5 Simple Ways To Eliminate Stress From Your Teaching Life

The other day I was just sitting around on my laptop, stressing over the jungle that I face in my class everyday, I came across this article. It has helped me a lot in my classroom management, and I hope it works for you too.

Stress is a killer.

And not just physically. It can also ruin your teaching career.

It can destroy your peace and happiness. It can affect your relationship with students.

It can severely limit your ability to manage your classroom.

The good news is that there is a lot you can do about teaching-related pressure, strain, tension, and the like.

Even if you’re prone to stress, it doesn’t have to be your everyday reality.

In fact, with just a few simple strategies, you can eliminate it from your teaching life.

Here’s how:

1. Decide.

One of the most powerful and effective ways to rid yourself of stress also happens to be the simplest. It’s called the decide-first method.

The way it works is just before your students arrive for the day, shut your classroom door and allow yourself a few minutes of uninterrupted silence. Close your eyes, take a few deep breaths, and clear your mind.

Once settled, you’re going to make one very important and very conscious decision.

You’re going to decide that no matter what happens that day, you’re going to keep your cool—inside as well as out.

Even if a family of orangutans comes swinging through your door, you’re going to remain as calm as a mountain lake.

And amazingly, almost magically, you will.

The first time you try it will be a revelation. But if you run through the same routine every day, being calm and composed will become who you are.

2. Say no.

Nearly every teacher would benefit by using more of this two-letter word. If fact, if you don’t say no regularly, chances are that you’re overworked and near the end of your rope.

Now, it’s important to mention that I don’t just mean saying no to taking on extra responsibilities or joining another committee.

You may also need to say no to gossip, procrastination, micromanagement, busywork, and commiserating with negative colleagues.

Saying no can feel awkward or uncomfortable at first, especially if you have to tell someone face to face. But once you take a stand, you’ll be shocked at how much time you have to focus on what really matters.

You’ll be shocked at how much better you feel and how favorably your students respond to you.

The truth is, if you want to love your job, and be most effective, you must learn to say no often.

3. Accept.

So many teachers get worked up over things they have no control over—like new policies, programs, curriculum, etc. But why do this to yourself?

When something new comes down the pipe, it’s far better and less stressful to accept it straightaway and then turn your thoughts to how you can make it work for you.

You don’t have the time, nor can you afford the mental energy or anguish, to ruminate, complain, or become anxious over anything that has been decided by someone above your pay grade.

To do otherwise is unhealthy and self-sabotage.

I’ve found over the years that I can take just about anything and make it my own, find a workaround, or, if it isn’t something I absolutely have to do, ignore it altogether.

4. Stop convincing.

Teachers who struggle with unruly behavior, disrespect, poor listening, and a chaotic room environment tend to rely on their ability to convince students to behave.

Which, even if you’re blessed with natural charisma and a silver tongue, is a losing proposition.

Besides being ineffective, trying to counsel, question, scold, guilt, coax, manipulate, persuade, or otherwise find the perfect words to get students to behave is incredibly burdensome and the most stressful strategy you can use.

Instead, lean exclusively on your classroom management plan.

Let it do the dirty work for you. So many wonderful things happen when you simply allow it to fulfill its intended purpose.

Not the least of which is your peace of mind.

5. Shift responsibility.

One thing nearly all stressed-out teachers have in common is that they willingly, eagerly even, take on what are—or should be—their students’ responsibilities.

After teaching a directed lesson, they fail to shift full responsibility for actually doing the work (independent practice) to their class. Instead, they disrupt the learning process by reteaching what they just taught minutes before.

They interrupt with reminders, clues, and suggestions. They rush to the side of every student who shows the least bit of struggle.

They don’t allow their students to wrestle with the material, build academic stamina, or draw their own conclusions. They think that giving and giving and giving is what good teaching looks like.

But it’s not.

Micromanaging, coddling, and over-helping very effectively produces learned helplessness. It dissuades listening and encourages dependence on you.

It creates a room full of needy, grabby students that make you want to run screaming for the parking lot.

