Promoting and equitably assisting organizations in the integration of animal-assisted therapies for the physical, mental, and emotional benefit of individuals in public and private settings, one paw at a time.
Many educators and school leaders recognize the benefits of therapy dogs in academic settings but hesitate to implement a full-scale program due to knowledge gaps, logistical challenges, financial constraints, or policy concerns. A Therapy Dog Club offers a structured, low-risk way to introduce animal-assisted therapies, easing leadership apprehensions. In fact, I strongly recommend beginning the therapy dog implementation process in this way to build trust in the program’s effectiveness while addressing concerns in a controlled environment.
So let’s dive in together as I define the concept of a Therapy Dog Club, outline its benefits, and provide a brief guide to getting started.
What is a Therapy Dog Club?
As I define it, a Therapy Dog Club is a student-led, faculty-advised group that brings trained therapy dogs into a school environment on a scheduled basis. The club provides a structured, low-risk way for students and staff to interact with therapy dogs, typically for emotional support, stress relief, and social engagement. It allows students to experience the benefits of animal-assisted interventions without the immediate need for implementing a full-time therapy dog program.
Participation is voluntary, making it an accessible option for a wide range of students. In my view, a Therapy Dog Club operates on a smaller, flexible scale, bringing therapy dogs into the school on specific days rather than having a resident dog on campus daily. Additionally, a Therapy Dog Club may meet after school or during designated extracurricular periods, which can be particularly appealing to school and district leaders.
Benefits of a Therapy Dog Club
Eases Administrative Concerns
Even with strong research supporting the benefits of therapy dogs, one of the biggest barriers to implementation is navigating perceptions, assumptions, and stereotypes. A club helps schools challenge misconceptions and test the waters before committing to a full-time therapy dog program. It also offers:
• Student Autonomy – Participation is voluntary, so students who are uncomfortable around dogs or have allergies can simply opt out. This eliminates concerns about mandatory exposure in classrooms or common areas.
• Waivers for Participants – Schools can require students (and guardians, if necessary) to sign waivers acknowledging participation and understanding any risks. This adds a layer of protection for the school and provides transparency for families.
• Gradual Implementation – Schools can observe how students and staff interact with therapy dogs before considering a larger-scale program. This allows time to refine policies, address concerns, and build community support.
Provides Emotional and Social Benefits for Students
A Therapy Dog Club offers many of the same emotional and mental health benefits as a full program. Interacting with therapy dogs has been shown to reduce stress, improve mood, and boost social interactions—all of which can be particularly helpful for students struggling with anxiety, academic pressure, or social isolation (Maricevic, 2022).
Fosters Student Leadership and Engagement
A Therapy Dog Club empowers students to take on leadership roles by organizing events, coordinating with therapy dog teams, and advocating for expanding the club into a full program. Giving students ownership fosters responsibility, teamwork, and community engagement.
Strengthens Community Partnerships
Starting a club opens the door to collaborations with local therapy dog organizations, shelters, or animal-assisted therapy programs. Schools can invite certified therapy dogs for visits, partner with community groups for educational sessions, or create service-learning opportunities where students volunteer with therapy animals.
Gathers Data to Support a Future Program
If a school is hesitant about implementing a therapy dog program, a club can serve as a pilot initiative to collect data on the impact of animal-assisted therapies. Surveys, testimonials, and anecdotal evidence from students, teachers, parents, and other key stakeholders can provide compelling reasons to expand the club into a permanent program.
How to Start a Therapy Dog Club
Identify a Faculty Advisor – A teacher, counselor, or staff member passionate about student well-being and animal therapy can oversee the club.
Partner with Local Therapy Dog Organizations – Certified therapy dog teams can schedule regular visits to meet with students.
Plan Activities – Meetings can include guest speakers, stress-relief sessions, volunteer opportunities, and advocacy efforts for therapy dog programs.
Involve Students – Let students lead initiatives, create outreach materials, and develop events.
Implement Waivers – Have students (and their guardians, if needed) sign participation waivers to ensure transparency and address liability concerns.
Final Thoughts
A Therapy Dog Club is a low-risk, high-reward way for schools to explore the benefits of therapy dogs before committing to a full program. It fosters a positive school culture, supports student mental health, and builds a foundation for a larger initiative in the future.
If your school is on the fence about a therapy dog program, starting with an extracurricular offering might be the perfect first step. By starting small and scaling thoughtfully, schools can introduce therapy dogs in a way that minimizes risks, maximizes benefits, and paves the way for a sustainable, well-integrated program.
