Assertive Discipline: More than Names on the Board and Marbles in
Transcription
Assertive Discipline: More than Names on the Board and Marbles in
Assertive Discipline: More than Names on the Board and Marbles in a Jar Author(s): Lee Canter Reviewed work(s): Source: The Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 71, No. 1 (Sep., 1989), pp. 57-61 Published by: Phi Delta Kappa International Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20404058 . Accessed: 02/01/2012 13:10 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Phi Delta Kappa International is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Phi Delta Kappan. http://www.jstor.org Assertive More Board Discipline Than and Names on Marbles in the a Jar Mr. Canter explains the background of theprogram and addresses some of the issues that are frequently raised about Assertive Discipline. F .~~~~~~~~ . . . . . . . . BY LEE CANTER A BOUT A YEAR ago Iwas on an airline flight, seated next to a university profes sor. When he found out that I had developed the Assertive Discipline program, he said, "Oh, that's where all you do is write the kids' names on the board when they're bad and drop marbles in the jar when they'regood." The university professor's response disturbed me. For some time rye been concerned about a small percentage of educators - this professor apparently among them - who have interpreted my program in a way that makes behavior sound simplistic. More im management portant, rm concernedwith theirmisguidedemphasison providingonly negative consequenceswhen studentsmisbe- : ;:. ;-X ; S 0 : ; ; !t,. LEE CANTER is president of Lee Canter .,-:: & Associates, Santa Monica, Calif He is the ei e.. author of many books on behavior management and is the developer of theAssertive Dis-t.,.". cipline program. Illustrationby RobColvvnn . ,i0. ~ E P T E M BE R 1989 57 The key to Assertive Discipline is catching students being good - and letting them know that you like it. have. The key to dealing effectively with student behavior is not negative - but positive - consequences. To clarify my views for Kappan readers, I would like to explain the background of the program and address some of the issues that are often raisedaboutAssertive Discipline. I developed the program about 14 years I first became aware that ago, when teachers were not trained to deal with stu dent behavior. Teachers were taught such concepts as "Don't smile until Christmas" or "If your curriculum is good enough, you will have no behavior problems." Those concepts were out of step with the reality of student behavior in the 1970s. When I discovered this lack of train ing, I began to study how effective teach ers dealt with student behavior. I found that, above all, the master teachers were assertive; that is, they taught students how to behave. They established clear rules for the classroom, they commu nicated those rules to the students, and they taught the students how to follow them. These effective teachers had also mastered skills inpositive reinforcement, and they praised every student at least once a day. Finally, when students chose to break the rules, these teachers used firmandconsistentnegativeconsequences - but only as a last resort. It troubles me to find my work inter preted as suggesting that teachers need only provide negative consequences check marks or demerits - when stu dents misbehave. That interpretation is wrong. The key to Assertive Discipline is catching students being good: recog nizing and supporting them when they behave appropriately and letting them know you like it, day in and day out. THE DISCIPLINE PLAN It is vital for classroom teachers to have a systematic discipline plan that explains exactly what will happen when students choose to misbehave. By telling the stu dents at the beginning of the school year what the consequences will be, teachers insure that all students know what to ex pect in the classroom. Without a plan, teachers must choose an appropriate con sequence at the moment when a student misbehaves. They must stop the lesson, talk to the misbehaving student, and do whatever else the situation requires, while 25 to 30 students look on. That is not an effective way to teach - or to deal with misbehavior. "You're here to teach, Mr. Gooch. You must stop telling your students, 'That's for me to know and for you to find out.'" 58 PHI DELTA KAPPAN Most important, without a plan teach ers tend to be inconsistent. One day they may ignore students who are talking, yelling, or disrupting the class. The next day they may severely discipline students In addition, for the same behaviors. teachers may respond differently to stu eth dents from different socioeconomic, nic, or racial backgrounds. An effective discipline plan is applied fairly to all students. Every student who willfully disrupts the classroom and stops the teacher from teaching suffers the same consequence. And a written plan can be sent home to parents, who then know beforehand what the teacher's stan dards are and what will be done