david

 code code __ Chapter 3: How Do I Recognize and Deal with Atypical Behavior That Is Neurological-Based? __ This chapter does an excellent job of making sure that students who have neurological-based behavioral problems (NBB) are viewed as people, not just as troublesome students to be dealt with, or cases to be studied. “Real people struggling for success” is a term used at the very beginning of the chapter to describe students who deal with NBB. A list breaking down the different effects of NBB on page 44 was particularly shocking, immediately and sharply emphasizing the point that neurological-based issues must be taken very seriously in students of all ages. Childhood mental health concerns being termed “a plague” in that list is backed up by dramatic facts: 10% of students suffer from serious emotional disturbance; 3 to 5% of children have ADHD; two or more diseases in one child is not an uncommon occurrence; most disturbingly, suicide is a leading cause of death in both primary- and secondary-aged students. In adults, these figures would be noticeable, but in children they are cause for alarm. The breakdown of the different types of NBB is very thorough and continues the theme of identifying with the afflicted students as real people. Many mental and emotional diseases are well-known and easily identified with, but Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) might be hard for some new teachers to deal with. Trying to rationally and calmly deal with a student who is belligerent is difficult, but needs to be done to help that student through whatever episode they are in the middle of. The Rage Cycle is another extreme behavior that will be encountered, and may be even more difficult to handle than ODD. The important thing, Charles stresses, is to remain calm and professional to be able to help the student through their anger. Safety for everyone involved must be ensured, but it is important to work through the issue, and not try to stop it, so that the rage does not escalate even further. Behavior issues that are not based in anger or defiance can still be disruptive and harmful in the classroom, and detrimental to the individual exhibiting these behaviors. Some of these issues are very well-known, but Charles still goes through the different disorders and how the students afflicted by them need to be helped. His use of the scenarios to flesh out what he is stating in the text gives depth to what he is writing. Scenario Two, with Jimmy in a distracting kindergarten room, and Scenario Four, with Tay making noises in class and refusing to participate in other exercises, both show how students with NBB can easily be helped in unobtrusive, tactful ways. They did not have to be addressed in front of all of their classmates, they did not have to deal with a disciplinarian, and their behavior ultimately improved. Charles’ examples show how treating the students fairly, like real people, benefitted them. Many types of atypical behavior are known and studied by teachers, and thus can be handled more-or-less easily. Other behaviors are not as well studied, or are so extreme that they can be much more challenging to handle. Charles gives a straight-forward and thorough examination of these different behaviors and lists many ways to help students with those behaviors learn and be a part of the classroom despite their differences. He also offers insights into behaviors that are more extreme and difficult to deal with, and explains why those students need to be seen first as people with problems, not as students who cause trouble.

Chapter 6:Wongs: Responsibilities and Procedures

Reading about Wongs’ ideas on discipline is a relief. Much like Morrish’s views of “Real Discipline”, the Wongs teach that the Discipline theory of the past few decades has been sorely misguided. I call it a relief because even without ever teaching, I can see that the “democratic classroom” style of teaching would present major problems. To let students decide what the rules are is to invite unwise rules. I believe that their focus on defining clear responsibilities of

teachers and students is key. I found the lists of specific procedures to be very insightful. To

make good behavior automatic through routine leaves the teacher free to teach content, and it

leaves the student free to learn the content. Neither the student nor teacher need worry about

the daily routines after they are set. This is a relief!

Chapter 7: Jones: Keeping Students Responsibly Involved

I can relate to Jones’ idea of teaching the easy way. While reading of the various methods of discipline and teaching, I noticed that many of the demands of those methods would keep the teacher mired in too much prep work. Like the Wongs and Morrish, Jones method seems like it would work in the real world. The use of routines, keeping the students active, and more engaging teacher performance through body language makes this method usable and realistic. I plan on actually re-reading this section and eventually implementing it into my own teaching. Chapter 8: Glasser: Choice Theory and Quality Education Glasser’s “choice theory” seems a bit silly. How is it possible that a child who commits suicide is “working toward a goal”, the first of which is “survival”. Clearly, this does not apply.

