TCM Table of Contents – Classroom
Management Resources – School
Climate – John
Shindler – TCM Workshops
Chapter 10:
Implementing the Social Contract and Promoting Student Responsibility
From Transformative Classroom Management. By
John Shindler. ©2009
Reproduction is unlawful
without permission
In this Chapter
·
The Big Picture
·
Delivering Consequences
·
What Constitutes a
Successful Implementation
·
Step-by-Step Examples
·
What if a Student Says
“No”
·
Why Students Make Excuses
·
How to Foster Student
Responsibility
·
Comparing the Social
Contract in the 1- and 2-Style Classrooms
A social contract is only as good as its
implementation. The most critical elements in the process of the development
and use of a social contract relate to how effectively the teacher: a) fosters
an understanding of the cause-and-effect relationship between choices and
outcomes and b) intentionally and effectively implements the agreed upon
consequences within the contract.
IMPLEMENTING THE SOCIAL
CONTRACT
Once the social contract has been initially developed,
it will be defined largely by how it is implemented in the first few days.
Whether it was developed with the involvement of the students or constructed by
the teacher alone, the essence of the contract is that it defines the
collective good. It says in effect, “we are the contract, and it will work to
the degree that all of us as members of the class community buy in and commit
to it.” Therefore, it is true democracy, in the sense that its power comes not
from the teacher but from the collective commitment of the students to their
functioning as a body (Rogers & Frieburg, 1994; Watson & Battistich,
2006). In the early stages of any implementation of the social contract the
teacher needs to clearly project the following fundamental concepts, both by word
and deed:
1.
The
contract is about the welfare of its participants, not the wishes of the
teacher.
2.
I
(the teacher) am just a manager/steward/facilitator of the contract, not the
police, boss, or judge of good and bad behavior.
3.
When
contract violations occur I (the teacher) owe it to you (the participants) to
hold you accountable for what you have agreed to.
4.
You
(the participants) do not need to be sorry when you violate the contract, you
simply accept your consequence and make an effort to learn from the event.
5.
Therefore,
I (the teacher) neither will ask for your repentance for what you did, nor do I
need to apologize for the discomfort a consequence may involve.
6. I (the teacher) owe it to you
(the participants) to implement the contract in a manner that protects and
respects your dignity and as a result you (the participants) owe me (the
teacher) recognition of the difficulty of my role.
7. It is okay for any member of
community to raise a concern for the common good.
Chapter Reflection 10-a: Reflect
on the vastly different expectations and management systems that students will
bring into your class from home and from previous teachers. How long will it
take to get on the same page? Will you have the determination to be a beacon of
clarity and not get too distracted by the growth pains that students exhibit?
Always Keep the
Big Picture in Sight
As the teacher, one must continually help each
student to recognize that the social contract is just one part of the overall
effort to support his/her journey to becoming more self-responsible,
disciplined, successful, and an integral part of the classroom community. One
way to do this is to help students recognize that consequences occur many times
a day, and that the majority of them are naturally occurring and even those
initiated by the teacher are primarily positive (see Figure 10.1).
Figure 10.1. Types
of Consequences: 4-quadrant matrix depicting types of consequences by the
degree to which they are naturally occurring and whether they are intended to
promote or limit behavior.
|
Effect on Student |
Positive/Promote |
Negative/Limit |
|
Origin of Consequence |
||
|
Naturally
Occurring |
·
Sense of accomplishment ·
Growth ·
Learning |
·
Unhappy recognitions that
a choice has led to an unwanted outcome |
|
Logical/Manufactured |
·
Positive recognitions by
the teacher ·
Good grades ·
More opportunities and
choices |
·
Lost opportunities ·
Teacher-delivered
consequences |
If we allow ourselves to be genuine, enjoy our students
and the act of teaching, and invest in the emotional bank account of our
students, just being present in our class will be a substantially positive
consequence (Osterman, 2000). Moreover, as suggested previously if we make a
very intentional effort to use positive recognitions of our students’ efforts,
most of the interactions they have with us will be of the positive variety --
they choose to invest in their work (cause/action), we recognize this and give
them positive, task-clarifying feedback (effect/consequence). Additionally, it
will be useful to support students’ recognition of this cause-and-effect
relationship. Therefore, when they make a choice that leads to a significant
outcome either positive or negative, we supportively, caringly help them
connect the dots between the choice they made and the result. Accordingly, when
it is time to approach a student about a violation of their agreement to the
social contract, it should be seen as just another means to help them in their
growth toward personal responsibility and accountability to their peers.
