<p>ebeeeee,
Your point is well taken. Certainly there are students with real physical and emotional needs, and many compassionate teachers try to help. I’ve seen colleagues quietly take up a collection to help provide an opportunity for a student to whom it would not otherwise be available, and when I worked in a poor district I always kept snacks in my room for hungry students.</p>
<p>And epiphany makes a valid point as well. We have a very general background in adolescent educational psychology but by default end up expected to provide much more. At least six times during a recent parent-teacher conference day, what I really wanted to say was, “I’m sorry, but I am not a licensed family therapist.”</p>
<p>But I think the OP and others are concerned about a different issue, in which a few teachers encourage dependence and actually retaliate against students who don’t want that kind of relationship. My own daughter dealt with such a situation, and she finally decided she would take a lower grade rather than become one of the teacher’s groupies (D’s words). It was awkward for me as that teacher was a colleague, and my daughter just decided to let it go rather than try to get fair treatment at the risk of having the issue escalate.</p>
<p>“Why not just raise our own kids to be as strong as we can and let others do their own thing? If parents are continually pointing out the “unfairness” of teachers giving certain kids more attention …what is the message we are giving them?”</p>
<p>We are giving them the message that (1) teaching is a profession, & that there are standards & proper roles for that profession, & that they should be able to expect a certain level of performance for that, (2) that boundaries are important in life, as they relate to jobs and to personal relationships, (3) that the place to expect personal – as opposed to professional – “love” is among one’s personal relationships, not from one’s doctor, professor, teacher, etc., (4) that as <em>students</em>, they are entitled to the same quality & quantity of attention from their classroom teacher as anybody else in the class is entitled to, regardless of the level of their achievement & capability. If they perform with consistent excellence & an <em>apparent</em> absence of “need,” they are to be encouraged & challenged even more. (Every student “needs”; it’s merely that what & how they need is the variation.)</p>
<p>Further, the social work/parental role alluded to by an above poster (ebeeee) is a choice others can make by way of community service. Again, there are proper roles for these functions in society in general, and schools in particular. If the teacher feels so strongly about “protecting” or caring for a particular student, & that follow-up is something of a personal (non-academic) nature, such as clothing, the more fitting thing would be to hand that task over to volunteers in the school.</p>
<p>I also take your point, Renee, as to the thrust of the OP’s question. Yes, I also think that perhaps the reference is to dependency, but again, I merely re-emphasize that the professional response to a “non-needy” student is nevertheless to educate. That student has not dispensed with the “need” for teachers; it’s just what is needed & how it is needed, which is the job of the teacher to discover, & as quickly as possible.</p>
<p>Renee, I actually do say “I am not a licensed family therapist” (or similar words) when a conference becomes essentially a plea for such services. I see nothing wrong with that. I have politely suggested appropriate professional recourse in such situations when families inappropriately ask for guidance beyond my specific credentials. </p>
<p>As to taking up collections for items such as you mention, I see nothing wrong with a teacher demonstrating such compassion, but in & through an appropriate venue. The extrinsic need can be communicated to the district, the administrator of the school, etc. When teachers begin refusing to take on parental roles & professional non-teaching roles, the needs will still be there but the “cause” will get funneled elsewhere. Yes, I do understand (I’m sure some poster will point out) that undernourished children do not perform well academically. That’s why there is the <em>federal</em> breakfast (or lunch) program. The teacher does not administer it, and hopefully does not serve it, especially within classroom instructional time. This is an agency function. </p>
<p>And yes, this means that some kids who are the product of exceptionally bad or absent parenting, or exceptionally compromised circumstances, will fall through the cracks. I’ve gotten over any Saviour complexes. If I can provide exceptional educational opportunities for my students (both dependent & independent, both challenged & gifted), that’s “saviour” enough for me.</p>