when students choose to misbehave. When a teacher calls a parent, there should be no surprises. MISBEHAVIOR AND CONSEQUENCES I suggest that a discipline plan include amaximum of five consequences for mis behavior, but teachers must choose con sequences with which they are comfort able. For example, the first time a stu dent breaks a rule, the student iswarned. The second infraction brings a 10-minute timeout; the third infraction, a 15-minute timeout. The fourth time a student breaks a rule, the teacher calls the parents; the fifth time, the student goes to the prin cipal. No teacher should have a plan that is not appropriate for his or her needs and that is not in the best interests of the stu dents. Most important, the consequences or phys should never be psychologically ically harmful to the students. Students should never be made to stand in front of the class as objects of ridicule or be degraded in any other way. Nor should that are in they be given consequences appropriate for their grade levels. I also feel strongly that corporal punishment should never be administered. There are more effective ways of dealing with stu dents than hitting them. Names and checks on the board are sometimes said to be essential to an As sertive Discipline program, but they are not. I originally suggested this particu lar practice because I had seen teachers interrupt their lessons tomake such nega students tive comments to misbehaving as, "You talked out again. I've had it. You're impossible. That's 20 minutes af ter school." Iwanted to eliminate the need to stop the lesson and issue reprimands. Writing a student's name on the board would warn the student in a calm, non degradingmanner. Itwould also provide a record-keepingsystem for the teacher. Unfortunately,someparentshavemis interpretedtheuse of names and checks on the board as a way of humiliating stu dents. I now suggest thatteachersinstead write an offending student'sname on a clipboard or in the roll book and say to the student,'You talkedout, you disrupt ed the class, you broke a rule. That's a warning. That's a check." In addition to parents, some teachers havemisinterpreted elements of theAs sertiveDiscipline program.The vastma jority of teachers - my staff and I have probably trainedclose to750,000 teach ers - have used the program Xhenever teachers want students to follow certain directions, they must teach the specific behaviors. to dramat ically increase their relianceon positive reinforcementand verbal praise. But a small percentageof teachershave inter First,whenever teacherswant students preted theprogramina negativemanner. There are several reasons for this. to follow certain directions, theymust First, Assertive Discipline has become a teachthe specificbehaviors.Teachers too generic term, likeXerox or Kleenex. A often assume that students know how numberof educatorsare now conducting they are expected to behave. Teachers firstneed to establish specific directions training in what they call Assertive Dis ciplinewithout teachingall thecompeten for each activity during the day - lec cies essential tomy program. For exam tures, small-groupwork, transitionsbe ple, I have heard reportsof teacherswho tween activities, and so forth. For each were taught that they had only to stand situation,teachersmust determinethe ex act behaviors they expect from the stu in front of their students, tell them that therewere rules and consequences, dis dents. For example, teachersmay want stu play a chart listing those rules and con sequences, and write the names of mis behaving studentson theboard.Thatwas it.Those teacherswere never introduced to theconcept thatpositive reinforcement is thekey to dealingwith students.Such programsare not in thebest interestsof students. Negative interpretations have also come fromburned-out,overwhelmed teachers who feel they do not get the support that they need from parents or adminis trators and who take out their frustrations on students.Assertive Discipline is not a negative program, but it can be misused by negative teachers. The answer is not to change the program, but to change the teachers. We need to train administra tors,mentor teachers, and staff devel opers to coach negative teachers in the use of positive reinforcement. If these teacherscannot become more positive, they should not be teaching. POSITIVE DISCIPLINE I recommend a three-step cycle of be haviormanagement to establish a posi tive discipline system. wrong with you?Get back towork.") In stead, teachersshould focuson those stu dentswho do follow the directions, re phrasing theoriginaldirectionsas a posi tive comment.For example, "Jasonwent back to his seat and got right to work." Third, if a studentis stillmisbehaving after a teacherhas taughtspecific direc tions and has used positive repetition, only thenshouldthe teacheruse thenega tive consequencesoutlined in his or her Assertive Discipline plan. As a general rule, a teachershouldn'tadministera dis ciplinary consequence to a studentuntil the teacher has reinforced at least