Chapter Reflection 10-b: Recall
our examination of the idea of the “emotional bank account” in Chapter 3. In
your assessment, would it make a difference if a student were given a
consequence by a teacher who had invested in the emotional bank account of
their relationship as compared to not having invested? Is so, why would you
feel there would be a difference?
Many students will be new to participating in a
democratic classroom. If students have grown accustomed to classrooms managed
by punishments, shaming, mandatory obedience, and/or teacher as “the boss,” it
may take them a while to get used to being empowered (Manke, 1997; Woolfolk,
Hoy & Weinstein, 2006). Using empowering mantras and language in general
that continuously clarifies the roles of the participants is important,
especially early on. You may need to remind them that “the class is made only
of talented, responsible, self-disciplined students.” And repeat to them on
occasion that “I am not the boss or the police in here, I am not going to get
mad at you. My job is to hold you accountable for what you’ve all agreed to,
and help you to become more self-disciplined and responsible.”
Chapter Reflection 10-c: I recently observed a teacher/student interaction that I thought was instructive. It was the second month of school. The teacher had developed a relatively sound set of rules and consequences. At one point a student did something minor (but it was obvious to everyone in the class) to violate a rule; the teacher calmly told them that they would lose a minor opportunity as a consequence. At this, the student became irate and said loudly to the teacher, “How come you are always getting me in trouble!” Where did the reaction come from? What would you do if you were the teacher in this class?”
While words are important to help clarify the
conceptual framework from which the members of the class are operating, over time
the power and effectiveness of the social contract will come from observation
of your actions by the students when it comes time to implement consequences
already outlined in the contract. Taking into account the nature of
social/indirect learning, our actions will speak louder than words when it
comes to students’ learning about the integrity of the social contract and what
to expect when violations occur.
DELIVERING CONSEQUENCES
Consequences exist only as abstractions. It is in
how they are implemented that will define whether students experience them as
fair and/or opportunities to learn rather than personal and punitive. Curwin
and Mendler (1986) suggest that “Sometimes it is more how we say something than
what we say. A lousy consequence delivered (effectively) is better than a good
consequence delivered in a publicly humiliating manner.” They offer a series of
useful steps for implementing a consequence. Keeping each of these practices in
mind when it is time to address a behavior that violates the social contract
will help ensure that the intervention is effective and does not attack a
student’s dignity.
Figure
10.2 Curwin and Mendler’s Nine Steps for Consequence Implementation
1.
Always
implement a consequence: Be consistent.
2.
Simply
state the rule and consequence.
3.
Be
physically close: use the power of proximity
4.
Make
direct eye contact. *
5.
Use
a soft voice.
6.
Catch
the student being good.
7.
Don’t
embarrass the student in front of the class.
8.
Be
firm, but anger free when giving the consequence.
9.
Don’t
accept excuses, bargaining or whining.
*(may be better said
as “make personal contact”)
Why is Consistency so
Important?
When we examine what promotes either function
or dysfunction and movement up or down the effectiveness continuum, applying our
social contract consistently shows itself to be essential in our efforts to
move up the continuum. The younger the students, the more significant this will
be. At the heart of the social contract is the cause-and-effect relationship
between choices and consequences. If students make certain choices, the teacher
is given the responsibility by the contract to implement a consequence. The
locus of control for the contract rests with the students. The purpose for the
teacher faithfully executing his role in the contract goes far beyond making
sure the student “gets what she deserves.” When the teacher does what is
expected, the message is sent that the contract is working. It is not an
arbitrary instrument. It is a real and living thing. The message is clear that
the contract governs all students, not just those who the teacher feels need to
improve behavior. With consistency comes a feeling that there is “rightness,”
justice, a security that governs the class.
Recall the social learning model. When the
teacher applies the contract inconsistently, students learn that the “implicit”
rules in the class include arbitrary teacher subjectivity (Doyle, 2006). They
find that what and why consequences are implemented is not so much about the
contract as it is about the unpredictable desires of the teacher. The result is
a shift in locus of control away from the students to the external agent -- the
teacher. Of course, subjectivity and discretion will always be a reality, but
when the students see variation in consequence implementation resulting from
laziness, favoritism, unpredictable moods, retaliation, weakness, or just
careless randomness, they lose some degree of faith in the integrity of the
social contract (Doyle, 2006). Eventually most students will understand that
there may be a need for exceptions and variation because students have
different needs, and to best help the collective the teacher must take each
learner’s specific circumstances into account. But no matter how noble the
intentions, it will be difficult for many students to interpret differential
treatment as anything other than inconsistency.
