Phil and Me, Part 2: Deeper Into the Master’s Words

Fabulous Camera Angles, By The Way

Recently I shared a mortifying secret: I had been the subject of a full-scale take down–a full scale multimedia take down–at the hands of Phil Beadle himself. It hurt, I have to say, to hear the things one of the heroes of the movement had to say about me. [Silver lining: he did say I was handsome!] But I picked myself up, dusted myself off, and vowed to study his work more deeply so I would not be such a callow fool going forward.

Phil’s very excellent How To Teach: Teaching Tips for New Teachers has been extremely revealing and I’m going to compare some of my own rough thoughts the the silky smooth “tips” of the master. I’m starting with Rule 3 because I discussed Rules 1 and 2 here.

Rule #3: Just after the guitars you’ll hear Phil advise that only one person can be speaking in the classroom. This echoes a point I have tried to make in TLAC (see Strong Voice; Do Not Talk Over) that if you show students that you are fine with them not listening and talking while you’re talking, you suggest that your words are optional. It’s going to be a long year for you and an unproductive one for your students.

Again obviously I take huge solace in knowing that Phil and I are simpatico on this one. I was, I confess, a little confused by Phil’s assertion that I shouldn’t actually be doing it (leading discussion) but that everyone did this and that if i did it too this was the way to kick ass while doing it. There’s a lot of nuance there. But I’m not a very nuanced guy so I’ll probably watch this one a few more times. The other challenge I have with rule #3 is the potential vagueness of Phil’s prescription. Again, koans are a weak spot for me–I’m VERY literal–but I wasn’t really sure what he meant at the end by “call them on it and rewind and go back to the beginning.”  Call them on it how? Using what language? And when you say “go back to the beginning…” what do you mean master? I know i can be too concrete–my wife tells me that all the time–but for all the wisdom of the advice, I’m not sure how actionable it is. That must be my inexperience showing. Still Phil and I are very similar on this and it’s nice to know he’ll be on my side when we have to circle the wagons when the four horsemen of the progressive education apocalypse come riding to tell us we are committing symbolic violence, Phil and me, when we extinguish student voices by asking them to take their turn.

I’m not going to include the video of Rule 4 here because it’s pretty straight forward. Phil weighs in on the importance of using students’ names.  This is a point I try to make a few times in TLAC though I am embarrassed that I didn’t think to make it it’s own technique. Phil shares a great little get-to-know-you-name-game that literally every summer camp counselor knows   I wasn’t aware of. I’ll definitely use it.

Rule 5 is a beauty. It’s all about how to deal with gum and the clever tricks kids use to not get rid of their gum when you ask them to throw it out. Phil is VERY granular on this one which just shows how much you can learn in a lifetime of teaching if you’re not distracted by Ratio and CFU and the kind of hokum that distracts me.

I’m going to share something fairly honest and vulnerable here. I don’t discuss gum in TLAC and in fact I don’t actually care that much about kids chewing gum in my classroom.  No slobber; no foul. That’s my rule. I know that’s surprising- that some of my good friends on Twitter are always reminding me that I am out to repress and control young people at every turn so I’m a bit embarrassed to have slept on the whole gum issue. 

But not Phil. He is all OVER the gum sitch and that secretly makes me happy. I was the strictest teacher in school until Mr Beadle arrived. Now all the internet hate about repression can go to him.

[Ok it’s a little weird though that in the blog post Phil kind of rants about how I yearn to control kids’ bodies so much and it’s him not me who cares about what they put in their mouths. Enough to put it in the top 5 pieces of guidance for new teachers. But if I had next level stuff like this–love the way he demos the student moves here–I’d put it in my top five too!]  And this line puts it all in perspective: “If you’re gonna be a good teacher, you’ve gotta become expert in the technicalities of dealing with gum.” With a call to arms like that I am definitely adding a gum chewing technique to TLAC 4.0, partly out of solidarity with Phil and partly so I am not the controlling neophyte he says I am but am more like the substantial man of the world he is. It’s not as big a priority for me as it is for him–Call me soft!–but I’m going to fix it!

I’ll wrap this second blog post–I’m sure your head is spinning and your working memory on overload…I know mine is—with Rule 7.  This in itself is hugely embarrassing because Phil’s rule #6 is about finishing lunch in session and I skipped it. I just didn’t–forgive me lord–I didn’t think it was that important. Awkward.

But Rule 7! Rule 7 is a Beaut! Phil is all money on this one, coming hard on the heels of more guitars–also noted for TLAC 4.0–with this little chestnut: “On detentions, simple: don’t do them.”

But just when I’m expecting more guitars, he throws the whole thing topsy-turvy. “Unless you’re in the period before lunch or the period before the end of the day.”  So don’t or do, then, Phil? I’m a little new at this and kind of unclear. But before I can despair about the apparent contradiction Phil explains: “The reason for this is that kids will surely bunk them.” There’s a beautiful little turn to the camera on the side to see Phil’s profile and stress his authenticity–great camera work, can I say?–before Phil explains: “The only time you can be certain of the kid staying in the detention is before lunch or before the end of the day.”

This one is tricky as I’m not clear whether Phil is pro-detention or con. Even though I don’t write about them in TLAC you will not be surprised to learn that I am pro detention with a large asterisk. [Cue the Tweet-storm by the way about my recurring fascistic tendencies.] My asterisk is an awkward one though. Actually it’s two asterisks. First, although i think consequences are reasonable for people who repeatedly disrupt other people’s learning and don’t respond to corrections, I have this thing for fairness. I kind of think the rules for detention should be the same for everyone in the school, as opposed to, say, a teacher letting some kids get away with it and others not based on arbitrary factors like what period of the day it is. Also I am really into teaching and I kind of think that what happens in a detention matters. There should be teaching so that the students who are sent there learn to manage their own behavior. You can read more about that here.

I also find it mildly ironic that a guy who’s willing to send kids to detentions–explain again how that’s not controlling their bodies?–takes immense umbrage at the thought of asking students to look at each other when they are talking.  But really the fairness issue- that’s #1 for me and so, embarrassingly, I am going to skip Phil’s advice on this one even though I am very very happy that the master is with me on Team Willing to Have Rules and Consequences.