“Why Do We Say ‘We’ When We Mean the Kid? A Teacher Explains the Habit”
The first time I noticed it in my own classroom, I was tying a four-year-old’s shoelaces. She was sitting on the rug, legs splayed out, and I was kneeling beside her, already late for our morning circle. “Okay, let’s get our shoes on,” I said. “We need to hurry up.” She looked at me, then down at her own two tiny feet, then back at me, her expression somewhere between confused and mildly offended. She didn’t say anything. But she didn’t move either.
It took me a second to realize what had happened. I had said “we” and “our,” but I meant her. I wasn’t putting on my shoes. I wasn’t in a hurry in the same way. I was the adult, already wearing my sensible slip-ons. Yet out of my mouth came this phantom collective: We need to get our shoes on.
I laughed it off at the time, but I started hearing it everywhere. At the doctor’s office, a nurse asking a six-year-old, “How are we feeling today?” At the supermarket, a dad crouching down to a toddler in the cart: “We don’t grab the cereal boxes, buddy.” At a friend’s house, a mother telling her son, “We need to go potty before we leave.” The child was the only one who would be using the toilet.
It’s such a normal way of speaking that most of us don’t notice we’re doing it. But once you start paying attention, it’s everywhere. And it’s worth asking: why do we say “we” when we mean the child? What is that we actually doing?
I think the first answer is the gentlest. Saying “we” is a way to soften a direct command. “Put on your shoes” is a demand. “We need to put on our shoes” sounds more like a shared situation. It turns an order into a fact of life. As if the shoes are just a thing that happens to both of us, not something I’m making you do. For a child who is learning to assert her own will, this can feel less confrontational. You’re not against each other. You’re both on the same side, facing the same task.
There’s also something about modeling an inner voice. Little kids don’t have an internal monologue yet. When they’re learning to regulate their own behavior, they hear our external voice and eventually internalize it. Saying “we need to wash our hands before snack” gives them the language they’ll later use on their own: I need to wash my hands before snack. It’s scaffolding, even if we’re not consciously building it.
But there’s another layer, and I only noticed it when I had my own son. He’s three, and I catch myself saying “we” constantly. Last week, he threw a block across the room and hit the lampshade. I said, “We don’t throw blocks, okay? We need to be gentle with our toys.” And I felt a strange shift in the sentence. It wasn’t just softening. It was also sharing the blame. By saying “we,” I was including myself in a behavior I had absolutely no intention of doing. I wasn’t going to throw blocks. But saying “we” made it feel less like an accusation. Less like “You did something wrong” and more like “This is how we do things here.”
That’s a different kind of “we.” It’s not about solidarity. It’s about establishing a norm. When a parent says “We don’t hit our sister,” they’re not really describing a joint activity. They’re saying, “In this family, hitting is not what we do.” It’s a statement of shared values. The child is being invited into that value, rather than being singled out as the offender.
For teachers, the “we” does a lot of heavy lifting in the classroom. I’ve used it to manage transitions: “We’re going to clean up our centers in five minutes.” I’ve used it to address a group while still holding one child accountable: “We need to remember to walk inside, not run.” It carries a sense of community. It says, We are all in this together, even when the adults are just standing there watching the kids walk.
But here’s the thing I’ve started to wonder about. Is the “we” always helpful? Because there are moments when it gets a little weird.
When my son is throwing a tantrum on the kitchen floor, and I say “We need to calm down,” who exactly is doing the calming? Not me. I’m the one trying to remain calm while a tiny person is screaming about a broken cracker. That “we” can feel a bit dishonest. And kids, especially around four or five, start to notice. They know they aren’t holding your hand through the potty trip. They know that last night they saw you eat a cookie after dinner, even though you said “We don’t have sweets before bed.” The plural can start to feel like the royal “we” – a way to make the adult’s rule sound more objective, more inevitable than just one person’s preference.
I once heard a child respond to a teacher who said, “We don’t tattle on our friends.” The child asked, “Are you tattling on me?” The teacher laughed, but the question wasn’t totally silly. The “we” had momentarily erased the power difference, but the child could feel the erasure. They knew it wasn’t true.
So what’s the alternative? I’m not suggesting we drop the “we” entirely. It’s a useful tool. But I’ve started making small adjustments, in the classroom and at home.
When it’s a true collaboration, I keep the “we.” For example, “We need to put away the toys before we can get out the paints.” That’s a real sequence we’re both participating in. Or “We need to wash our hands so we don’t get germs on the food.” That’s genuinely shared.
But when the action is clearly the child’s alone, I try to switch to a direct but neutral statement. Instead of “We need to put on our shoes,” I’ve been saying, “Your shoes need to go on your feet. Do you want to do it, or should I help?” That still gives a choice, without pretending I’m also doing it. Instead of “We don’t hit,” I say, “I won’t let you hit. Hitting hurts. Let’s find a different way to show you’re upset.” That’s more direct, but it also makes it clear where I stand.
The hardest part is catching myself. The “we” is so automatic. It’s baked into the way we talk to children, passed down from our own parents and teachers. I don’t think it’s harmful. I think it’s usually loving. It’s a way of lowering the ladder, so the child isn’t always on the bottom rung looking up at a giant.
But I also want my son to know that he is his own person. That when he makes a choice, it’s his. That “I” and “you” aren’t scary words. That it’s okay to say, “I don’t want to eat this,” or “You need to sit in your car seat,” without wrapping it in a shared fiction.
Yesterday, he was struggling with his seatbelt. He said, “We can’t do it.” And I realized he had picked up the habit from me. He meant I can’t do it. But he was already speaking the language of togetherness, even when alone.
I smiled and said, “You can do it. I’m right here.”
He clicked the buckle in. Then he said, “We did it.” I didn’t correct him. Maybe he knows something I’m still figuring out.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » “Why Do We Say ‘We’ When We Mean the Kid