Just the other day, I received a message from an educator in a current leadership position. In the message, the school leader expressed frustration and confusion over the abrupt discontinuation of a beloved therapy dog program at their school. This decision, a result from a change in district regulations, now prohibits employees from bringing therapy dogs into the school, and many in the learning community are disheartened. It is the educator’s belief that the therapy dog program was a vital source of comfort and emotional support, fostered positive connections and contributed to a supportive school culture for the faculty, staff and student body as a whole.
Which is why I was then brought to wonder about the original policy language prior to the regulatory change for the 2024-2025 school year and why such a change would occur: What explicit language existed in district’ policy regarding therapy dogs before this decision? Was there any formal language at all? Could it be that the therapy dog program was running under an unspoken understanding rather than an official framework?
Policy isn’t necessarily a “bad thing,” for without formal guidelines, such programs can easily grow unchecked, potentially leading to conflicts—especially if there was an increase in the number of dogs coming to school, concerns about certification, or misunderstandings about what constitutes a legitimate therapy dog. The absence of a clear policy on therapy dogs may have allowed the program to grow naturally. However, this lack of structure could have led to unforeseen issues, ultimately contributing to the decision to end the program.
Having said that, while the regulatory change in the educator’s school poses a significant challenge, it doesn’t have to mean the end of the therapy dog program altogether. In the absence of a clear explanation, it’s essential to propose thoughtful solutions to address the concerns of stakeholders while advocating for the reinstatement of the therapy dog program. Below, I outline several considerations for the educator—and others impacted by similar policy shifts—to navigate the current situation with the hopes of reinstating a revised therapy dog program to meet the needs of all stakeholders.
The Role of Unspoken Understandings
When therapy dog programs aren’t codified into official district policy, they may rely on informal arrangements or personal agreements (Maricevic, 2022). In some cases, administrators may allow other school leaders, teachers or staff to bring certified therapy dogs without objection, trusting the intentions of the program (Maricevic, 2022). But without written guidelines, inconsistencies and confusion can arise, which may have contributed to the recent decision to prohibit therapy dogs altogether for the school leader.
Now, if there were concerns about the number of dogs on campus, questions about certifications, or uncertainty around how to manage liability, any one of these issues—or all of them—could have prompted the district to take a blanket approach and halt the program. In either scenario, the issue comes back to the need for clear policy to ensure the viability of any programmatic addition, with the goal of sustaining a long-term impact on the learning community—especially if that program includes therapy dogs (Maricevic, 2022).
Schools with transparent policies, can foster a supportive environment where therapy dogs, or any programmatic enhancements to the wellness and learning of students, can thrive as valuable resources, ensuring that their benefits are accessible to all students and staff while minimizing potential conflicts or concerns. Without clear, formal guidelines, programs can become vulnerable to misunderstandings and inconsistencies that ultimately jeopardize their effectiveness and long term sustainability within the organization (Maricevic, 2022).
Establishing a comprehensive policy framework would not only provide a solid foundation for the program but also clarify roles, responsibilities, and expectations for all parties involved (Maricevic, 2022). Ultimately, a well-defined policy will help safeguard the educator’s therapy dog program’s integrity and reinforce its positive impact on the school community (Maricevic, 2022).
Certification Confusion: Therapy Dogs vs. Emotional Support Dogs
Another layer of complexity is the widespread misunderstanding between therapy dogs and emotional support animals (ESAs), particularly when it comes to certification. This confusion can create legal and logistical issues, making it difficult to establish a program that complies with district policies.
First and foremost, it’s important to clarify that there is no formal “certification” for emotional support dogs. ESAs are animals that provide comfort and emotional support to individuals with mental health challenges, but they are not trained to perform specific tasks like service dogs. There’s no official certification for ESAs, and they do not have the same legal rights as service animals.
Unfortunately, not all organizations that claim to certify therapy dogs are legitimate. Some companies exploit loopholes, offering quick and easy certifications bypassing the necessary training or certification assessment. Such unethical practices can undermine the credibility of therapy dog programs and cause confusion in school districts trying to maintain appropriate standards.
In the case of this educator’s dilemma, if the district encountered concerns about the legitimacy of the certifications held by therapy dogs on campus,such a concern could have triggered the decision to halt the existing therapy dog program. Without clear guidelines or a trusted certification process in place, district leadership may have felt the risks—whether related to liability, safety, or standards—outweighed the benefits. To ensure the program’s legitimacy and effectiveness, schools must establish clear guidelines that require certification only from trusted, reputable organizations, like those presented above (Maricevic, 2022).
