Therefore having positive expectations for them is futile.	All students can learn given the right conditions. Moreover, the level of expectations the teacher has will affect the relative success of every student (see Pygmalion in the classroom below).
“That practice will not work here. I tried it and it did not work with my students.” Or “The only thing that works with these students is. . “ (see it works ch.3)	A sound practice will work anywhere. For every teacher that claims that it did not work there is another that found great success with it with a similar population of students, often times in the same district.
“These students only respond to external reinforcement and punishment, so I have no choice but to continue to use that with them.”	Students do get used to certain kinds of treatment and adult interactions, but they will respond to 1) what feels right and 2) what the situation calls for.
Usually a mental construction that one forms to escape feelings of guilt and inadequacy	Inherently empirical. The more perceptive and aware we become the more we can see the real world clearly.

As you examine each perspective consider why so many teachers espouse the “real world” view characterized by the column on the left. It seems likely that it is in fact what is referred to in cognitive behavioral psychology as a “reaction formation”. A reaction formation is a basic human defense mechanism in which the unconscious mind confronted with an unpleasant feelings (in this case guilt, inadequacy, helplessness, hopelessness, anger at parents, anger at one’s own limitations, shame, etc.) seeks relief through the creation of a reactive belief (in this case “it is not my fault,” or “I am doing the best I can,” or “If it were not for external forces, I would be able to succeed.”) in an effort to compensate for that feeling. In other words we create a belief structure where, “My world view is right (or at least it makes me feel better), even if it is not supported by empirical evidence or reality.”

The “real world” view will inherently correspond to a shift to an external locus of control (LOC). As you listen to the plea of the teacher defending this perspective, listen to how the tendency will be to externalize causality. The opposite of this view is characterized by an internal locus of control. In an internal LOC the teacher feels an inherent responsibility for the outcomes that occur in his/her class. This distinction will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter when we contrast the 1-style (facilitator) and 2-style (conductor) teachers to the 3-style (enabler) and 4-style (dominator) teachers.

It is not difficult to see why the challenging task of teaching and the exposure to other externalizing individuals can lead a teacher to externalizing his/her view for the “way things are.” In the short-term there may be a sense of relief, but it does have a cost. In the long-term, it breads misery and ineffectiveness. Teachers who cultivate an attitude of internal LOC will be happier at their jobs and more effective with students.

Chapter Reflection 3#: Recall the last time you heard a teacher make a suggestion to you that included the phrase “the real world.” What was the context? In your estimation, what did the suggestion assume about the nature of students?