Discipline for Smart People    

While strolling and listening to the following story, I requested the storyteller send it to me so that I could share it using her own words. For obvious reasons, the author of the letter requested anonymity.

—-

After six years of using the Raise Responsibility System in our home, we had an amazing incident with our fifteen-and a-half-year-old son.

We live on a very large piece of property and my husband was preparing our son for driving by allowing him to drive the firewood truck from one area to another under his guidance and supervision. He would also allow him to move our vehicles around in the driveway. The expectation was always the same. This was a privilege and only possible when my husband was in the vehicle. One day while we were at work, my son decided to drive the car up and down the driveway. Of course, the neighbors reported this to us the moment we arrived home. We were very disappointed. My husband grounded him for two weeks.

My son came to me and said, “I thought we didn’t handle things this way anymore? Being grounded has nothing to do with what I did and I won’t learn anything from it. I think that I shouldn’t be allowed to get my learners permit on my birthday. I should have to wait an extra month. I was not responsible about driving and the consequence should be related to that.”

I told him that this was between him and his dad and that he would have to discuss it with him.

They both agreed that this was a more acceptable solution. His birthday was five months away. When his birthday arrived, he did not mention his learner’s permit. One month later he announced that it was time to go to the licensing office.

The best part of this story is that he assumed full responsibility for his behavior. We did not have to suffer through two weeks of grounding and he never drove the car again unattended.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: August 30, 2008: 3:02 pm: By Marvin Marshall

Everett McKinley Dirksen (1896 - 1969) was a U.S. Congressman and Senator from Illinois. As a Senate leader he played a highly visible role in the politics of the 1960s. He helped write the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and played the decisive role in its passage. The Dirksen Senate Office Building was named after him.

One of my favorite quotes is attributed to Everett Dirksen, viz., “I am a man of principle and my first principle is the ability to change my mind.”

So it is with me when I decided to emphasize “discipline” in my newsletters. A few comments influenced me to return to my original emphasis on “responsibility”:

1) Harry Wong, who reminded me that my mission is to promote responsibility.

2) Steve Sroka, who said to me, “Responsibility connotes action from INSIDE, and discipline usually connotes someone else’s action to someone else—from the OUTSIDE .”

3) Kerry Weisner’s approach that NEVER refers to “DISCIPLINE.” Rather, she thinks of the hierarchy of the RAISE RESPONSIBILITY SYSTEM (Part III of the Discipline Without Stress Teaching Model) as an OPPORTUNITY for young people to have a reference or rubric for making decisions in life

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: August 29, 2008: 3:24 pm: By Marvin Marshall

Positive Behavior(al) Interventions and Supports (PBIS) or just Positive Behavior Support (PBS) was established by the Office of Special Education Programs in the U.S. Department of Education. The approach is behaviorally based in that it is a classic use of B.F. Skinner’s positive reinforcement of operant conditioning. The program was developed as an alternative to aversive interventions that were used with students with severe disabilities who engaged in extreme forms of self-injury and aggression. The approach rests on the idea that these students need something tangible to change behavior.

Positive Behavior Support treats the acquisition and use of social-behavioral skills in much the same way we would academic skills. However, academic skills deal with the cognitive domain, whereas behavior has to do with the affective domain—those factors which pertain to feelings and emotions.

A basic rationale of PBS is that it is necessary to understand the “why” of a behavioral problem in order to “fix’ the behavior. However, it is nearly impossible to articulate with certainty the underlying reasons for behavior. And even more important, although finding the rationale or reason for a behavior may be interesting, it has no effect on changing the behavior.

My personal ex[eriences attests to this little acknowledged fact. I attended speech classes all the way through elementary, junior high, and high school. When I graduated high school, I still had a severe stutter. Although much research and study gave me great insight into the cause of my behavior, it had absolutely nothing to do with “fixing my problem.” In order to change my behavior, it was necessary for my brain to establish new neural patterns. Although at the time I did not know how the brain operates, I did know that in order to change behavior, it would be necessary to participate and experience new behavior patterns in order to replace my current pattern. In college, therefore, I decided to participate in new experiences such as impromptu and extemporaneous speaking, debating, and radio broadcasting.

The major point here is that when you focus on attempting to understand the reason that prompted the behavior, you are focusing on the past and simply revisiting memories. The more you stay in the past, the more you avoid working in the present. The past cannot be changed. It is useless to water last year’s crops. Dr. William Glasser put it succinctly: “We do not need to find the pothole that ambushed the car in order to align the front end.”

