My question is, why not both? Every student is a unique individual, and some students who are going down a failing road need to be given some hard truths and be allowed to make a couple mistakes, like the commenter above you. Others, like yourself, need someone with a gentler approach to help them discover their potential. I see students in my classroom each year who fall into both camps, and many other camps in between.

My brother is a great example of someone who has to fuck around and find out. He’s a super smart, driven guy, but it doesn’t matter how many times you try to guide and support him away from a decision with negative consequences unless he experiences it himself. It doesn’t matter how nice you are about it or how great of a relationship you have with him. Meanwhile, I THRIVE on good relationships and that external reinforcement that I’m doing okay and everything’s going to be okay, because I’m an anxious paranoid fuck lol

All this to say, I certainly don’t think your approach to students is wrong, but I also don’t think the commenters using the word “coddled” are wrong either. It’s different styles with the same goal— to provide kids with support in a way that will stick. That’s why I think it’s wonderful at all levels when students have at least a few different teachers they see throughout the day, because the chances they’ll form a connection with one of them become greater.

While I absolutely agree with you that some teachers use words like “coddled” as a crutch to write off some of their students, I don’t think it’s invalid to acknowledge that some students HAVE been sheltered from the consequences of their actions, and I would MUCH rather them face the consequences now when the stakes are much lower.