Moving Forward: Addressing Policy Gaps and Certification Concerns
To advocate for the reinstatement of the therapy dog program, the educator must first address these potential gaps. Maybe start a conversation with key stakeholders, follow the dialogue with a collaborative review of the district’s policy language (or lack thereof) and discuss additional language to formalize clear guidelines around the use of therapy dogs in schools. Here’s how this educator can approach the current situation:
Review the Old Policy (or Unspoken Understanding): If the program previously operated without formal policy, it’s time to work with district leadership to establish clear guidelines. This would ensure that any future therapy dog program operates within a well-defined framework, preventing misunderstandings or unchecked growth (Maricevic, 2022).
Ensure Proper Certification: Address concerns about certifications by only working with well-established, reputable organizations that train and certify therapy dogs according to recognized standards (Maricevic, 2022). Research and recommend organizations that adhere to the highest levels of training, evaluation, and insurance, helping the district feel more confident in the legitimacy of the program (Maricevic, 2022).
Clarify the Difference Between Therapy Dogs and ESAs: Educate both staff and district leadership on the key distinctions between therapy dogs and emotional support animals. Emphasize that while ESAs provide comfort, they are not part of structured therapy programs, nor do they have certification or training requirements. Therapy dogs, on the other hand, must undergo rigorous training and certification to operate in school settings (Maricevic, 2022).
Propose a Pilot Program with Clear Oversight: If the primary concerns are related to certification and management, propose reinstating the program as a small pilot with stringent guidelines. Start by bringing in one or two certified therapy dogs through reputable organizations during designated times throughout the school year (i.e. Wellness Day, midterms, finals, etc) with clear oversight and documentation. This approach may help ease district concerns while demonstrating the value of the therapy dog in the high school setting.
Bridge the Gap Between Intention and Implementation
The abrupt end of this educator’s therapy dog program highlights the importance of having clear, well-structured policies in place for any school or district initiative’s longterm sustainability. Without them, even well-intentioned programs can become vulnerable to mismanagement, confusion, and abrupt decisions like the one that occurred in this example. By examining the district’s language around therapy dogs, clearing up misunderstandings around certification, and other inconsistencies within the established protocol, this educator, and others who might find themselves in a similar scenario, can build a stronger case for reinstating the program in a way that benefits everyone—students, staff, and dogs alike.
In an era shaped by technological advancements and evolving educational paradigms, students face an ever-growing need to showcase their skills and accomplishments comprehensively and accessibly. This is where the concept of Digital Knowledge Portfolios becomes a pivotal tool in the academic journey, especially for those pursuing the International Baccalaureate (IB) Middle Years Programme (MYP), Diploma Programme (DP), and beyond.
Digital Knowledge Portfolios serve as dynamic repositories, housing a student’s academic achievements, reflections, and growth over time. Within the context of the IB framework, they play a crucial role in aligning with the program’s core principles and objectives.
Understanding the IB MYP Framework
The MYP emphasizes holistic learning, encouraging students to explore connections between disciplines while fostering critical thinking and communication skills. It’s within this interdisciplinary approach that Digital Knowledge Portfolios find their stride, enabling students to document projects, essays, artistic creations, and other endeavors that exhibit their multifaceted talents.
When transitioning to the DP, these portfolios become even more vital. The program’s rigorous demands necessitate evidence of research, creativity, and reflection – elements that can be effectively showcased through digital portfolios. Students demonstrate their growth, track their academic journey, and exhibit the skills and attributes sought after in the DP curriculum.
The Power of Reflection and Connection
Digital Knowledge Portfolios are not just repositories of work; they are reflective spaces where students can articulate their learning process, challenges faced, and growth achieved. Through this reflective practice, students gain a deeper understanding of their strengths and areas for improvement, aligning with the IB’s emphasis on metacognition and self-awareness.
Moreover, these portfolios bridge the gap between academic endeavors and future aspirations. They serve as tangible evidence of a student’s capabilities, aiding college admissions, scholarship applications, and career pursuits. As the world increasingly values digital literacy and the ability to curate one’s online presence, the Digital Knowledge Portfolios become invaluable assets.
Aligning IB Command Terms within the Digital Knowledge Portfolio
The International Baccalaureate (IB) program is renowned for its rigorous academic standards and precise language used to articulate student expectations. Central to this I IB language are Command Terms – key words that direct students on how to approach their learning.
