In the 1960’s, Douglas McGregor from MIT came up with the Theory-X and Theory-Y to describe styles of managers. It became very popular in the field of HR and it was a model that helped shift management from the negative paradigm to a positive spin. I would like to apply the same theories in Education describing Teacher-X and Teacher-Y. I have copied and pasted the theory directly from and replaced management terms with educational terms. So, work becomes study, employees becomes students, managers becomes educators, and so on. I have placed the words I could not find an alternative between square brackets.
In this theory, [which has been proven counter-effective in most modern practices], educators assume students are inherently lazy and will avoid studying if they can and that they inherently dislike learning. As a result of this, educators believes that students need to be closely supervised and comprehensive systems of controls developed. A hierarchical structure is needed with narrow span of control at each and every level. According to this theory, students will show little ambition without an enticing incentive program and will avoid responsibility whenever they can. [According to Michael J. Papa,] if the educational goals are to be met, theory X educators rely heavily on threat and coercion to gain their students’ compliance. Beliefs of this theory lead to mistrust, highly restrictive supervision, and a punitive atmosphere. The Theory X educators tends to believe that everything must end in blaming someone. He or she thinks all prospective educators are only out for themselves. Usually these educators feel the sole purpose of the student’s interest in the school is [????]. They will blame the person first in most situations, without questioning whether it may be the system, policy, or lack of training that deserves the blame. A Theory X educator believes that his or her students do not really want to study, that they would rather avoid responsibility and that it is the teacher’s job to structure the work and energize the students. One major flaw of this teaching style is it is much more likely to cause Diseconomies of Scale.
In this theory, education assumes students may be ambitious and self-motivated and exercise self-control. It is believed that students enjoy their mental and physical learning duties. [According to Papa,] to them learning is as natural as play. They possess the ability for creative problem solving, but their talents are underused in most organizations. Given the proper conditions, theory Y educators believe that students will learn to seek out and accept responsibility and to exercise self-control and self-direction in accomplishing objectives to which they are committed. A Theory Y teacher believes that, given the right conditions, most people will want to do well at their studies. They believe that the satisfaction of doing a good job is a strong motivation. Many people interpret Theory Y as a positive set of beliefs about students. [A close reading of Thereveals that McGregor simply argues for teachers to be open to a more positive view of students and the possibilities that this creates. He thinks that Theory Y teachers are more likely than Theory X teachers to develop the climate of trust with students that is required for learning. It’s human resource development that is a crucial aspect of any organization. This would include teachers communicating openly with students, minimizing the difference between mentor-learner relationships, creating a comfortable environment in which students can develop and use their abilities. This climate would include the sharing of decision making so that students have a say in decisions that influence them.