Publish at November 13 2024 Updated November 13 2024
"He's more than a teacher to me, he's a true friend".
This confession by a high-school student, delivered anonymously, sounds like a confession. That of an ambiguous relationship, where the classic roles of master and pupil are blurred in an extraordinary complicity. A "too-cool" teacher, who shares his musical tastes, his romantic disappointments and even his nocturnal escapades with his student "buddies".
These "transgressive friendships" reveal a tension at the heart of the teaching relationship. That of finding the right distance between benevolent proximity and misplaced familiarity. For in a society where horizontality has become the norm, the teacher-student boundary has never been so porous. Gone is the distant authority of the teacher perched on his podium, replaced by the teacher-buddy who wants to be at teenager level.
But how far can this complicity go without jeopardizing the educational posture? When does friendly connivance turn into unhealthy cronyism? This sensitive issue goes to the very heart of the teacher's identity. By blurring the boundaries, these "borderline" friendships undermine the pedagogical framework necessary for learning.
Our society is undergoing a major evolution in human relations, marked by a quest for horizontality.(1) Traditional hierarchical relationships are being called into question, in favor of more egalitarian and participatory forms of relationship. This fundamental trend is not sparing the educational establishment, where traditional professorial authority is being overturned(2).
Gone are the days of the distant, all-powerful teacher, towering over his students from the top of his podium. Today, many teachers seek to establish a close relationship with their classes, positioning themselves as benevolent "big brothers". This figure of the "teacher-buddy", close to teenage cultural codes, is seductive in its ability to create connivance with pupils(3).
But this quest for complicity is not without risk. By blurring the boundary between teacher and pupil, it can lead to a confusion of roles that is detrimental to learning. When emotional closeness takes precedence over pedagogical distance, the whole educational relationship is weakened(4).
Building a structuring educational framework requires the right amount of asymmetry.(5) To feel secure, students need stable points of reference, embodied by an adult who clearly assumes his or her position of benevolent authority. By posing as a "buddy", the teacher blurs these reference points and weakens his or her educational credibility.
How can a pupil accept an instruction, let alone a sanction, from someone he or she considers a "buddy"? Experience shows that this close relationship often makes the pupil resistant to the authority of his "teacher-friend". A teacher who plays the proximity card too much runs the risk of no longer being taken seriously in his or her teaching role.
This loss of reference points is accentuated when the teacher reveals to his pupils his intimate flaws, doubts or failures. Of course, showing vulnerability humanizes the teacher. But saying too much undermines the image of a reliable, protective adult, capable of serenely containing adolescent angst. This goes to the heart of educational asymmetry: the adult does not need to position himself as the teenager's alter ego, but rather to assume his structuring otherness(6).
By breaking down this necessary generational gap, teacher-student "friendships" can open the door to real abuses. The first of these is the suspicion of favoritism that inevitably hangs over these singular relationships. How can a teacher evaluate fairly a student whose confidant he or she has become? The suspicion of "darlings" benefiting from special privileges undermines confidence in the impartiality of teachers.
More seriously, transgressive friendships run the risk of confusing pedagogical complicity with emotional control. When the teacher-student relationship slips into excessive intimacy, it can drift into forms of manipulation, even moral harassment. Such situations can have a lasting impact on the bond of trust between students and teachers, which is so vital to learning.
These potential pitfalls call for great caution in managing relational distance. They urge teachers to think more carefully about the contours of a benevolent closeness with their pupils, without falling into a cronyism that is counter-productive from an educational point of view.(7)
Rethinking the teacher-student relationship involves striking a subtle balance between human warmth and high educational standards. It's not a matter of reverting to the cold distance of yesteryear, but of embodying a restraining attitude that combines firmness and empathy. A teacher can be attentive and a good listener, without acting like a comrade.
This right posture requires mutual respect for each other's roles. Horizontality has its limits: while encouraging cooperation, the teacher must calmly assume the leadership conferred by his or her adult experience. Being an educator also means knowing how to set limits, which can be frustrating but also structuring.
Finding the "right distance" ultimately means reinventing a pedagogical relationship that combines opposites. Being close to students, but without excessive familiarity. Understanding them without identifying with them. Supporting them without feeling obliged to meet all their expectations. In short, to demonstrate professional empathy tailored to students' needs.
Ultimately, the question of teacher-student "friendships" brings us back to the profoundly asymmetrical and specific nature of the pedagogical relationship. By seeking connivance at all costs, we run the paradoxical risk of weakening this very special bond. For the "good" teacher is not one who erases generational differences, but one who assumes them in a demanding, caring relationship.
Far from fusional drifts, the challenge is to build an educational relationship that respects the otherness of each individual. A relationship in which the adult takes his or her place as guide and landmark, without renouncing empathy. This is the only way to forge a bond of trust conducive to learning, where proximity does not mean promiscuity.
Illustration: AI-generated - Flavien Albarras
References
1-Pièges et principes de l'horizontalité - Considérations sur les dynamiques d'organisation Hanane al-Jouri, [no date]. lundimatin [online]. Available at: https: //lundi.am/Pieges-et-principes-de-l-horizontalite [Accessed November 2, 2024].
2-VERA, Charlotte and CHAUVIN, Marine. L'autorité éducative en classe.
https:// dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-03475129v1/document
3-CLAUDE, Alexandra Tessa. Dimension affective et pratique réflexive: quels liens dans la pratique enseignante?
https:// dumas.ccsd.cnrs.fr/dumas-01020231/file/mem-14-claude.pdf
You might also like:
Learning to learn with bias: towards a lucid pedagogy
Cognitive biases are evolutionary mechanisms that have enabled humanity to survive, decide quickly and save energy. How can they be better considered in education?
Motivating a student in a school context is the teacher's responsibility. Even under academic constraint, there are several levers that a teacher can use, in context and by instilling a sense of competence in the student. An interesting Master's thesis by Marlène Douibi.
Educational scripting, part 1: defining the objective
Digital technology is now at the heart of learning. If teachers are faced with a difficult choice among the variety of tools and digital media available, they also struggle to develop a pedagogical scenario that allows the combination of knowledge, mobilized abilities and coherent tools. In a series of articles, we will address the main steps of the scripting process. Today: defining the pedagogical objective.
Learning with objects, an object lesson
What if, in this age of pixelation and avatarization of our lives, we were to return to objects? Object-based learning (OBL): a new way of learning
The ambition of questioning without questioning is to learn to detach oneself from questioning and let the learner grasp his or her own inner movement.