Integrating Command Terms Strategically
Integrating the IB’s Command Terms within the Digital Knowledge Portfolio is instrumental in showcasing a student’s mastery of these skills as it pertains to the rigors of the IB’s program.
First, students must determine and demonstrate understanding of the terminology. Within the Digital Knowledge Portfolio, sections are dedicated to honoring the IB’s definition of the Command Term, as well as designated spaces for students to define the Command Terms in their own words. Clearly defining the Command Terms, in their own words, confirms a foundational understanding of the IB’s terminology and students’ ownership of learning.
Then, students strategically align their work to the content specific Command Terms. Students identify an artifact, include an image and/or a direct link to the artifact, and then justify their rationale for the selected artifact.
Hypothetical Artifacts & Justification
In this section, I put forth hypothetical artifacts and justification aligned to some of the Command Terms to showcase how a student might demonstrate engagement in the IB curriculum framework and ownership of learning.
Define: The artifact might be an essay or research paper where the student meticulously defines and clarifies key terms within a specific subject area. The justification here would involve highlighting how this artifact serves to establish a foundational understanding of the topic under discussion.
Explain: An artifact showcasing an elaborate project presentation or an instructional video might justify its inclusion by emphasizing how it succinctly explains complex concepts or methodologies, showcasing the student’s adeptness in simplifying intricate ideas.
Evaluate: If a portfolio entry involves a reflective piece where the student assesses the efficacy of a scientific experiment or a historical analysis, the justification would focus on how this artifact demonstrates the student’s capacity for critical evaluation.
Discuss: In the case of a recorded debate or a written dialogue on socio-political issues, the justification would elucidate how this artifact displays the student’s ability to engage in meaningful discussions, considering multiple perspectives.
Compare and Contrast: An artifact might feature a project that compares and contrasts different literary works or scientific theories, justifying its inclusion by highlighting how it showcases the student’s understanding of interdisciplinary connections.
Conclusion
By consciously aligning their work to the IB Command Terms within the Digital Knowledge Portfolio, students not only showcase their understanding of these terms but also demonstrate their ability to engage with the academic material at a higher level. This strategic curation enhances the depth of the Digital Knowledge Portfolio, presenting a comprehensive overview of a student’s academic journey while explicitly highlighting their mastery of the IB’s language and expectations.
I recently stumbled upon a TikTok post featuring a table-read for the sketch comedy show, The Muppet Show (1976 – 1981). The clip, posted by TikTok user, @muppetmarissa, includes the voice-overlay of creative mind and Muppet creator, Jim Henson, along with his perspective on the collaborative creative process. The clip progresses, there are many other voices of Muppet Legendary, and then comes the wave of nostalgia.
The Fabric
Now, if you made it this far, it should come as no surprise to learn the obvious. I am a huge Jim Henson fan. I mean, I am writing a reflection on educational leadership with an ode to The Muppets. Don’t worry, it has a purpose, I promise.
I am unsure where @muppetmarissa found this particular clip, but very much look forward to viewing what appears to be a documentary on Jim Henson that I have yet to review. I do know there is a highly anticipated documentary in the works about Jim Henson, directed and produced by the dynamic duo of Ron Howard and Brian Glazer. The release date of the Disney Original Documentary is still to be determined and you can read more about it here in this 2022 press release by The Jim Henson Company.
You see, I consider myself a creative. I allow myself the time, space, and flexibility to be creative in all aspects of my personal and professional interests. I credit my creative identity and all my ventures, from childhood to this very moment, to Jim Henson, his circle of like-minded creatives, the imaginary world they conjured for us kids in the 80s, and how that imaginary world has now transcended space and time.
Ed Sullivan, Kermit the Frog and Jim Henson; The Ed Sullivan Show, N.D.
Shared Experience
I also know, I am not the only one who feels this way. Take actor Jason Segel, for example. Segal is best known for his role in the sitcom How I Met Your Mother (2005 – 2014), writing and starring in the iconic film, Forgetting Sarah Marshall (2008), writing and staring in the recent the AppleTV series, Shrinking (2023), and [drumroll please], his love of The Muppets.