two stu dents for the appropriatebehavior. Ef fective teachersare alwayspositive first. Focusing on negative behavior teaches students thatnegative behavior gets at tention, that the teacher is a negative per son, and that the classroom is a negative place. An effectivebehaviormanagementpro grammust be built on choice. Students must know beforehandwhat is expected of them in the classroom, what will hap pen if they choose to behave, and what will happen if they choose not to be have. Students learn self-discipline and responsiblebehaviorby beinggiven clear, consistent choices. They learn that their actions have an impact and that they themselves control the consequences. I wish teachers did not need to use negative consequences at all. I wish all ture, focusing theireyes on the lecturer, students came to school motivated to learn. Iwish all parents supportedteach clearing theirdesks of all materials ex ceptpaperandpencil, raisingtheirhands ers and administrators. But that's not the when theyhave questions or comments, realitytoday.Many childrendo not come and waiting to be called on before speak to school intrinsicallymotivated to be ing.Once teachershave determined the have. Their parentshave never takenthe specificbehaviorsfor each situation,they timeor don'thave theknowledgeor sklfls must teach the studentshow to follow the to teachthemhow tobehave.Given these directions.Theymust firststatethedirec circumstances, teachersneed to set firm tions and, with younger students,write and consistent limits in theirclassrooms. the behaviors on the board or on a flip However, those limitsmust be fair, and chart. Then theymust model the be the consequences must be seen as out haviors, ask the students to restate the comes of behaviors that students have directions, question the studentstomake chosen. sure theyunderstandthedirections, and Studentsneed teacherswho can create immediatelyengage the students in the classroom environmentsinwhich teach dents to stay in their seats during a lec activity tomake sure that they understand the directions. Second, after teaching the specific directions, teachers- especially at the elementary level - must use positive repetitionto reinforce the studentswhen they follow the directions. Typically, teachersgive directions to the students and thenfocusattentiononly on those stu dents who do not obey. ("Bobby,you didn'tgo back toyour seat.Teddy,what's ing and learning can take place. Every student has the right to a learning en vironment that is free from disruption. Students also need teacherswho help them learnhow to behave appropriately in school.Many studentswho are catego rized as behaviorproblemswould not be so labeled if their teachershad taught themhow tobehave appropriatelyin the classroom and had raised their self esteem. SEPTEMBER 1989 59 WHY ASSERTIVE DISCIPLINE? The average teacher never receives in-depth, competency-based training in managing thebehaviorof 30 students.No one teachesteachershow tokeep students in their seats longenough for teachers to make good use of the skills they learned in their education classes. Inmost in stances, behaviormanagement is taught througha smorgasbordapproach- a lit tle bit ofWilliam Glasser, a littlebit of Thomas Gordon, a little bit of Rudolf Dreikurs, a littlebit of Lee Canter. The A smorgasbord approach to class room management forces teachers to sink or swim. Too many sink. teachers are told to find an approach that works for them. Such an approach to trainingteachers inbehaviormanagement is analogous to a swimmingclass inwhich nonswimmers arebriefly introduced- without practice - to the crawl stroke, thebreast stroke, theback stroke,and the side stroke; then they are rowed to the middle of a lake, tossed overboard, and told to swim to shore, using whatever strokeworks for them. In effect, we're telling teachers to sink or swim, and too many teachers are sinking. The lack of ability tomanage student behavior is one of the key reasonswhy beginning teachersdrop out of teaching. Teachersmust be trained thoroughly in classroommanagement skills. It is not for them to know how to teach sufficient content. They will never get to the con tent unless they know how to create a positive environment inwhich students know how to behave. Assertive Discipline is not a cure-all. It is a startingpoint.Every teachershould also know how to use counseling skills, how to use group process skills, and how to help studentswith behavioraldeficits learn appropriateclassroom behaviors. Inaddition,classroommanagementmust be part of an educator'scontinuingpro fessionaldevelopment.Teachers routine ly attendworkshops, enroll in college courses, receive feedbackfrom adminis classroommanagement.2Research con ducted in school districts inCalifornia, Oregon, Ohio, andArizona has shown thatan overwhelmingmajority of teach ers believe thatAssertiveDiscipline helps to improve theclimate in the schools and the behavior of students.3 No one should be surprised that re search has verified the success of the program when teachers use