NOTE: You can also find this article on our new and improved blog, TrustED. You’ll get the same great content and more in an all-new, easy-to-navigate format.
TrustED: News and solutions school leaders can actually use.
“She’s a smart kid, if only she’d apply herself more…” Sound familiar?
You’ve no doubt uttered this well-worn phrase at some point in your career. Few things are more frustrating than wasted student potential.
But students aren’t the only known squanderers of opportunity; schools have this problem too.
It’s becoming increasingly clear that quality environments (aka schools) are as integral to student success as the desire to learn.
Unfortunately, as educator Jim Bellanca posits for the Solution Tree blog, many schools don’t fully understand the role of climate, particularly the importance of trust and familiarity, in the success paradigm.
Making climate matter
Turns out, the term climate is an apt way of describing the culture and environment of a school.
When students feel unsafe or disconnected from their teachers and other students, their school environment becomes “toxic,” writes Bellanca. Neuroscientists have done some digging into this, he says. What they found was essentially this: Toxicity pollutes students’ learning and negatively affects their success.
On the other hand, schools that promote a positive climate, often through better parent, student, and teacher engagement, display such qualities as creativity, innovative learning, and increased academic success and happiness.
Translation: How students perceive their schools goes a long way toward how they perceive themselves—and, by extension, their potential.
Time for an attitude check?
It might be tempting to think: “I don’t have to worry about school climate. We have new facilities, the latest security technology, and a healthy budget to spend.”
But money can’t buy everything, writes Bellanca.
Facility safety and strategic learning design can contribute to a positive school environment. But no amount of money can counteract negative staff attitudes or limiting teaching strategies or methods.
To prove this point, Bellanca and a team of researchers recently analyzed the results of student surveys from two schools, both of which enroll students of similar economic, racial, and ethnic backgrounds.
One school was deemed to have a toxic climate via student feedback; the other was deemed to have a positive, healthy one.
“With all other things equal, the positive, healthy climate allowed teachers and students to wade into the deepest learning waters and enjoy the fruits of instructional practices, which evidence tells us get the most powerful results,” Bellanca says.
The biggest difference between these schools? Simple, says Bellanca: attitude.
After analyzing the curricula and lesson plans of school districts with both negative and positive school climates, several patterns emerged.
For example, schools with negative climates over-emphasized memorization and test-taking. Schools with healthy climates emphasized problem-solving and investigation. Schools with negative climates relied primarily on traditional teaching methods, such as lectures. Schools with positive climates tended to promote collaboration and choice.
Make no mistake: Modern learning facilities and new technology can contribute to a positive school climate, assuming those resources are used the right way and with the right intentions. But the attitudes and perceptions of teachers and parents and students matter just as much, if not more.
That’s why it’s so important to ask your community what it thinks about your schools before you start writing checks. Here’s one way to start that conversation.
For more on the link between school climate and student success, don’t miss our webinar Making Feedback Matter: How School Climate Affects School Quality , Oct. 12. Space is limited, so sign up now!