Segel does not shy away from his love and appreciation for The Muppets, and even refers to them as his “childhood idols.” An additional interest worth noting is Segel’s idolization of Kermit the Frog, the amphibian embodiment of Henson’s legacy. Segel reveres Kermit almost as much as I revere the little green frog. During an interview to promote his mid-2000s film, The Muppets (2011), Segel was asked to divulge his favorite Muppet, to which he replied “… it’s Kermit. It’s always been Kermit.” I get it.
I get Segel’s #ItsAlwaysBeenKermit belief statement because quite frankly, I have an #ItsAlwaysBeenKermit belief statement, too. So here it goes, my Kermit belief statement:
Everything I learned in life, I learned from a little green frog.
I really get it.
In 2011, Segal took it upon himself to dust off the Muppet memories for us “80s kids,” thanks to writing and staring alongside them for their return to the big screen. That summer, I took my son, who was then 4 years old, along with his cousins, to see Segal’s major motion picture production. We sat in a quaint, Berkshire, Massachusetts movie theater. What could be better than a summertime movie, in the Berkshires, and watching The Muppets? Nothing. There is nothing better. Trust me.
The lights dimmed. The credits rolled, and so did the tears. Let me be more specific. The credits rolled, and so did my tears.
I wish I could say I was overcome with emotion because it was my son’s first time in a movie theater– it wasn’t that. No, it wasn’t tears of joy. Tears of sadness? Nah. Nope, not tears longing for the days of yesterday. I pretty much cried throughout the entire movie.
The Act of Being
For the duration of the film, the adult me was very cognizant of the fact that I was in a theater, surrounded by children, one of them being my own, to watch a film in which my own childhood icons paraded on screen. The film, for all intents and purposes, was presented under the auspices of a children’s movie. But to me, I knew this film was not exclusively targeted to the 4-12 year old demographic, but to their parents, guardians, aunts, uncles, neighbors– to those “80s kids.”
The Muppets (2011) was a film targeted to me, and my tears were tears of being; being seen, heard and valued.
It was so very apparent, how by watching this film, my personal roadmap, goals, dreams, and aspirations were emphatically validated, and not just by any other person, by another like-minded creative, personally and professionally influenced by Henson and his Muppets.
Jason Segel got it– he got me.
I was beingseen, valued, and heard as a person in need of a reminder, a reminder to remember….and I wasn’t the only one. I wasn’t the only one positively influenced by the creative masterminds behind The Muppets. I wasn’t the only one still using the efforts of ingenious creatives, like Henson, to fuel my purpose. I wasn’t the only one who wanted to genuinely find opportunities to advocate for empathy and understanding, to leave my mark on this world, and make it just a little brighter than it was the day before.
There are people, like Segel, who are like me. There are people, like Segel, who, like me, want others to know that even during some of life’s most [fill in the blank] moments, they are seen, heard and valued.
Educational Leadership
As I reflect on my own educational leadership journey, there is the running motif and thematic concept within my writing and it is centered around those three words: seen, valued, and heard (I’ve coined it “the trifecta”). All individuals in an organization need to feel truly seen, valued, and heard for a plethora of reasons; the multitude of stakeholders: who is the cultivator of “the trifecta” one day and who is the receiver the next; interwoven relationships between district, school building leadership and the trickle down effect; leadership philosophy and philosophical approaches to management, transactional vs. transformational…
Now, enter students into the equation. Students must feel seen, heard and valued, and if teachers are the ones to help cultivate and nurture “the trifecta,” then teachers must also be a receiver of those feelings, which then means district and school building leadership must …. round and round we go.
All stakeholders must have equitable access to “the trifecta.” Easier said than done? Meh.
Everything I learned in life, I learned from a little green frog.
I get it, because I believe it. And I also believe in order to cultivate authentic opportunities for others to feel all those things, and more, it takes creative ingenuity, it requires safety and security, transparency, honesty, love, kindness, trust, empathy …. it requires a Kermit-like mindset.
A Kermit-Like Mindset to Leadership and Beyond! That reads as if it’s got some potential, and that is where the next chapter of my leadership journey will start.
My recent post is associated with a school building leadership assignment. Below is the prompt and my response.
Prompt: During your internship, has anything occurred that was unanticipated or surprising? Is there anything you encountered that was unexpected? If so, what was your major takeaway? If nothing was unexpected or surprising, why do you think that is the case? After the class session, post a reply to this inquiry on the discussion board and respond to at least one other classmates post.
This is the second semester of my school building leader internship. Interestingly enough, I find myself much more astute at identifying areas of need, at both the building and district level. Additionally, I find myself considering those within the organization, other than individuals appointed to leadership positions, equipped to address those identified areas of need.
