Every workplace and, indeed, all social gatherings inevitably have a segment of their respective populations consisting of those lacking common sense. Unfortunately, the ALT business is such that, those who are terribly under qualified (not just educationally, but mentally and emotionally) cast a terrible light on the majority of hard working ALTs.But, this post is not a critique of the English language business so much as the telling of a tale about an absurd rationalization which continues to boggle the still functioning parts of my mind.There we sat, a motley crew of ALTs from several prefectures gathered under the banner of company training. As the floor was opened for general problems and discussions regarding conflict resolution in the workplace, a hand was raised. The volunteer was called up to share with the group the wisdom of her experience.
In the moment following the yielding of the floor to the female speaker, an audible collective sigh of exasperation went up from the veteran members of the company. My newer associates and I would soon understand the reason.
While I cannot clearly remember if her anecdote was truly germane to the overall preceding group discussion, the collectively "feared" ALT began regaling us with a tale of her compassion and understanding toward her more troubled students.
Setting the stage, our narrator informed us of a rather expensive piece of jewelry she brought to school. Leaving the valuable in the teachers' room, she returned from class only to discover it stolen! As any person would do in her situation, she sought help from her fellow teachers. Although the effort had slim to no chance at recovering the artifact, a general attempt at locating the guilty party commenced. Soon afterward, the narrator halted further attempts to recover her stolen item.
Before I continue further, I should state that I can think of two good reasons for halting the search. First, it is disruptive to the other teachers and inconveniencing the school (something which may or may not be frowned upon in Japan). Second, the odds of finding the student after initial efforts proved useless were slim to nil. Better to cut your losses and learn from your mistakes.
However, our narrator refused to be confined by logical explanations. According to her, the impetus to halt the search was out of kindness and understanding toward the guilty student. We all sat in awe as the speaker eagerly mounted her high horse and prepared for an explanation which would bypass logical reasoning.
In somewhat paraphrased words, "whoever took it is clearly a troubled student (not disagreed with by anyone in the room). Once I realized that, I had the other teachers stop looking. I mean, I saw that I could use this as a way of helping the student. I can ALWAYS get a new piece of [expensive] jewelry . But, this was my chance to give the student something they've (sic) never had. It is now my gift for the student and it teaches them (sic) that I care."
Before you read on, take a moment of silence to really think about that thought process. That is what the rest of us felt compelled to do in order to reconcile the fallacies in her logic.
In her own way, our narrator utilized a very common mental defense. She turned herself from a victim to a figure of strength. After all, SHE made the decision to halt the search. More than this, she seized the opportunity to change herself into the immensely generous and kindhearted teacher who was willing to give all of herself to reach her students. Had she the chance, I do not doubt that she would have claimed that she was a martyr returned from death to teach us all of her saintlike kindness.
However, she seemingly forgot about the glaring problems with her logic. Let's deconstruct her argument shall we?
One of her initial premises was not wholly unfounded. She believed that the guilty student was in some way troubled. I don't disagree. Thievery, even as a childish prank, can be a sign of an underlying emotional problem. Usually, kids outgrow this immaturity in short order.
Where our noble narrator's reasoning begins to fail is in the belief that her eventual halting of the search was a selfless action. Indeed she wholeheartedly believed that once the search was voluntarily stopped, the stolen property was no longer stolen. It instead magically transformed into a gift given to the student. In general, for something to be truly a gift, doesn't the receiving party need to be at least vaguely aware that the object was GIVEN with the intention of being a gift? I assume the guilty party, more likely than not, believed that his caper had been successful and the teachers had given up the futile effort of searching.
Our misguided narrator went so far as to claim that she was enriching the thief's life. Not only would the student receive a gracious gift from the English teacher, but also the warm knowledge that the ALT cared.
I argue that instead of enriching the life of the thief, this foreign teacher merely reinforced the notion that there are no consequences for misdeeds. What a terrible lesson to be teaching. The fact that she could and/or would not see the absurdity of her logic frustrated the more rational teachers present at training.