Using this as an over-arching theory to explain all behavior simply does not work for me. Reflections on Chapters 10-13 of Building Classroom Discipline David Elkin Classroom Management EDUC 531P Holy Family University Dr. Williams 16 March 2011 Chapter 10: Marshall: Activating Internal Motivation and Raising Student Responsibility Marshall seems to espouse the various theories we have read so far, although he leans in the direction of the “democratic classroom” people. This is defined in his “hierarchy of social development”. I agree with the fact that internal motivation, or self responsibility, is a better goal than external motivation. Marshall does at least call the external motivation level acceptable, showing that he is realistic in expectations of students. Yes, we should all strive to be selfgoverned, but at the same time we live in a reality where laws are necessary. Chapter 11: Seganti: Teacher Leverage and Student Accountability Seganti is tough. His method of discipline leaves no room for misbehavior, negotiating, or anything bad! It is fantastic! So far this method is the only one that I think would work on me as a primary/secondary (even undergrad) student. I was a mild class clown, and a champion of negotiating. Even when disciplined, I would find a way out of it. By the end of high school, I had devised a way to not attend “homeroom” in the morning by having one teacher cover for me by calling another teacher and letting them know that I was there in another classroom even though I was not even at school yet. Yes, I was that good. Mr. Seganti’s method is the only one so far that would have tamed me. -- Impressive. I read every word of this chapter and loved it. I can’t think of any loop holes. This is fantastic! Chapter 12: Establish Personal Influence with Students Who Are Difficult to Manage Hingsberger has clearly never taught a class. It is possible that he never even attended school. Are we to believe that by “seeing things from the misbehaving student’s point of view” they will behave better? It sounds as if he is talking about mediating between people of differing viewpoints. He writes “It is usually a waste of time to try to get [the students] to see the right way of doing things.” Really? So when a student talks out of turn, disrupts class, is sarcastic or “smart” towards others, and is generally rude, Hingsberger wants us to see it from their perspective. This is utter poppycock. Right and wrong DO exist. We the teachers know which is which and it is our job to impose that on the students. 2+2=4. Student says, “I think it should be 5.” Teacher says, “oh, I guess we should agree to disagree, but I respect your point of view.” Even if the student has a medical condition such as ODD, ADHD, etc, this method is not the answer. The students must understand clearly what is expect of them. We can use medication, or other compensatory strategies to get there, but the standards for civility must be firmly in place. Covey’s “empathetic listening” is a style of communication, not a method of discipline. Yes it is true that one must “seek first to understand, then to be understood.” This is great advice for general communication in life. Let’s apply Morrish, or Wong, or Seganti to this maxim. “I the teacher understand that you the student are students, in need of rules, regulations, guidlines, guidance, knowledge, understanding, discipline, and all the other things that are necessary to become an adult. And I understand that I am the teacher, the adult, learned, wise, disciplined, a general good example of a civil human being, etc, therefore, you will do as told.” Ginott’s “congruent language” can also fit into methods of discipline as it is not one itself. Like Covey’s, it is a method of commuication that “confers dignity” upon the students by treating them as “social equals capable of making decisions”. I believe that this is a nice way to treat people, however rules must be in place and enforced along with this communication method lest the students use the lack of discipline to their advantage to find loop holes in the rules and bargain with the teacher. Really, it is strange to think that an adolescent with little experience, knowledge, or wisdom, could be an equal to a teacher. However one could read “social equal” as having to do with the simple communication between each other. That is fine if it is understood that the teacher is an adult, a step higher, than the students. Being so means that the teacher is an example to the students, and that the goal is for the students to strive to acquire the social skills to become an adult. By following the rules, and accepting discipline upon infraction of the rules, the students can show that they are becoming like adults. I find Ginott to be one of the better thinkers on the subject of communication. Ford’s “responsible thinking process” sounds nice, like it would work for anyone. But alas, it doesn’t work. I’m proof. The 6 questions he uses work until the last one, “What will happen if you disrupt again?” The consequence is obvious, the student will have to endure being asked those same questions. If the student is a smart-aleck, he will say exactly that. Pointing out the failure of these questions to everybody and flaunting it. “Neener neener, you can’t punish me, because you think punishment is asking me questions.” “Oh, and if I keep misbehaving, I will be sent to the responsible thinking classroom, Big Deal. [sarcasm]” I’m glad that we do not use this kind of correction in our correctional institutes. Criminals belong in jail. Misbehaving students belong in detention. This teaches the reality that there are consequences to actions. Everyone must accept that. It is a really hard pill to swallow, but a necessary one. Yes this method might work for many people if used very early. However, those people will understand that they can always bend the rules if necessary. How much does the IRS bend if you don’t pay your taxes? You can respond, “I was trying to pay my other bills”, all you want, but the reality is that you are going to jail-- well, unless you are a politician. Overall this chapter has shown techniques that seem to work with already well behaved students. I would like to be proven wrong by evidence of use in schools with poor behavior. So far, I am most impressed by the work of Craig Seganti. Chapter 13: Leading Experts Engender Respect and Civility in the Classroom. Before I read this chapter, my assumption to the answer of the title of this chapter is “by using the Golden Rule, and leading by example.” Let’s see if I’m right... Forni ○ “Respect for others and their opinions, consideration, courtesy, niceness, politeness, kindness, good manners, fairness, decency, concern for others, justice, tolerance, equality, sincerity, morality, honesty, awareness, trustworthiness, moderation, compassion, friendliness, helpfulness, good citizenship, abiding by rules.” There it is, the Golden Rule, and Jesus did it about 2000 years ago. Why do we have to keep reinventing the wheel? Borba talks about her concept of “moral intelligence” and how students will be better behaved as they gain it. Also she notes the importance of schools in teaching this through “... adults displaying those traits...”, AKA “leading by example.” My predictions came true, so what? Even though I am noticing that much of the advice is “common sense”, I have to keep reminding myself that it is still important to emphasize these things. Gossen writes about some virtues that she feels are in need of general improvement in “today’s society”. I like the idea that we should all work on the virtues that she lists, however I find that the premise behind most of them is misleading, unknown, or false. For example: I am a product of the “overabundance of media images of suffering that dull sensitivity”, I played countless hours of “shoot ‘em up” video games. Despite that, when I saw a person rip the head off of a chicken and let it run around headless (the chicken was the main course for dinner that night), I grew ill to my stomach, as I think anyone would. Sorry for the gross imagery. If Gossen’s premise were true, I would have thought nothing of the chicken, or possibly laughed and gained pleasure from watching the trauma. I also like the way that she deals with discipline problems in the classroom. Her 4 “R’s” of Respond, Review, Reflect, and make Right, seem to be helpful, although I think only for the primary grades. She spends too much class time fixing misbehavior.
 * the Golden **
 * Rule, **