I’m aware that there are resources, human resources, readily available to assist those in the designated leadership position, human resources who may in fact be more equipped to address the identified area need than the person in the designated leadership position to typically address those needs. But for leadership to truly benefit from the human capital within the organization, it requires a transformative mindset, or at least a mindset working towards a full transformative overhaul and cognizant of the need to be open minded, as well as a fortified ego, ready to withstand some of the most daunting moments of self-doubt.
I often find myself thinking, if I were in a current leadership position, how I would incorporate these outstanding educators, to honor their strengths and their desire to be a part of the larger systematic plan of improvement? If students want to be seen, heard, and valued by their teachers, wouldn’t teachers want to be seen, heard, and valued by their leadership team? At the end of the day, people are people.
I always tell my colleagues how proud I am to work alongside them, wish for more time for collaboration, to learn from one another– my colleagues know they are seen, heard, and valued, but it’s me that’s doing the seeing, and hearing and valuing. As one colleague said during a recent conversation, “You’re going to make a great principal one day….” I brush those comments to the side and change the subject, not because it doesn’t feel good to hear, but because of what their comment really says about how they feel, and how their words that followed directly reflected an area of need: school culture the teacher’s perspective on their value and worth, and the degree to which the teacher perspective was aligned with the leaderships’ perspective.
How does one address an identified area of need specific to the school culture from the perspective of the teacher, when it is assumed by some (not all) in leadership positions that there isn’t a problem at all? When does an identified area of need become an identified area of need? Is it in the eye of the beholder, or the one in a leadership position? And if the role of the leader is integral to addressing the need, is the need only a need worthy of attention when it directly impacts the transactional leader? More questions than answers.
I’ll continue to lift my colleagues, and contemplate all the possibilities to address the embedded needs in questions like those above. In all honesty, I would be disappointed if the only thing to come out of this reflective response is further confirmation for how I want to lead as school building leader, but it just might be all that a response like this is destined to reaffirm.
Currently, I am three weeks into the second semester of my year long, school building leader internship. This time around, I find myself contemplating a myriad of hot topics as a parent, secondary educator, aspiring school leader, and advocate for the social-emotional well-being of adolescent students.
Last week, my professor posted the following assignment:
Prompt: In this week’s discussion post, please select one quote, then make one comment on how you believe this technology may impact education. Please respond to at least one of your classmates (sic) posts. Do not create a new thread, simply respond to my post and to classmate’s (sic) posts.
During the fall months of the 2022-2023 school year, the one and only AI platform, ChatGPT, commandeered secondary department meeting agendas, as well as the group text threads and Snapchats of secondary students. There were mainstream publications like The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, presenting bold-print, ominous headlines of the AI platform’s stealthy omnipresence. Then came The Atlantic’s subsequent op-ed from a high school English teacher, how cliché.
ChatGPT was a topic of conversation among parents while I stood on the sidelines at youth sporting events, during holiday celebrations with family, and even among my extended PLN of educators and other professionals. In all three scenarios, I listened to concerned perspectives. Statementslike, It’s the end of the world, there goes humanity, teachers are insignificant, here come the robots, and variations of such, were followed by a barrage of rhetorical questions.
Do students need to learn how to write?
Why do students need to learn how to write?
If there are computers that can do it for them, why waste their time with writing?
As people prepared for the end of the world as we know it [cue REM], I kept reading, listening, and observing fellow educators and non-educators alike.
The words I read, the voices I heard, and the actions I observed were mere reflections of the dubious undertones emanating from those mainstream articles alerting readers, education and humanity of … what exactly?
The more I read, the more I listened, the more I observed, the more convinced I became that there was something worth adding to the docket.
Pre-ChatGPT Era. Let’s be real for a second. I’ve been in secondary education for 18 years. ChatGPT is no different than the tutor who only “helped,” the Google search results producing a plethora of graduate school level work worthy of a ::highlight, click-copy-paste::: into an 11th grade essay of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel, The Great Gatsby, or the older sibling/neighbor/cousin assigned the same senior thesis assignment 5 years prior, etc. Educators today need to consider how, if at all, pre-ChatGPT era students are more similar than they are different than students of the ChatGPT generation.
I asked my students their thoughts to that same very question. Their collective responses are captured in this paraphrased statement, If a student wants to cheat, they are going to cheat, and they don’t need ChatGPT. It needs to be known my students also provided an empathic rationale for why students might feel the need to submit something that does not represent their own original thinking, resort to cheating or using an AI platform like ChatGPT.
