It's a pretty common view on the right, especially among those of us old enough to remember the 1970s, that we grew up in a very different era when idea about parenting were not at all what they are now. Back then it was pretty normal for an 8-year-old to go out on his bike on a Saturday morning and be gone for 4-5 hours with no cell phone and no contact with his parents. These days you can literally get arrested for allowing that.
There's an opinion piece today making the case that American kids would do better in schools brought back some of that "agency" to childhood inside schools as well.
Giving kids agency doesn’t mean letting them do whatever they want. It doesn’t mean lowering expectations, turning education into entertainment or allowing children to choose their own adventure. It means requiring them to identify and pursue some of their own goals, helping them build strategies to reach those goals, assessing their progress and guiding them to course-correct when they fall short.
The basic idea the author is trying to convey is that instead of focusing on a top-down process in which teachers set and agenda and students are just supposed to tune in to whatever is being taught, give the kids some ability to direct the conversation to what interests them.
At the start of a lesson, instead of providing a step-by-step schedule and overview for the class period, as many good teachers do, they inquired about the kids’ own interest. They might say, “Today I’m going to tell you about the solar system. Before we start, is there anything about the solar system that you are particularly curious about or have a question about?” This simple step encourages kids to think about what they know, what they care about and what they want to know more about, rather than just settling in and tuning out.
The idea isn't just to make the kids more engaged students, but to teach them what agency looks like so they can develop it and use it later on in life, i.e. at work.
In a survey by Gallup and the Walton Family Foundation of more than 4,000 members of Gen Z, 49 percent of respondents said they did not feel prepared for the future. Employers complain that young hires lack initiative, communication skills, problem-solving abilities and resilience.
We've all heard stories about Millennials who show up at work and don't seem to have much interest in developing skills that could help their careers. These are kids who never developed the agency required to have their own strong work ethic. Can we change that in future generations by offering them opportunities to set some of their own goals.
My own guess is that this would work fine in an honors or gifted class. Kids that enjoy school and learning would leap at these opportunities. But I'm not sure this would work at all with the kids who are watching TikTok videos on their phones or asleep on their desks.
That's not to say it's a bad idea. Ultimately, even a marginal improvement is an improvement. But there were some teachers responding in the comments who think there are other problems that need to be solved.
While I agree that students benefit from agency when accompanied by accountability, it is not as simple as that. I've been teaching 9th graders for 18 years and I've observed more and more students who become paralyzed when asked to make choices. Or they regard all choices as garbage and make the choice of opting out.
The writers bring up the interesting disparity between 3rd graders who like school and 10th graders who like school. What happens between 3rd and 10th grade? Standardized testing.
As a result of Common Core and Race to the Top, we tied tests that focused reading short passages, answering multiple choice questions and writing formulaic essays to whether or not teachers could keep their jobs. So teachers and schools adjusted what they taught so that everyone could keep their jobs. Is it any wonder kids are bored?
Another teacher suggests class discipline is the problem.
I’ve been teaching middle schoolers for the last 15 years and yes, something big has changed with kids since 2019. I’ve been reflecting all year on why my students are the way they are this year. Agency is a new cause I hadn’t thought about and I will be thinking about ways to address this in my classroom as the new year starts.
The bigger issue is that school can’t solve it all. This year, even without cell phones, I am spending 50% of my time addressing behavioral issues. Teaching children how one behaves in school vs home and holding them accountable. I can’t teach if they are talking, yelling, hitting or constantly in the bathroom. I started to give them a challenge to stay on task for a set amount of time without disruptions. How long can we go, class? They said 10, 15, 40 minutes. We are at 4 minutes. Twelve and thirteen year old children from a wide variety of families can focus for 4 minutes.
I’m going to take an early retirement the moment I’m eligible. I have about 5 years. I can’t do this much longer and I’m not the only one with this plan.
There's also some flat disagreement.
The teacher is in charge and should be able to dictate the basic requirements of an assignment. The huge problem is that too many kids don’t see their instructors as the boss of the classroom and think they can negotiate and make demands.
And when these kids enter the workforce, they’re going to be presented with plenty of authoritative demands. They’re not going to be able to choose when to begin their workdays, they may have to don specific uniforms, and they will absolutely have deadlines that demand adherence.
It's a fair point, one which connects with the discipline problem mentioned above. Kids who don't learn any discipline at home or at school probably aren't going to last long in their jobs obviously.
The question is whether providing some guided agency in school could gradually teach them to be more engaged, respectful and disciplined over time. I think that's the argument being made.