The ground on which PBS rests is faulty—and sooner or later the structure will topple.

According to the developers of PBS, the most impressive gains in reducing challenging behavior have occurred with students who have severe intellectual disabilities. It seems to me that this is another case of both the tail wagging the dog and of tunnel vision. When I was working in the dean of boys’ office in a large urban high school, I dealt solely with behavioral problems. The position could easily give one a policeman’s viewpoint. Are ALL students sent to the office for disciplinary purposes? Hardly! But that was the only type of student I dealt with. In contrast, when I moved to an even larger high school (3,200 students) in a different district as assistant principal of supervision and control, I dealt with the student government leaders, athletes, as well as with students whose behaviors needed attention. I, therefore, had a more realistic perception of the entire student body.

For the advocates of PBS to impose a system on an entire school—which they are trying to do—in order to help a few seems to me hardly justifiable.

Success with special education students and students of lower intellectual abilities has more to do with motivation to learn and using procedures in a structured environment than giving rewards for desired behavior. See Special Education.

An integral part of the PBS is based on schools’ developing rules. But rules are meant to control—not inspire. Establishing rules to have teachers reward students is counterproductive to the goals of the system—a critical factor the developers of the approach do not realize. See Rules.

Rewards aim at obedience. They do not foster values of character education such as responsibility, integrity, honesty, empathy, or perseverance. By rewarding kids with something youngsters value (candy, stickers, prizes, etc.), we simply reinforce their childish values. In the process, we lose opportunities to pass on our values. What we really should be doing is fostering that values that promote responsible behavior, bring long-term satisfaction, and promote civic characteristics that can last a lifetime.

PBS is based on the “critical importance of consistency among people.” This is an impossible task, if for no other reasons that there cannot be consistency in how people perceive. People differ in a myriad of ways. A focus on consistency fosters the factory approach of the 19th and 20th centuries—certainly not one for the 21st century where success is increasingly based on individual creativity and personal responsibility.

A major concern is that decision-making is team-based. It is impractical to the point of being impossible to have a team respond to every behavior. Most importantly a “one size fits all” approach is totally unfair. With some students an askance look stops inappropriate behavior; others need to feel the heat before they see the light.

PBS is based on “empirical support” or evidence of effectiveness. The aphorism is appropriate here. “Those things that count can’t be counted, and those things that can be counted don’t count.” How can one quantify perseverance, honesty, integrity, caring, desire, positive self-talk, and other factors that make for a responsible and successful citizenry?

The developers of PBS state that it may take a school 3 - 5 years to fully implement. A person wonders, with the turnover of so many principals and teachers in so many schools these days, how practical this approach is—especially when an approach exists which can find immediate results and have long-lasting changes.

WHAT SHOULD A SCHOOL DO IF PBS IS MANDATED? The first step would be to present a better approach and ask for a waiver. The case would be presented by asking whether the district is willing to allow the school to try something different that the school believes will reach the objectives of PBS without using the PBS approach.

FOR AN INDIVIDUAL TEACHER WHO HAS THE APPROACH MANDATED, have a class meeting. Put the problem on the table and let the students determine the criteria to be used for the reward, and then have the students choose on a rotating basis which students will do the rewarding. In all of my studies of PBS, I have not seen anything that mandates the TEACHER to do the rewarding.

The future of this approach is destined to be short-lived if for no other reason that it is imposed top-down and, thereby, deprives professionals of their professional judgments.

Two final thoughts: (1) Experience shows that rewards punish those who believe they have deserved the reward but were not rewarded. (2) Rewards change motivation so that students soon start competing to see who receives the most number of rewards.

PBS is another case of using a misguided approach based on external agents to promote responsible behavior—which is always an internal decision.

For those interested in a personal experience and a quicker, more effective approach to promote responsible behavior and learning, download the following article to read at your convenience:
A Letter Worth Reading.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: August 17, 2008: 11:03 pm: By Marvin Marshall

The following is from the Resource Guide described at In-House Package.

The ideas are described in more detail in the book, “DISCIPLINE WITHOUT STRESS, PUNISHMENTS OR REWARDS; How Teachers and Parents Promote Responsibility & Learning at http://www.DisciplineWithoutStress.com.

GUIDED CHOICES

Guided Choices are used when a student has already acknowledged level B behavior and disrupts the lesson again.