Chapter Reflection 10-d: In your judgment, when
it is better for the teacher to be uniform in his/her consequence
implementation and when it is more “fair” and effective to fit the consequence
to the situation and needs of the particular student?
Examining Privacy,
Proximity, and Group Consequences: Using the Power of the Social Context
Effectively
When you intervene with one student privately
your interaction is between that student and you alone. When you intervene with
a student publicly, you include an audience and all that that implies. Privacy
requires proximity (Curwin & Mendler 1986; Wubbles et al., 2006). When
implementing a consequence to one or more students, be physically close to the
student(s). Speak in a private tone. It may be useful to bend down to the
student’s level so as to reduce your position of dominance. The power of the
event will come from the fulfillment of your job in the equation by holding the
student accountable, and not in any display of your toughness.
Students learn most lessons indirectly. They
infer what will happen to them in a future situation by what they observe
happening to another student in the same situation. There is a temptation to
use the public dimension of an intervention with one student or group to send a
message to the whole class. The logic goes something like this: if the rest of
the students in the class see this student receiving a consequence, they will
understand that the same fate could be theirs. When it comes to positive
consequences this is pretty useful logic. If a student is making a good effort,
we recognize it, or if a student needs help, we give them support, or if a
student is risking sharing an idea, it can be very empowering to show publicly
that we will validate the effort and the risk. But when we use a public
context for implementing contract violations, we bring shame and embarrassment
into the equation. This can seem inconsequential to us, because the
interaction often feels the same from our perspective. But to the student,
public penalties hurt and can be experienced as attacks on their dignity (Elias
& Schwab, 2006). And even if the public consequence does not produce much
negative emotion, the public shaming component shifts the focus of the
consequence from a natural and related outgrowth of the social contract to a
weapon wielded by the teacher. Possessing the power of this weapon can make us
feel influential, but giving in to the “power trip” will undermine our
authority, the legitimacy of the social contract, and students’ dignity in the
long-term.
Chapter Reflection 10-e:
Recall
teachers you have had or seen who liked to publicly “flex their teacher power”
and give public consequences/punishments. What effects did you observe it had
on the class over time?
Group Contingencies as a Consequence
When a whole group contingency is imminent, individual students will feel an incentive
(i.e., peer pressure) to act in a manner that benefits the collective (Robinson
& Ricord Griesemer, 2006; Skinner, Cashwell & Dunn, 1996). If all members of a
group are put in a position in which something needs to be done (e.g., perform
a task, exhibit a behavior, refrain from a behavior) or the entire group will
be unable to meet its goal, each member will feel the
weight of the whole as they consider their actions.
One typical example of the use of this
principle is when a teacher says to the class, “Everyone needs to clean up
their desks before anyone can go.” In this situation, the pressure each
individual student feels as a result of this arrangement is likely more related
to the desires and expectations of their classmates than those of the teacher.
The teacher has essentially used the power of the social mechanism, peer
pressure, to motivate individual students to behave in a collectively
beneficial manner.
Other examples of the deliberate use of peer
pressure include:
- When
the teacher looks for “ready groups” or groups that are demonstrating by
their behavior that they are ready, given a prescribed characterization of
“ready” clarified at an earlier time.
- When
the teacher stops and waits for individual students to listen and/or get
on task. In this case, the message is that the group is having to wait for
an individual or two, so those individuals need to attend not only because
of the expectation, but also because the progress of the entire group is
contingent upon their actions.
These types of consequences can have a great deal of power
and can be carried out relatively efficiently. As a result, they are attractive
for a lot of reasons. We do need to distinguish between times they are working
to support our long term goals and times they are creating unwanted outcomes (Skinner, Cashwell & Dunn,
1996).
Chapter Refection 10-f: Consider teachers you
have seen who have used a great deal of peer pressure and group contingency to
motivate the students in their classes. Was it effective? Why or why not? How
did it make you feel?
When are group contingencies a good idea?
- When
the stakes are small. A small loss of time will not have a lasting cost,
but anything that affects grades, friendships, dignities, material or
learning outcomes should be avoided.
- When
it helps make an expectation more concrete, and leads to more
understanding and self-responsible behavior in the future. In other words,
it is a good practice if you recognize that it is needed increasingly
less over time.
When
are group contingencies not such a good idea?
- When
they involve the same student repeatedly. When one student (or small
portion of the students) repeatedly causes the group to pay a price, this
can lead to the student becoming resented, marginalized, and/or having
negative identity patterns encouraged.
