The Hedgehog Concept, as discussed in Carr’s “Hope Against Hope,” is the idea that to succeed, businesses (or schools in this instance) should work on doing one thing and one thing well rather than spreading resources around trying to do multiple things. Just like a hedgehog continuously rolls up into a ball to respond to a variety of challenges and threats, so a school should have a single strategy, focus, or mission to best teach its students. Anything else is irrelevant according to the Hedgehog principle.
In “Hope Against Hope,” a New Orleans charter school called Akili Academy champions this idea in that their one focus is on student academic achievement and the end goal of college. It’s not a bad goal or focus, not at all. However, it ignores any underlying social problems that hamper student achievement. They say that they will do anything to get kids into college, but Akili principal Sean Gallagher told teachers, “Akili is not ever going to be a school that spends money educating parents” (p. 41). This no-excuses approach devalues the students’ prior experiences. In the case of New Orleans students, they’ve experienced the chaos of Katrina, seen their friends or family get killed, spent time in jail, and/or have been bounced around to a crazy amount of schools in a short period of time. Mental health services are even deprioritized, which is interesting since you think that mental health would be the one thing that would be necessary for quality learning.
What’s even more frustrating, though, is that this no-excuses approach wouldn’t be acceptable in a middle or upper class-dominated school. I remember once that I was given some slack on some due dates because my grandpa had died a couple days before. Imagine how much leeway I would have received if I had had a friend commit suicide or had seen them get murdered? Because I was in a well-off area, my personal struggles were seen as legitimate excuses for taking longer on schoolwork. In my opinion, when the reasons behind misbehavior aren’t addressed, the endless demerits and suspensions become meaningless and even kind of vindictive.
So, what do y’all think? Is it a school’s job to address the outside-school issues that its students face? Or is it more empowering to view students as “blank slates?” Or is there another option that schools have?
Comments
7 responses to “The Hedgehog Concept and the No-Excuses Approach”
Courtney- I really appreciate this perspective on what a “no excuses” mentality could do to the psychic of student. I agree that sometimes the underlying problems are what are the “most important” thing to be focusing on. If one does not address the catalyst, in my opinion, problems will continue to occur. I especially like your point about receiving leeway when something comes up in life outside of the confines of school. As my one teacher used to say, “life happens and that’s where your focus should be”. How can schools find a balance between life and what needs to take place inside schools? Especially in less-well off areas, I believe that life and school are two entirely different entities. How do these successfully function simultaneously?
My suggestion, if schools are stuck on a ‘hedgehog’ approach, is to focus on fixing the causes of poor performance. Like many of reading suggested, this may be a focus toward more out-of-school factors that directly impacts student achievement.
Hi McKenzie, your response to Courtney’s post is interesting to me. My personal opinion would be the same as your teacher’s: life happens and that’s where your focus should be. I say personal opinion because it is just that, the view I hold and live out for myself. I do not think, however, that this would be feasible in a place like New Orleans. Too much “life” is happening around them for them to ever to be able to focus solely on schoolwork. I don’t think giving all students leeway for all the scenarios we are describing here would ever lead to school type learning (I do think it will allow students to grow as people and be better because of it, but that is not the point I am making here). The no-excuses learning policy may just be the best approach Akili Academy has at the moment and consequently, needs to keep it around.
I am very intrigued by reading this because I had one set reaction in my mind as I was reading this, which went along with McKenzie’s post, and then seeing Hannah’s comment in turn made me reanalyze my thoughts.
Initially, I had the same mind set as McKenzie in the sense that life indeed does happen. How can be look to students simply as blank slates? To me, getting to know a student is crucial in order to make sure they succeed. I know from personal experience, I learn a lot better from a teacher that I know a bit about, more so than a stranger off the street. I think the same goes for teachers, in the sense that they can connect on a different level with the students when they get to know them, so how can they simply be a blank slate? What goes on outside of school in an individual’s life is so important in their learning and development. It’s hard to learn when you’ve just had a death, or maybe going through something like a divorce.
THEN, Hannah’s point makes clear sense to me. How can we give leeway in situations like New Orleans when “life happens” or at least did happen SO MUCH right in front of their faces. So many of those students lost their homes, family members, friends, favorite hangouts, stores, schools, their community… Do we give all these students leeway simply because of the disasters they have faced? I obviously think New Orleans is a special case when it comes to this scenario, but maybe Hannah is right in the sense that how else could you teach these students besides using something like the hedgehog effect? It truly does make sense if you view it in this dynamic.
I think that the issue, once again, comes back to what we want our schools to accomplish. Do we want them to just teach certain sets of information, or are they also partly responsible for teaching morality and how to interact with people?
In the case of New Orleans, I think it comes down to pursuing either short or long-term goals. If we’re focused on the short term, standardized test scores direct how schools make decisions, and teachers try to teach the kids without taking their mental health into consideration. If we’re thinking long term though, then doesn’t it make sense that these issues should be addressed? Plus, they will probably learn more effectively when they feel welcome and understood rather than if they just feel like widgets.
We see this long-term view when we read about Laurie (the principal) in Carr’s “Hope Against Hope.” She creates a home environment for her students, and her staff work to get to know the kids so that they can address the issue when students are acting out. She keeps the school open as long as possible so that kids don’t have to go back to their neighborhoods, and she knows the families on a personal level. And yes, this takes a toll on her, it also produces results in the classroom.
I find these posts really intriguing–I have in the past had various situations (deaths, etc) during the school year that have resulted in me missing class or falling a little behind on work, so I understand the necessity to sometimes cut students a little slack. On the other hand, I see the points of Hannah and Melinda that in a place like New Orleans, teachers may end up being far too lenient.
This brings me to the conclusion that a school situation more like the Harlem Children’s Zone may be the best way to compromise on this issue. Rather than ignoring issues that students are having, the school can work with the student and their family to improve their life as a whole. Whether it be food, medical care, counseling after a traumatic event, or just providing a place to work quietly on homework, a school that offers such accompaniments to education will likely have more success than a school that simply ignores the problems their students are facing at home. As we’ve seen, the New Orleans charters have had trouble offering any of these services due to their lack of pooled resources.
Alex,
My thoughts while I was reading through these posts were similar to yours about having a more well-rounded approach to aiding students in their education. While, yes, learning information and gaining an education is important, and that me help you the most when trying to apply to college, there are still a lot of things that are important for students to learn that don’t deal directly with what they’re learning in the classroom. For example, I think students ought to learn more about themselves and the things that they value the most during their educational experience. Courtney’s example demonstrated the importance of family in her life, and it was important that her school respected such a dedication. I believe that by using the “Hedgehog Approach” schools may tend to ignore the aspects of learning that are beyond just knowledge.
I agree with you Dana, but I’m not sure if it is the school’s place to step in and take on the responsibility outside of school. A school’s job is to educate students in an academic sense and help them develop as students. However, the family should have the biggest impact on a child’s growth and development and that is something that school cannot replace. This becomes more difficult when a student has a broken family or family that is not involved in their live. So maybe the problem lies in the lack of family presence in the life of a student.