“ Saint David ’ s has a strong intellectual and moral framework already in place and the relational dimension makes sense in that context .”
A Conversation with In-House Visiting Scholar , Dr . Michael Reichert
A
key element of the Teaching Boys Initiative includes Saint David ’ s collaboration with leading scholars in the education of boys . This year , the school launched its visiting scholars program , welcoming psychologist Dr . Michael Reichert , one of the world ’ s leading experts on boys ’ education . Dr . Reichert has been working in small groups with our faculty around a relational teaching framework for boys , and has been the featured speaker at events for our parents , faculty , and prospective families . Saint David ’ s Magazine sat down with Dr . Reichert to discuss his research and experience at the school .
In your workshops with our faculty , what has impressed you ; what observations have you made ?
Two things : one is that your headmaster , both intellectually and spiritually , already recognizes the powerful role that relationship plays in helping boys grow and become their best selves . Having already established that relationship is at the center of what differentiates Saint David ’ s School ; the school felt it could bring me in for a year to reinforce that dimension . Saint David ’ s has a strong intellectual and moral framework already in place and the relational dimension makes sense in that context .
I ’ ve also noticed how earnest and willing your faculty are to do the hard work of self reflection and self growth . They are willing to stretch themselves and grow , to be vulnerable and make it safe for each other .
What drew you to the field of research in boys ’ education ?
It was gradual : a response to a role I was playing first at a single school , then at a consortium of schools . I was working as a consulting psychologist at the Haverford School , an all boys Pre-K-12 school outside of Philadelphia , to create and lead a center that was stateof-the-art in the theory and research on boys ’ development . We conducted some original research on the school ’ s alumni and then were approached by a number of other schools including coed schools and boarding schools , to talk to them about education for boys in those different educational contexts . We moved the center out of the Haverford School and created a partnership with the University of Pennsylvania Center for the Study of Boys ’ Lives . The center then expanded to include research about girls , and was renamed the Center for the Study of Boys ’ and Girls ’ Lives .
The International Boys Schools Coalition ( IBSC ) invited me to partner with them in conducting a global study about boys ’ education among their member schools . That led to the first of four studies for them . The first focused on what teaching practices were working well . The second took a deeper look at the relationship that boys had with teachers and coaches , which the first study had identified to be so important . I partnered for these studies with Richard Hawley . We wrote two books together : Reaching Boys , Teaching Boys and I Can Learn From You - Boys as Relational Learners .
Your research demonstrated the importance of the relational domain in teaching and learning . Did anything about the results surprise you ?
Yes ! We tried to go into this research without already having the answers in mind . In the first study , we asked 1,400 boys ages 12-18 and 1,000 of their teachers in grades 6-12 , “ What was working ?”. The answers included lots of overlap between the boys ’ and teachers ’ responses . However , there was one area in which the teachers ’ answers were very different than the boys . In retrospect , this was rather shocking . When asked what made for a successful lesson , teachers pointed to educational theory and technical details / lesson content . The boys pointed to their teacher , the person . We realized two things : that boys were relational learners , and that relationship was a mediating variable — the way to engage boys in learning . The second thing we learned was , in not identifying relationships as key , teachers were revealing that they were somewhat confused about what boys really were and what they needed . They were confused by stereotypes about boys as “ lone ranger ,” “ non relational .”
But the boys were crystal clear : We need to be connected , we need to have a sense that the teacher knows and cares about us as a precondition for engaging with us .
“ Saint David ’ s has a strong intellectual and moral framework already in place and the relational dimension makes sense in that context .”
How are you working with our faculty to maximize our efficacy in relational teaching and learning ?
As the school has embraced the student / teacher relationship as central to its identity , there are many different levels to operationalize that aspiration : It lies in hiring practices , professional assessment practices , peer collaboration , parent involvement . One of the keys to being a successful relational school is helping teachers handle the relational breakdowns , those moments in a teacher ’ s year where the relationship or connection has gotten weakened or stuck . This involves helping teachers conduct a reflective relational practice where they review those relationships in a context with colleagues and brainstorm strategies to improve the quality of the connection .
12 • Saint David ’ s Magazine