I'm thinking that, for a lot of reasons, I would really love to get to do the Socrates-type thing and take like three or four students (tops) all day every day and educate them like that. I have a lot of motives behind this wish, but right now I'm mainly considering just one, which is probably silly but is on my mind: you eliminate the need to treat students like cattle. Here's the story.

This evening discussion was made of an event almost completely unimportant in the long run but which is a matter of fair contention within my family. However, the reporting on that event was done by only one of the people who witnessed it. This wouldn't have been too bad by itself, except that 1) my view was quite different and 2) the listener made directive comments in line with what was heard but largely at odds with my view and intolerant of it as well. It ended up in a total loss of conversational momentum, strained discussion between the two witnesses, and unfinished business besides. I didn't like that.

I really hate (as you may have figured out!) having my personal input, views, comments, etc. ignored. I'm not saying that everybody should agree with what I say, or even that we should exist in perspectual (is that a word?) relativism where it's always, "hey, that's my opinion so you can't say I'm wrong." (I don't mind being wrong as long as I can change my mind so it's right!) I'm just saying I should get equal time in court. Usually, I'm able to make SURE I get that time, but sometimes I don't manage it. And when kids in class get into disagreements, they hardly EVER manage it.

You get two students going back and forth, "he punched me" "he poked me" "he started it" "no, HE started it" - and then the teacher steps in, usually with a generic "knock it off" or whatever designed to make them both be quiet, with no acknowledgement of the humanity (strong word, but you know what I mean...) involved. "I don't care who started it, but you're both ending it. NOW," even if one of the students has given her story and the other has not. Now, theoretically and in light of my feelings about equal time, this does not cut it. It's not fair. But practically and in light of the fluorescent bulbs in the classroom, there aren't a lot of other (better) ways to do it. There's not enough time, it'll never really be fair, the teacher can never be sure she's getting a straight answer. So it's avoided completely.

But this means that my philosophy of behavior towards other human beings is very much in conflict with my philosophy of behavior towards students being scrappy, which is a conflict I'm uncomfortable with. Certainly there's a difference in levels of seriousness, effect on the future, and so on, but still. This makes my bones itch. As dumb as it might seem to listen to both sides of a student disagreement, I want to do it. I mean, maybe I could have some kind of cut-off point: for stupid disagreements pay no attention, for reasonable and/or interesting disagreements offer consideration, and I guess that's really what's in practice. But I still say it would be easier if I had four students and COULD give their comments and perspectives all the time in the world....