We have to get into college and get money.
All everyone cares about are grades.
Sometimes you aren’t prepared.
There isn’t enough time.
Stuff happens, and sometimes people don’t get that stuff happens, so what else are we going to do?
I’d rather play with my dog…
Keep this empathic level of adolescent transparency in mind as I share a recent comment and rhetorical question from a professional colleague with no affiliation to my current place of employment. The professional colleague stated, “If there was ChatGPT when I was a student, I would’ve used it. Wouldn’t you?” While I believe the intentions of the statement to be rhetorical, I vehemently responded, “No.” My answer was no, is still no, and will always be no, and here’s why–– the adolescent voices represented above.
Those voices, all of them, make me think about my own high school experience. I loved my formative high school years and believe they contribute to my pedagogical stance on education and curriculum. As a result, I skillfully craft authentic curriculum for my own students and continuously create organic opportunities for students to demonstrate learning on their terms, as much as possible. Nothing comes from a handout, or a book, or an online platform which allows educators to pay other educators for their products. My lessons today, look nothing like my lessons from 2005, the year I started teaching, nor should they reflect the needs of students from almost 20 years ago! Same goes for assessments. Formative and summative assessments are not the same from year-to-year, not the same from class period to class period, sometimes not even the same within the class period. I am always fine tuning lessons, assessments, differentiating and giving autonomy to the students (it is their learning after all). I am reflective, constantly wondering if I am being culturally responsive to the ever-changing needs of my students, diversifying texts and text types, and asking for their feedback.
When I was a high school student, I knew I was seen, heard, and valued by the way my teachers interacted with me, the lessons they created, the diversity of the texts, the way they allowed me to creatively represent my learning, by the way they listened, allowed me to be the gregarious change-maker who challenged norms and advocated for others, and they acknowledged my reality in a non-judgmental way.
Now, I pay it forward.
Seen, Heard, & Valued. Whether pre-ChatGPT era students are more similar than they are different than students of the ChatGPT generation really depends on three seemingly simple, yet ever-so necessary words–– seen, heard, and valued. The trifecta!
My students, your students, they are people, and I believe, as I am sure you do too, all people deserve to be seen, heard, and valued. Students want to know they matter, not just to any person, they want to matter to you, their teacher, their parent/guardian, their adult role model. And not just sometimes. Students want to matter all the time, for all their thoughts, ideas, mistakes, wrongdoings, successes, and they want to matter when it comes to their learning process.
I believe it is essential to unearth a student’s root decision to utilize AI platforms like ChatGPT, rather than submit their own thoughts and ideas. I believe it is essential to evaluate the extent to which a student’s perception of themselves as a learner, influences their decision to utilize alternatives like ChatGPT, and to what degree their actions are influenced by their perspective on how others may see, hear, and value them as a learner. In short, we need to illuminate the influence of the trifecta’s presence, or lack thereof, on the secondary students perception of self, and understand the possibility of such a factor influencing the decisions of secondary learners.
Today ChatGPT, Tomorrow Robots. No, I don’t believe robots are going to take over the world, or America’s classrooms. Do I think there is a concern for the well-being of humanity? Maybe, but my concern for the well-being of humanity is not because of an AI platform.
Humanity’s well-being can teeter if today’s students become the adults of tomorrow, who are one day responsible for humanity’s survival and simultaneously harbor self-doubt, the belief their words and the words of others are insignificant, the belief their thoughts and the thoughts of others have no purpose or aren’t good enough, the belief they aren’t good enough, the belief there’s no need to write or communicate or advocate, or the worst case, harbor the belief it is easier to embrace apathy because… why bother with any other mindset?
Who You Gonna Call? To protect humanity, we don’t need to condemn innovation. We must deconstruct the illusive apathetic mindset. Psst, I’ll let you in on a little secret, the apathetic mindset is creeping behind the letters, C-H-A-T-G-P-T, and it is looking for a spot to take root, but ChatGPT didn’t disperse the seeds of apathy.
Before any deconstruction takes place, we need to ask some questions, which may or may not start with the word, Why:
Why was the ChatGPT platform generated in the first place (think about Stone’s concepts of welfare and security)?
Literal rationale for its creation
Figurative rationale for its creation
Why would a student opt to submit anything other than a product representative of their authentic voice?
Why would a student resort to a sterile computer response, a response that could hold serious inaccuracies intertwined with “big SAT words,” rather than their own?