You Can Do It

You can’t be an effective teacher if you’re laden with stress.

It shortens your patience, mars your judgment, and weakens your ability to build influential relationships with your students.

It also brings tense, negative energy into your classroom that you can’t feel, but that visitors experience the moment they walk through your door.

No matter who you are or where you teach, the simple changes above can help you eliminate stress from your teaching life.

But it does take discipline. It takes forethought and commitment. It takes determination and the will to swim against the tide of what everyone else seems to be doing.

But you can do it.

The journey begins with one small, daily decision.

by  on August 12, 2017





Meher se Qeher tak Meher se Qeher tak

This is not the first time anything is written, spoken, or shown regarding domestic violence; and sadly but true, may not be the last either. Media professionals, social workers, artists, civil society and any other category that I may be missing out, have been talking about this ever since we started recording time, perhaps.

Today, in this modern 21st century, age of science and technology, we are still standing on square one, from where we started ages ago. Today we talk about empowerment, education, sophistication, but in reality we are no near to being anything said above, than the apes, man is said to have evolved from.

Stating that is just not enough. We must strive to understand domestic violence in its empirical sense; otherwise the dust under the carpet will always remain.

Domestic abuse that includes physical violence is called domestic violence, which…

View original post 885 more words

Questions of Life

Today as I stand and reflect, millions of questions swarm in front of my eyes like images. Images from the past, images from the future, images questioning the very existence of my life, the purpose.

People come and go.

Feelings change.

Attitudes are confusing.

And eventually, what is left behind, is Me for Myself.






Life is hard, and it’s not easy to cope up with it and certain attitudes doesn’t make things any easier.

We all have problems in our lives. Although, it may seem that the next person is more happy than you, you don’t know their side of the story.  Every living being on this planet is fighting a battle on their own.

Don’t make someone’s battle harder than it already it. We should not dump our problems on other people in hopes of finding a way out. Your attitude towards the problem, is what is causing more problems.

This is how relations go down the drain. First you are friends, then good friends. Then a problem arise, and instead of finding a solution through collaboration, you start the blame game.

Misunderstandings grow taller than love.

Distances increase.

Care, love become meaningless.

Relations die a brutal death.




You looked at me

Our eyes met

My heart pounded

I lowered my eyes


A dream seen

A promise made


Under the sun

On the roof top

You asked

Yes or no

I looked at you

Our eyes met

I lowered my gaze

My answer



You stared at me

Your promise

To stay by my side

To protect me

To love me

To take care of me



You lived your promise

I couldn’t make mine

Couldn’t stay by your side



Love is there

Always will be

We are there

Not to be sure

Affection will remain

Promise lies in vain

Life is unpredictable


A tomorrow is gained

Or a yesterday lost

Today is here

Or maybe not

Life will end

Nothing remains

Empty promises

Losing affection

Love is all that remains… 



LIFE is hard

Life is beautiful

Life is unpredictable

Life is but a constant hope


The days we spend thinking

The nights we employed planning

Comes to an end

Nothing is as simple as it seems



We are puppets of clay

Dancing to the sounds of fate

No soul to own

No decisions to make

No promises to keep


Cannot stop something from happening

Cannot make something happen

Can only wish

Can only dream


No struggle is our own

No battle can be won


Yet Life is learning

Life is fighting

Life is anticipation

Life is faith


Life is me

Life is YOU !!


The Hanging Of Afzal Guru Is A Stain On India’s Democracy


Despite gaping holes in the case against Afzal Guru, all India’s institutions played a part in putting a Kashmiri ‘terrorist’ to death.

Spring announced itself in Delhi on Saturday. The sun was out, and the law took its course. Just before breakfast, the government of India secretly hanged Afzal Guru, prime accused in the attack on parliament in December 2001, and interred his body in Delhi’s Tihar jail where he had been in solitary confinement for 12 years. Guru’s wife and son were not informed. “The authorities intimated the family through speed post and registered post,” the home secretary told the press, “the director general of the Jammu and Kashmir [J&K] police has been told to check whether they got it or not”. No big deal, they’re only the family of yet another Kashmiri terrorist.