the skills properly. Numerous research studies have shown that teachersneed to teach students the specific behaviors that they expect from them.Research also shows that student behavior improves when teachersuse positive reinforcementeffec tively and that thepairing of positive re inforcementwith consistentdisciplinary consequences effectively motivates stu dents to behave appropriately.4 Any behavior management program thatis taughtto teacherstodaymust have a solid foundationin research.Many so called "experts"advocate programs that are based solely on their own opinions regardingwhat constitutesa properclass roomenvironment. When pressed,many of theseexpertshave no researchvalidat ing their opinions or perceptions, and many of theirprogramshave never been validatedforeffectiveness inclassrooms. supportfrom thebuilding administrator. backinga teach Without an administrator er's efforts to improvebehaviormanage ment, without an administratorto coach and clinically supervise a teacher'sbe haviormanagement skills, that teacher is not going to receive the necessary feedbackand assistance tomaster those skills. Parental supportfor teachers'discipli nary efforts is equally important.Many teachersbecome frustratedand give up We when theydon'treceive such support. must trainteachersto guarantee the sup We can't afford to train educators in pro port of parentsby teaching teachershow grams based only on whim or untested to communicateeffectivelywith parents. theory. We have an obligation to insure In teacherftainingprograms,participants that any trainingprogram in behavior management be based solidly on tech are led to believe that today's parents will act as parents did in the past and give absolute support to the school. That is rarely the case. Today's teachers call par ents and are told, "He's your problem at school. You handle it. You're the profes sional. You take care of him. I don't know what to do. Leave me alone." niques that have been validated by re search and that have been shown towork in the classroom. Research has demonstrated that Asser tive Discipline works and that it isn't just a quick-fix solution. In school districts in Lennox, California, and Troy, Ohio, teachers who were RESEARCH AND ASSERTIVE DISCIPLINE Over the last several years, a number trained 10 years ago still use the program effectively.5 The program works because it is based on practices thateffective teachershave fol lowed instinctively for a long time. It's of dissertations,master's theses, and re searchprojectshave dealtwith Assertive not new to have rules in a classroom. It's Discipline. The results have consistent not new touse positive reinforcement.It's trators, and take part in regular inservice training to refine their teaching skills. ly shown that teachersdramatically im not new to have disciplinary conse Classroommanagementskillsdeserve the prove studentbehaviorwhen theyuse the quences. Teachers who are effective year after sameattention.Unfortunately,some edu skills as prescribed. Teachers who use Assertive Discipline reduce the frequen year take the basic Assertive Discipline cators view training in Assertive Dis cipline as a one-shot process; they attend a one-day workshop, and that's supposed to take care of their training needs for the rest of their careers. One day is not enough. It takes a great cy of disruptive behavior in their class competencies and mold them to their in rooms, gready reduce thenumberof stu dividual teaching styles. They may stop dents they refer to administrators,and using certain techniques,such as putting dramaticallyincreasetheirstudents'time marbles in ajar or writing names on the on-task.1 Other research has demonstrat board. That's fine. I don't want the lega to be - and cy of Assertive Discipline deal of effort and continuing training ed that student teachers trained inAsser tive Discipline are evaluated by their I don'twant teacherstobelieve tey have for a teachertomaster the skills of class roommanagement.A teacheralso needs master teachers as more effective in touse -names and checks on thieboard 60 PHIDELTA KAPPAN in a jar. I want teachers to or marbles learn that they have to take charge, ex plain theirexpectations,be positivewith students, and consistently employ both positive reinforcementandnegative con sequences.These are the skills thatform the basis of Assertive Discipline and of any effectiveprogramof classroomman agement. A 1. Linda H. Mandlebaum et al., "Assertive Dis Pro Behavior Management cipline: An Effective Journal, vol. 8,1983, gram," Behavioral Disorders pp. 258-64; Carl L. Fereira, "A Positive Approach to Assertive Discipline," Martinez (Calif.) Unified the Save Bfaby! to Response 'Integrating Of the the Children Second System' SchoolDistrict, ERICED 240 058,1983; andSam mie McCormack, "Students' Off-Task Behavior and Assertive Discipline" (Doctoral dissertation, Univer 1985). sity of Oregon, of Assertive Dis Effects Smith, The cipline Training on Student Teachers' Self Concept and Classroom Management Skills" (Doctoral dis of South Carolina, sertation, University 1983). 