Why would a student resort to a sterile computer response that could violate a student code of conduct and result in serious consequences?
Why does the student value the “thoughts” of AI over their own thoughts?
Why would a student think their teacher would prefer the submission of AI generated “work,” over age and skill appropriate submissions which reflect who they are as a person and learner?
ChatGPT is here for a myriad of plausible reasons. I am highlighting one plausible reason being the messages students receive on the daily; messages of who is seen, heard and valued; why they are seen, heard and valued; and the need to figure out a way to be seen, heard and valued.
But, who would send a message like that, you ask? Schools, towns, stakeholders (educators, school building and district leaders, parents, state and national figures), external curriculums like AP and IB, state standards, national standards, SAT, ACT, societal norms and expectations, all send messages, intended or not. Which brings me to another set of questions to ponder:
To what extent do the intended messages sent differ from the messages students’ receive?
How, if at all, do parents and/or guardians contribute to disseminating messages which compel students to turn to AI platforms like Chat GPT, rather than their own thoughts and ideas?
Ready, Set, Deconstruct. Good educators will keep asking good questions, and by good questions, I mean challenging questions, like those I crafted above. Good educators will keep creating a good curriculum, and a good curriculum is differentiated, student centered, authentic, inquiry based, rooted in student choice, performance based, and sends an important message to the student they are seen, heard, and valued. Good educators will keep incorporating purposeful technology use in the classroom, for who are we to deny students with the 21st century skills needed to communicate, create, advocate, and protect humanity.
Now is not the time to get distracted from the good stuff. We cannot get caught up in futile efforts to catch or prevent student use of technological advancements. We cannot have a John Lithgow, Footloose (1984) level of control in our schools when it comes to mitigating the rapidly changing contours of technological innovation.
Footloose(1984)
We cannot run away from technological advancements– just think if we took a defensive stance against the printing press, or “the calculator, which was decried as the death of math” (Rosenblatt, 2023)! We cannot point fingers and place blame for ChatGPT indiscriminately; technology is not the enemy here. Neither is innovation or ingenuity–– Elon Musk, is not the antagonist of this dystopian tale. I’m not certain it’s even a dystopian tale, at least for right now.
Balance is Key. I’ll stick with the Hollywood motif a little longer and quote Mister Miyagi from the 1984 classic film, Karate Kid. During the “Rowboat Scene,” Mister Miyagi, the film’s archetypal sage, guides protagonist, Daniel LaRusso, with inspirational words. Mister Miyagi states, “Better learn balance. Balance is key. Balance good, karate good. Everything good. Balance bad, better pack up, go home. Understand?”
The Karate Kid (1984)
No one is walking away from technological advancements in the classroom. No one is packing up their bags and going home.
We need to “get the balance right” (Depeche Mode, 1983) when it comes to technological innovation, which requires trial and error.
So let’s embrace technological innovation!
Incorporate it!
Model it!
Respect it!
Learn from, and with one another (and I am talking about collaboration with students)–– about the emerging technological trends, model the behaviors we hope to instill in our students through our own responsible use of technology to present a true, unified digital citizenship initiative.
Maybe this offensive-line strategy will help to realign the messages we send, reflect their true intentions, and be received as such in the hearts and minds of our students. At the end of the day, our students are people–– people, sitting in a class, hoping their teachers see, hear, and value them (that has some Julia Roberts Notting Hill (1999) vibes, no?). Our students deserve to receive this message, and then some.
Notting Hill (1999)
As educators and emerging school leaders, now is the time to reflect upon the individual and collective messages we send, the messages students receive, and recognize our contribution to the inception of ChatGPT, a technological response to an identified need we, inadvertently, created (and there are a lot of people, places, and things falling under the words our and we in this post).
But we do need to act, or the only fingers pointing will be those placing blame where it belongs, at ourselves–– and nobody likes fingers pointing while hearing the words, “I told you so.”
Disclaimer: I cannot present an opinion piece about students accessing AI technology without acknowledging an AI tool afforded to teachers! The a-ha!, we gotcha AI platform to determine a submissions level of authenticity, turnitin.com. Full disclosure, I use turnitin.com, but I didn’t get into teaching to complete a crime scene investigation on work submitted, and turnitin.com is so much more than a plagiarism “checker.”
Wait, does that mean ChatGPT is so much more than an AI platform doing the work for America’s students? A conversation for another day.
Empathic Paws 