The most effective approach is to ELICIT a consequence or procedure to help the student help himself to avoid future unacceptable behavior. This should be done in private by stating, “What you have done is not on an acceptable level.” Then ask, “What do you suggest we do about it?” Be ready to ask, “What else?” “What else?” “What else?” until what the student says is acceptable and will assist the student in not repeating the behavior.

The advantages of ELICITING the consequence are multiple:

• 1. An adversarial relationship is avoided,
• 2. The student has ownership in the decision,
• 3. Victimhood thinking is not encouraged because the student is empowered—rather than overpowered, and
• 4. The student has developed a plan to avoid repetition of the inappropriate behavior.

When talking with the student in private may not be immediately practical, one of the forms can be used. (K-1 teachers can have the student draw the situation.)

When handing the form to the student, give the student choices. Three (3) choices are more effective than two because any sense of coercion is eliminated with a third choice.

Quietly ask, for example,
—Would you prefer to complete the activity in your seat,
—at the rear of the room,
—or in the office?

The teacher controls the situation using this approach because the teacher is asking the question(s), and as long as the student has a choice, dignity is preserved and confrontation is avoided.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: : 2:48 pm: By Marvin Marshall

The following was post by Kerry at the mailring.

I usually post the announcement questions that our school uses each day. Originally,  when we did a book study of Discipline Without Stress, we decided to change the format of our daily announcements to make them more in line with the DWS philosophy.

Instead of TELLING kids things like, “Don’t run on the pavement,” we decided we’d be more effective if we asked a question of the students in order to get them to do their own thinking. Nowadays, we might ask, “Why is it a smart idea to walk rather than to run on the pavement leading to the playground?”

We use these announcements/questions to deal with problems in the school, to review school-wide procedures, and to do some character education. We also use them for acknowledgments.

Each day we have one question and generally most teachers take a minute or two to discuss the question after the announcements are over.

Over the years we have built a bank of questions that we repeat each year, and we continue to add more.

Originally, adults did the announcements, but for a few years now our grade sixes have been taking turns at the mike. We have four questions a week, except for Mondays when we have our regular school assembly.

More of Kerry’s posts are availabie at her blog.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: July 31, 2008: 7:28 am: By Marvin Marshall

When students are standing around watching bullying behavior, they become accomplices. The bully wants to show off. A person on Level D of the social development hierarchy—one who understands that democracy and responsibility are inseparable—will TAKE THE INITIATIVE in an attempt to disperse the crowd and remove a prime motivational factor for the bully.

How do you get people to WANT to take the initiative to act responsibly? I believe it’s done by understanding the relationship between the brain and the body—by communicating ideas so that positive emotions kick in. Only by tapping into positive emotions will young people feel that they WANT to do the right thing simply because it’s the right thing to do—regardless of peer influence. It is through positive emotions that young people WANT to behave responsibly and WANT to put forth effort to learn because they understand that doing so is in their own best interests—in addition to the best interests of others. This is a description of Level D motivation on the hierarchy of personal and social development referred to above.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: July 8, 2008: 8:21 am: By Marvin Marshall

To be most effective, communicate not only to prompt thinking but to also prompt good feelings. This is especially the case when you would like to put a stop to irresponsible behavior—such as bullying. The approach described below was first posted at the mailring by Joy Widmann from Robert Redmond, a 4th grade teacher.

Explain the MOTIVATION of those students whose behavior is on Level B of the levels of social development—those who boss and bully others.

Use a ruler or a meter stick (yard stick in the U.S.A.) to demonstrate a teeter-totter (see-saw). Hold it flat, parallel to the floor, and describe that this is how it looks when people are balanced with themselves and with others—when they are making responsible choices.

However, when one person starts to pick on another person, the teeter-totter gets out of balance. The person who is picked on starts to feel as if he/she is “lower” than the other person. But, in reality, the bully who forces the tilt is actually the one who is out of balance and feeling bad about her/himself. (Tilt the teeter-totter out of balance to show this.)

The bullying behavior is actually an attempt to pull the other person down to the bully’s level–to try to bring things back into balance from the bully’s perspective. (Balance the teeter-totter by bringing the higher side down.)

People should see the bully as someone who is having a bad day or feeling bad for some reason. Challenge students to keep this in mind as they decide how to respond to bullying behavior.