2. Susan L. Moffett et al., "Assertive Discipline," California School Board Journal, June/July/August "Assessment 1982, pp. 24-27; Mark Y. Swanson, of the Assertive Discipline Program," Compton 3. Kenneth To throwout the baby (bydismantling special education) because the bath water ismurky (thereare still unresolved problems)wouldproduceunintendedresultsof disastrous proportions, these authors charge in their response to a November Kappan article. (Calif.)Unified SchoolDistrict, Spring 1984; "Dis cipline Report," School District, ation of Oregon letter, 28 April (Ariz.) Elementary Cartwright 10 February 1982; and Confeder School Administrators, personal 1980. of Internal 4. Helen Hair et al., "Development in Elementary Structure Students: A System of Classroom Management and Class Control," ERIC T ED 189 067, 1980;EdmundEmmer andCarolyn At the Begin "Effective Management: Everston, ning of the School Year in Junior High Classes," Research and Development Center for Teacher Edu of Texas, Austin, cation, University 1980; Marcia on At Broden et al., "Effects of Teacher Attention tending Behavior of Two Boys at Adjacent Desks," Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, vol. 3,1970, Use of Nor et al., The pp. 205-11; HiU Walker mative Peer Data as a Standard for Evaluating Treat ment Effects," Journal of Applied Behavior Analy sis, vol. 37,1976, pp. 145-55; Jere Brophy, "Class room Organization and Management," Elementary vol. 83, 1983, pp. 265-85; Hill School Journal, et al., "Experiments with Response Walker Cost in Playground and Classroom Settings," Center for in Behavioral of the Handi Research Education of Oregon, 1977; capped, University Eugene, Thomas McLaughlin and John Malaby, "Reducing and Measuring Jour Inappropriate Verbalizations," nal of Applied Behavior Analysis, vol. 5,1972, pp. 329-33; Charles Madsen et al., "Rules, Praise, and Ignoring: Elements of Elementary Classroom Con vol. trol," Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, et al., 1, 1968, pp. 139-50; Charles Greenwood in for Group Consequences "Group Contingencies Classroom A Further Analysis," Management: Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, vol. 7,1974, pp. 413-25; and K. Daniel O'Leary et al., "A To in a Public School: A ken Reinforcement Program and Systematic Analysis," Journal of Replication vol. 2,1969, pp. 3-13. Applied Behavior Analysis, 5. Kenneth L. Moffett et al., Training and Coach to Reality An Antidote Teachers: ing Beginning Shock," Educational 1987, Leadership, February pp. 34-46; and Bob Murphy, Troy High School: An Assertive Model," Miami Valley Sunday News, 12 March IB 1989, p. 1. Troy, Ohio, BY GLENN A. VERGASON O AND M. L. ANDEREGG SAY THAT we are dis turbed by the attack on spe cial education that appeared in theNovember 1988Kap pan is an understatement.' We do not understandwhy profession als in special education are attempting to make major changes in the professional practiceof regulareducation.Moreover, we question why such well-known re searchers as Margaret Wang, Maynard attack based on researchmethodology that is so clearly flawed.2 While it is bothhealthyandhelpful to raisequestions about educational practices, these re searchers have gone beyond the data to conduct a campaign to change special education in their own image. Their previous articleson this issue 3and their speecheshave promptedone critic to de scribe their efforts as more a "public re lations campaign" than a research ef Reynolds, andHerbertWalberg are so dedicated to dismantling special educa tion. The movement they championhas fort.4Others have characterized their solutions as "patentmedicine."5 been given different names - ticle (and elsewhere in thewritings of the Regu larEducation Initiative, the SharedRe sponsibility Initiative, theGeneral Edu cation Initiative - but the underlying message is the same: a group of special educators knows what is best for all kinds One of the premises these in the Kappan three educators) ar is the idea that regulareducation and special education form separate systems. Our own ex perience andour discussionswith teach ers and administrators do not lead us of education. to accept that notion. In fact, the very We also question why professionals children that thesewriters hope to res who are so well-known for their interest in research persist in pursuing a plan of GLENN A. VERGASON (Metro Atlanta! Georgia State University Chapter) is a pro fessor in the Department of Special Educa tion and coordinator of the Special Education Administration Program at Georgia State University, Atlanta, whereM. L ANDEREGG is a doctoral student in special education. cue from special education are, by and large, in regular education classes for most of the school day. Special educa tion is an adaptive support system for the mildly handicapped; it is not a separate system. Wang, Reynolds, andWalberg suggest that special education programs are usu ally "pull-out" programs and criticize SEPTEMBER 1989 61