What's the Big Deal with Students Addressing Teachers By First Name?

[Anonymous]

PP, you are feeding the troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the idea that if you call a teacher by your his or her first name that it threatens boundaries between adults and children. You live in a very fragile world.

I wrote about boundaries.

not fragile - quite the opposite, in fact

Children have to learn respect, and by blurring those lines, they will put themselves at your level and often challenge you. You want to challenge children academically; you don't want them to challenge you.

big difference

Do your children call you by your first name instead of using Mom or Dad?

How children address adults aside, I am bothered by this statement. Of course I want my children to challenge me, to challenge authority, neither of which negates respectful challenge. I want a fully functioning, rational human for a child, not an automaton.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love the idea that if you call a teacher by your his or her first name that it threatens boundaries between adults and children. You live in a very fragile world.

I wrote about boundaries.

not fragile - quite the opposite, in fact

Children have to learn respect, and by blurring those lines, they will put themselves at your level and often challenge you. You want to challenge children academically; you don't want them to challenge you.

big difference

Do your children call you by your first name instead of using Mom or Dad?

How children address adults aside, I am bothered by this statement. Of course I want my children to challenge me, to challenge authority, neither of which negates respectful challenge. I want a fully functioning, rational human for a child, not an automaton.

Perhaps this is one of the key points about progressive education, and a reason why the first-name question does serve as a litmus test. Like this PP, I want my children to (respectfully) challenge me. I am not unhappy when they (politely) convince me to change my mind, or get me to look at an issue in a new way, and I am delighted when they speak their minds at school and are given a positive reception. It's not that I think the other choice is a child-automaton, but this is the type of school I sought out for my children, and yes, they also call their teachers by their first names.

[Anonymous]

I don't mind my close friends' children calling me by my first name, but I find myself slightly uncomfortable when an acquaintance's 2-year-old calls me "Amy." I don't necessarily think a little distance is a bad thing, especially if it's not really an equitable relationship (can you have an equitable relationship with someone who you have to instruct not to draw with marker on your coffee table?). Let's face it: the teacher-student relationship is not equal. You can have a respectful exchange of ideas, you can take students' opinions seriously, you can regard them as full human beings -- but at the end of the day you are determining the syllabus, guiding their interpretations, evaluating their work. Teaching is reciprocal, to an extent, but the teacher is still in charge. To me (generally progressive on most issues, including education), calling teachers by first names feels dishonest, implying an equality which isn't really there.

[Anonymous]

I was with you up to the last sentence. But my child attends a progressive school, calls the teachers by their first names, and is totally clear on who is in charge. The names imply a collegiality, not pure equality (I call my boss by his first name, but he can still fire me or tell me what to do, after all).

[Anonymous]

But there are so many "unequal" relationships that aren't defined by the nomenclature used. Do you call your boss Mr/Mrs? What if he/she has a superior? Do they get an even higher honorific? In my opinion, the idea that how we address each other somehow connotes the level of respect is misplaced.

Ultimately, most things we commonly refer to as "manners" are essentially arbitrary, in the sense that they are social constructs and do not inherently have a value. In some cultures, we shake hands to greet. In others, we bow. Is one better than the other? No. It's all contextual. For some people, using Mr/Mrs with adults or authority figures is a sign of respect. For others, it is not. If it is done in a way meant to convey respect, than all the power to those people. But if kids just do it because they're told to, not specifically meant as a sign of respect, it doesn't have much value. So, it really depends on the larger context in which it is practiced. Which is largely personal/cultural.

[Anonymous]

"Collegiality," as a PP in favor of first names mentioned? I do not consider my child to be a colleague of his teachers or any other adults, and I would not like him to think of himsalf as one.

[Anonymous]

PP-

And that is a perfectly valid perspective. But some people want teachers and students to be partners in learning and, sometimes breaking down some of the formality helps achieve that (which is not to say it can't still be achieved through other means as well). Different strokes for different folks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Collegiality," as a PP in favor of first names mentioned? I do not consider my child to be a colleague of his teachers or any other adults, and I would not like him to think of himsalf as one.

Exactly, and I do - a junior colleague, but a colleague. Fortunately, we each have multiple schools from which to choose.

[Anonymous]

20:08 - I respect your opinion but feel very strongly that my child and teacher should not be "partners in learning." My child is at school to learn - and her teachers to teach. That's why we're paying the big bucks.

Are there any countries other than the US where students are on a first name basis with their teachers? Seems to me that the countries top in education (and the US is nowhere near the top) are also those who offer a very formal, structured education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But there are so many "unequal" relationships that aren't defined by the nomenclature used. Do you call your boss Mr/Mrs? What if he/she has a superior? Do they get an even higher honorific? In my opinion, the idea that how we address each other somehow connotes the level of respect is misplaced.

Ultimately, most things we commonly refer to as "manners" are essentially arbitrary, in the sense that they are social constructs and do not inherently have a value. In some cultures, we shake hands to greet. In others, we bow. Is one better than the other? No. It's all contextual. For some people, using Mr/Mrs with adults or authority figures is a sign of respect. For others, it is not. If it is done in a way meant to convey respect, than all the power to those people. But if kids just do it because they're told to, not specifically meant as a sign of respect, it doesn't have much value. So, it really depends on the larger context in which it is practiced. Which is largely personal/cultural.

Why yes, I call my boss Mr. Spacely!

Very Truly Yours, Mr. George Jetson

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Collegiality," as a PP in favor of first names mentioned? I do not consider my child to be a colleague of his teachers or any other adults, and I would not like him to think of himsalf as one.

My child is most certainly not a colleague of her teachers. She can run circles around those jerks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:20:08 - I respect your opinion but feel very strongly that my child and teacher should not be "partners in learning." My child is at school to learn - and her teachers to teach. That's why we're paying the big bucks.

Are there any countries other than the US where students are on a first name basis with their teachers? Seems to me that the countries top in education (and the US is nowhere near the top) are also those who offer a very formal, structured education.

And that's all fine and dandy. Agree to disagree. Luckily, there are ample choices for each of us to seek out what we want. Isn't that preferable to a one-size-fits-none model?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But there are so many "unequal" relationships that aren't defined by the nomenclature used. Do you call your boss Mr/Mrs? What if he/she has a superior? Do they get an even higher honorific? In my opinion, the idea that how we address each other somehow connotes the level of respect is misplaced.

Ultimately, most things we commonly refer to as "manners" are essentially arbitrary, in the sense that they are social constructs and do not inherently have a value. In some cultures, we shake hands to greet. In others, we bow. Is one better than the other? No. It's all contextual. For some people, using Mr/Mrs with adults or authority figures is a sign of respect. For others, it is not. If it is done in a way meant to convey respect, than all the power to those people. But if kids just do it because they're told to, not specifically meant as a sign of respect, it doesn't have much value. So, it really depends on the larger context in which it is practiced. Which is largely personal/cultural.

Why yes, I call my boss Mr. Spacely!

Very Truly Yours, Mr. George Jetson

Touche, sir. Well played. Seriously though, I wonder how many people call their bosses by Mr/Mrs?

[Anonymous]

19:59 here. "Partner"? I do not consider my child to be a partner of the teacher, any more than I consider him to be a colleague. Partnership and collegiality are not teacher-student models that I subscribe to.