With younger kids, prompt them to say, “Sorry you are having a bad day.” The usual result is that the bully is left speechless. Many times the choice is simply to recognize what is going on and walk away, realizing that the one with the problem is the bully.

Having youngsters understand that bullying behavior indicates that the bully is “out of balance” is empowering and very liberating.

The discussion also opens the eyes of the bully. No one wants to be known as someone who has problems. These students usually have never thought about their own behavior in this way.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: July 7, 2008: 7:51 am: By Marvin Marshall

Dad, can I speak to you about something?” asked Tom.

“Let me guess. You want to borrow the car?” his dad joked.

“No, it’s nothing like that. It’s about Jim and something that happened at school today.”

“Isn’t Jim that kid on the track team with you?”

“Yeah.”

“You two are pretty good friends, aren’t you?”

“Well, that’s what I want to talk to you about. You see, there’s another guy on the team named Eric who got into a fight with Jim after practice. I tried to break it up, but the coach pulled all three of us aside. I told the coach that I was only trying to keep the peace, but then I defended Jim.”

Suddenly Tom was quiet.

“Okay, so what happened next?” prompted his dad.

“I found out later from some other guys on the team that Jim has been bullying Eric for a long time and that today Eric just snapped. They told me about all kinds of rotten things Jim had done when I wasn’t around. Dad, I feel like such a jerk for sticking up for him. I feel like I don’t even know who he is.”

“Well, don’t be so hard on yourself. We all make mistakes. Yours was sticking up for someone without knowing all the facts.”

“You can say that again,” said Tom.

“But the real lesson here has more to do with friendship than anything else,” said Tom’s dad.

“It does?”

“Absolutely. It would be easy to walk away. But friends don’t let each other down. You’ve got to tell Jim that you are disappointed in him.”

“I doubt that he’ll care,” mumbled Tom.

“I disagree,” said his dad. “Jim wanted you to see only the good side of him and that’s why you never knew about the bullying. Since he wants your approval, let him know that you expect more from him. If you do that, he’ll come to expect more from himself. And once that happens, he’ll change and be the kind of friend you won’t mind sticking up for.”

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: June 26, 2008: 11:35 am: By Marvin Marshall

Until the 1960’s, school books were replete with vocabulary words like integrity, industry, work, diligence, perseverance, self-reliance, self-examination, honesty, character, and responsibility. There was a glorification of hard work and an emphasis on education and self-discipline.

Assuming that textbooks have an influence on curriculum and instruction and that they, therefore, have an effect on children’s behavior and character, perhaps it is time to re-examine the contents of our school books as well as the vocabulary we use.

In his classic book, “1984,” George Orwell demonstrated the power of words with the example of the term “freedom.” If there were no such term, how would the concept be imagined, envisioned, and communicated? When we use the word in conversations with the young, we teach this concept of freedom and the values the word represents.

As an aside, this is the reason that the hierarchy of the Raise Responsibility System uses “anarchy,” “bossing/bullying” (both unacceptable levels), and “cooperation/conformity,” (external motivation) and “democracy” (internal motivation) as the vocabulary. Democracy and responsibility are inseparable and responsibility is the foundational characteristic in any character education approach.

Regularly using vocabulary that represents the values we wish to teach would be so much more effective than so many “popular” character education programs of external approaches catching them doing something good.

I am a graduate of Hollywood High School in Hollywood, California. I recall walking daily by the school’s marquee and reading “ACHIEVE THE HONORABLE.” I recently drove by the school and was truly disappointed that the motto was no longer posted. It, too, had gone the way of missed opportunities to foster character development.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: June 13, 2008: 1:21 pm: By Marvin Marshall

Kerry Weisner, the writer of Discipline Answers, notes that the only thing that she has often seen schools do with the Virtue Project that would not fit with the Discipline Without Stress approach is rewarding students for displaying various virtues—in other words, using the old “catch them being good” behaviour modification ploy.

As an example, I have noticed many schools offer raffle tickets to students who display kindness during “Kindness Month” or who are helpful during “Helpfulness Month,” thereby unwittingly encouraging operation on Level C. To me, it seems that such schools are missing out on a wonderful opportunity to help young people become aware of the benefits of operating on the highest level of all—Level D—the level at which a person feels intrinsically satisfied, simply as a natural result of having offered genuine kindness or help to others.

The levels referred to are explained at the link to the hierarchy.

 Print This Post
Posted In: Promoting Responsibility On: June 12, 2008: 2:04 pm: By Marvin Marshall