In light of all the other requirements on teachers and the way schools tend to micro-manage students' lives, it may be tempting to allow kids to choose their own seats in the classroom. After all, doesn't the research say that choice increases motivation? Can't we trust students to make wise choices based on their preferences and needs? Isn't an important aspect of executive functioning that students are able to regulate their behavior?
Well...yes. And no. According to Eric Toshalis, author of "Five Practices that Provoke Misbehavior," "The truth is, open seating isn't democratic, doesn't support student autonomy, and seldom teaches students to self-regulate."
Often, students who most vocally advocate for self-selecting seats are flaunting their social status, while quieter kids are more likely to be marginalized. Quieter students are usually the last to choose, and are often relegated to areas that accentuate their isolation. When students who have self-selected seats become too noisy or disruptive, we revoke the privilege either for all students (even those who were quiet and compliant) or for the select few who were were unable to contain themselves. Having been forced to move, students now see assigned seating as a punishment and are more likely to react negatively.
Instead, take the time to assign seats using factors mentioned in the opening paragraph above. Switch seats every quarter to allow for new peer groupings and diverse perspectives, and avoid attributing changes in seating to (mis)behavior. "We can support [students]...and provide them a little predictability and safety when we give them a dependable spot that's always there for them and always theirs."
Inspired by: Toshalis, Eric. "5 Practices that Provoke Misbehavior." Educational Leadership Oct. 2015: 34-40. Print.
What are the other four practices?
- highlighting ability differences
- grading practice work
- establishing vague norms
- using tired, old scripts