In a moment of rare unity the Indian nation, or at least its major political parties – Congress, the Bharatiya Janata party and the Communist party of India (Marxist) – came together as one (barring a few squabbles about “delay” and “timing”) to celebrate the triumph of the rule of law. Live broadcasts from TV studios, with their usual cocktail of papal passion and a delicate grip on facts, crowed about the “victory of democracy”. Rightwing Hindu nationalists distributed sweets to celebrate the hanging, and beat up Kashmiris (paying special attention to the girls) who had gathered in Delhi to protest. Even though Guru was dead and gone, the commentators in the studios and the thugs on the streets seemed, like cowards who hunt in packs, to need each other to keep their courage up. Perhaps because, deep inside, themselves they knew they had colluded in doing something terribly wrong.

What are the facts? On 13 December 2001 five armed men drove through the gates of the Indian parliament in a car fitted out with a bomb. When challenged they jumped out of the car and opened fire, killing eight security personnel and a gardener. In the firefight that followed, all five attackers were killed. In one of the many versions of the confessions he was forced to make in police custody, Guru identified the men as Mohammed, Rana, Raja, Hamza and Haider.

That’s all we know about them. They don’t even have second names. LK Advani, then home minister in the BJP government, said they “looked like Pakistanis”. (He should know what Pakistanis look like right? Being a Sindhi himself.) Based only on Guru’s custodial confession (which the supreme court subsequently set aside, citing “lapses” and “violations of procedural safeguards”) the government recalled its ambassador from Pakistan and mobilised half a million soldiers on the Pakistan border. There was talk of nuclear war. Foreign embassies issued travel advisories and evacuated their staff from Delhi. The standoff lasted months and cost India thousands of crores – millions of pounds.

Within 24 hours, the Delhi Police Special Cell (notorious for its fake “encounter” killings, where suspected terrorists are targeted in extrajudicial attacks) claimed it had cracked the case. On 15 December it arrested the “mastermind”, Professor SAR Geelani, in Delhi, and Showkat Guru and his cousin Afzal Guru in Srinagar, Kashmir. Subsequently, they arrested Afsan Guru, Showkat’s wife. The Indian media enthusiastically disseminated the police version.

These were some of the headlines: “Delhi university lecturer was terror plan hub”, “Varsity don guided fidayeen”, “Don lectured on terror in free time.” Zee TV, a national network, broadcast a “docudrama” called December 13, a recreation that claimed to be the “truth based on the police charge sheet”. (If the police version is the truth, why have courts?) The then prime minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and Advani publicly applauded the film. The supreme court refused to postpone the screening, saying that the media would not influence judges. It was broadcast only a few days before the fast-track court sentenced Geelani and Afzal and Showkat Guru to death. Subsequently the high court acquitted Geelani and Afsan Guru. The supreme court upheld the acquittal. But in its 5 August 2005 judgment it gave Afzal Guru three life sentences and a double death sentence.

The BJP called for an immediate execution. One of its election slogans was “Desh abhi sharminda hai, Afzal abhibhi zinda hai”, which means (in stirring rhyme), “Our nation is ashamed because Afzal is still alive”. In order to blunt the murmurs that had begun to surface, a fresh media campaign began. Chandan Mitra, now a BJP MP, then editor of the Pioneer newspaper, wrote: “Afzal Guru was one of the terrorists who stormed parliament house on 13 December 2001. He was the first to open fire on security personnel, apparently killing three of the six who died.” Even the police charge sheet did not accuse Afzal of that.

The supreme court judgment acknowledged the evidence was circumstantial: “As is the case with most conspiracies, there is and could be no evidence amounting to criminal conspiracy.” But then, shockingly, it went on to say: “The incident, which resulted in heavy casualties, had shaken the entire nation, and the collective conscience of society will only be satisfied if capital punishment is awarded to the offender.”

