What if children are not good or bad?

Shifting away from these polarizing labels for our children in the classroom.

Most of us have heard this statement before, “Oh, she’s a good girl” or “He’s such a bad boy.” It’s a statement that adults and the world at large use to equate the worth of young children. And it’s one used frequently in our schools.

The question becomes, can we look beyond the lens of seeing a child as either good OR bad?

This concept was brought up when I watched the video “The Ideal Education” by Sir Ken Robinson with Sadhguru. For those not familiar with his work, Sadhguru is an Indian yogi who speaks about enlightenment across the world, and Sir Ken Robinson was an innovative educator whose Ted Talk has reached 19M views on how schools kill creativity (he passed away on August 21, 2020).

Both gentlemen have a unique perspective at implementing consciousness within education by prioritizing creativity and self-directed learning. The two educators critically examine the need to shift the century-old education system* based on the factory model of schooling of the 19th century (Sleeter, 2015).

During the talk, there was one segment that deeply resonated with me. It was this idea that we have normalized opposites for children, specifically good OR bad. These polarizing labels have spilled over from society into our education system (or vice versa), and our children have become products of these misused terms by using them as a litmus test to internalize their worth within our world.

So what makes a child “good” in school according to our system?

A child who sits quietly and listens attentively to the teacher

A child who turns in all of their homework

A child who gets good grades in all of their classes

A child who is kind and polite

A child who is college bound

In summary, “good” kids in school are those who are compliant. Specifically, compliant with the system. Unfortunately, identifying children with these labels transcends grade levels, correlating those as “bad” as not good enough. This perception is taken up by all stakeholders including administrators, teachers, parents, and unfortunately, the child itself.

What we should be saying is that those who are labeled as “bad” have different needs than those who are “good.” A child who is active, doesn’t turn in homework, or tends to be more on the creative side is not necessarily “bad”. However, many school systems are unable to support these children, leading to higher degrees of punishment and a higher chance of that child becoming a high school drop-out.

Our school system itself is failing our children if it only supports “good” kids.

Sir Ken Robinson states eloquently in his TED Talk, “If a business loses 30% of its clients every year, the business will not blame the client. Instead, it will look at the enterprise itself. If schools are having 30% of their children not graduate from high school, is it our students? Or should we be looking at the schools themselves?” (Robinson, 2007).

So in the 21st century, how do we shift from the “good and “bad” labels of a child, whether it’s at home, in the classroom, or out in the world?

1. We must see our children as whole, believing every child holds unique and diverse qualities.

Each and every one of us holds both opposites, the “good” and the “bad”. I find it more helpful to step away from these judgmental labels, and instead acknowledge that humans have both darkness and lightness. This means even if a child is not interested in certain subjects in school, they have other unique or diverse qualities that need support to be advanced. Remember, the system is only created for the “good,” compliant kids.

2. We must see our children as individuals, knowing some may not thrive in our current schools.

Though many schools are improving, there are still classrooms that focus on antiquated ideals like strict curriculum, teachers in front of the classroom, and repetitive subject matter. To ask a child to be quiet and listen will not work if their interests are not supported. So instead of deeming them “bad,” we should learn to redirect by giving that child more leadership opportunities, outdoor activities, or making the curriculum more personalized to fit their specific needs. Sometimes a child may have different interests than a parent or a teacher, and we can enable them to go explore them, instead of stifling who they are.

3. We must see our children as special, asking the right questions when it’s not working.

If our system is not built to serve all types of children, we need to ask different questions. Moving away from “This child will never learn” and “They are just a bad child” to “What does this child need that either myself or this system is unable to provide?” or “What’s not working?” These questions provide more space for the child to grow and become their authentic self. It leads to personalization, instead of trying to get the child to conform to the system itself.

In summary, we are all unique, creative beings. And our children are at the heart of that. Let’s not perpetuate polarizing labels, creating a false belief of what they can or cannot do. Each child has the potential to flourish when we treat them as a whole being, not as “good” or “bad.”

*System — In this article, the system is defined as all public schools in the United States that still adhere to standardized testing and teacher-centered learning.

References:

“Do Schools Kill Creativity.” Youtube Video, 20:03, posted by “Youtube,” January 6, 2007,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iG9CE55wbtY&t=2s.

“The Ideal Education.” May 2016. Youtube Video, 1:43:31, posted by “Youtube,” March 6, 2007,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PAaWZTFRP9Q.

Sleeter, Christine. “Multicultural Education vs. Factory Modeling Schooling.” 2015.