Who crafted our collective conscience on the parliament attack case? Could it have been the facts we gleaned in the papers? The films we saw on TV? Before celebrating the rule of law, let’s take a look at what happened.

The people who are celebrating the victory of the rule of law argue that the very fact that the Indian courts acquitted Geelani and convicted Afzal proves that the trial was free and fair. Was it?

The trial in the fast-track court began in May 2002. The world was still convulsed by post 9/11 frenzy. The US government was gloating prematurely over its “victory” in Afghanistan. In the state of Gujarat, the massacre of Muslims by Hindu goon squads, helped along by the police and the state government machinery that had begun in late February, was still going on sporadically. The air was charged with communal hatred. And in the parliament attack case the law was taking its own course.

At the most crucial stage of a criminal case, when evidence is presented, when witnesses are cross-examined, when the foundations of the argument are laid – in the high court and supreme court you can only argue points of law, you cannot introduce new evidence – Afzal Guru, locked in a high-security solitary cell, had no lawyer. The court-appointed junior lawyer did not visit his client even once in jail, he did not summon any witnesses in Guru’s defence, and he did not cross-examine the prosecution witnesses. The judge expressed his inability to do anything about the situation.

Even so, from the word go the case fell apart. A few examples out of many: The two most incriminating pieces of evidence against Guru were a cellphone and a laptop confiscated at the time of arrest. They were not sealed, as evidence is required to be. During the trial it emerged that the hard disk of the laptop had been accessed after the arrest.

It only contained the fake home ministry passes and the fake identity cards that the “terrorists” used to access parliament – and a Zee TV video clip of parliament house. So according to the police, Guru had deleted all the information except the most incriminating bits. The police witness said he sold the crucial sim card that connected all the accused in the case to one another to Guru on 4 December 2001. But the prosecution’s own call records showed the sim was actually operational from 6 November 2001.

How did the police get to Afzal? They said that Geelani led them to him. But the court records show that the message to arrest Afzal went out before they picked up Geelani. The high court called this a “material contradiction” but left it at that.

The arrest memos were signed by Bismillah, Geelani’s brother, in Delhi. The seizure memos were signed by two men from the J&K police, one of them an old tormentor from Afzal’s past as a surrendered “militant”.

It goes on and on, this pile up of lies and fabricated evidence. The courts note them, but for their pains the police get no more than a gentle rap on their knuckles. Nothing more.

Anyone who was really interested in solving the mystery of the parliament attack would have followed the dense trail of evidence on offer. No one did, thereby ensuring the real authors of the conspiracy will remain unidentified and uninvestigated.

The real story and the tragedy of what happened to Guru is too immense to be contained in a courtroom. The real story would lead us to the Kashmir valley, that potential nuclear flashpoint, and the most densely militarised zone in the world, where half a million Indian soldiers (one to every four civilians) and a maze of army camps and torture chambers that would put Abu Ghraib in the shade are bringing secularism and democracy to the Kashmiri people. Since 1990, when the struggle for self-determination became militant, 68,000 people have died, 10,000 have disappeared, and at least 100,000 have been tortured.

What sets Guru’s killing apart is that, unlike those tens of thousands who died in prison cells, his life and death were played out in the blinding light of day in which all the institutions of Indian democracy played their part in putting him to death.

Now he has been hanged, I hope our collective conscience has been satisfied. Or is our cup of blood still only half full?


This article is written by a well known Indian journalist Arundhati Roy and published in the Guardian UK. 
Arundhati Roy was one of the major players in the movement against the verdict given to Afzal Guru. Her stance was simple “every accused has a right to a fair trail and everyone is innocent until proven gulity.”

She was right on the point that Afzal Guru was denied justice. He was not given a fair trail, which everyone in the international community expect from a large democracy like India. 

This case has raisen quite a lot of questions, especially on the justice system of India and the vote of majority.

Does the majority have a right to lead an innocent man to the gallows ?
What do you mean by ‘collective conscience’ ?
And by the way do you even know who is responsible for building of this so-called collective conscience ?

Sorry to say this cannot be termed as “The Victory of Democracy”