- When
it is clearly not working to motivate better behavior or has become a
crutch used by the teacher to obtain the desired behavior. If the students
do not see and agree to the need for the behavior it will be just a
gimmick at best, and at worst it will lead to resentment toward the
teacher and/or dependency or a threat condition to obtain responsible
behavior.
- When
the majority of students feel that they are being coerced rather than
challenged. This again can lead to resentment toward the teacher.
Chapter Reflection 10-g:
Consider
the costs associated with giving up some amount of group cohesion and/or the
quality of your relationships with your students for higher levels of
efficiency. This is not always the result when we use group contingencies, but
it can be. When would you make this trade? How much sense of comfort would you
trade for more efficiency and a feeling of accountability? Reflect on your
answer related to the idea of what promotes a success psychology in the
classroom.
For example, if we find
that quite a few students in the class did not treat the lesson materials very
well (given a clear expectation of how the materials were to be treated
beforehand) and we withhold those materials for a couple of days from the whole
class, this can be an effective consequence. It demonstrates active
follow-through. It also demonstrates a clear a cause-and-effect relationship --
respect the materials and you can use them; don’t and you will have to wait to
try again later. But if the penalty is the result of a few of the same students
on a repeated basis, an implementation of group consequence becomes much less desirable
(Robinson & Ricord Griesemer, 2006;
Skinner, Cashwell & Dunn, 1996). The majority of the class feels
penalized for the actions of a few and can develop a growing resentment for
them and a loss of trust in the teacher’s sense of fairness. The most telling
evidence of the fact that our group contingency is being effective is often
expressions on students’ faces when you make your request. Is it a sense of
urgency and playfulness, or is it discomfort and impatience? If you see
resentment emerging as a result of the practice then it will be a better idea
to stop doing what we have been doing and try something else. It is usually not
worthwhile to trade the emotional quality in the class for more efficiency in
most cases.
Delivering a
consequence to an individual contract violation
As
we examine the notion of how to best implement consequences, it is important to
recognize that problems do not all come in the same size and shape. We might
make a distinction among three levels of problem behavior. Figure 10.3
describes these classes of student behavior problem and offers potential
logical consequences for each.
Figure 10.3: Levels
of Classroom Behavior Problems and Examples of Each
|
|
Description |
Classroom
Example |
Potential
Logical Consequence |
|
|
A student or class displays a form
of dysfunctional behavior that will likely become steadily more problematic
is ignored. |
Students failing to give another
student 100% attention when appropriate. |
Stop the class and ask the
students to give the student their full attention. Ask the student to start
over. (See Ch. 6 related to technical management) |
|
Level
Ib |
Student actions that violate the
classroom rules and/or social contract. Typically rooted in forgetfulness, lack
of understanding, or carelessness. |
Student carelessly leaves a mess
at a work station. |
Student is asked to clean up their
desk before they can move on the next thing. |
|
Level
IIa |
Students knowingly reject their
commitment to the social contract in words or actions. Typically rooted in
defiance, a desire for power, or a cry for help. |
Student refuses to clean up their
area or deliberately continues to talk when the expectation is to be attentive to the speaker. |
Remind students they are not part
of the class until they can demonstrate a commitment to the social contract.
Student may be required to complete and commit to an individual behavior contract (see Chapter 14) |
|
Level
IIb |
Students exhibit dysfunctional
behavior on a regular basis. Typically rooted in a deeply conditioned pattern
of thinking and ego defense. |
Student tends to disrupt the work
of other group members any time they feel the task is too challenging in an
attempt to meet their needs for competence and power, or student exhibits a
compulsive need for attention. |
Student brought to recognize the
pattern (i.e., negative identity pattern) with the teacher’s help.
Demonstrate progress and commitment to the social contract, and potentially
complete and follow an individual behavioral contract (see Chapter 15) |
|
Level
III |
Students experience a struggle
with their behavior and have a biological/organic basis to their lack of self
control which may involve a legitimate case of ADHD. |
Student struggles to attend for
long periods of time and feels a compulsive need to move and talk -- even
though they wish they could attend and feel guilty that they cannot. |
Student follows the plan laid out
in their IEP and personal behavioral contract. |
In
this chapter we will focus primarily on level Ib types of problems. These are
the most common and will involve most of our students at one time or another.
In Chapter 15 we will explore level II and III types of problems and how to
effectively deal with them.
Curwin and Mendler (1986) offer three pieces
of advice when it comes to delivering the message to a student who has violated
the contract: 1) simply state the consequence; 2) be firm and anger free; and
3) use a soft voice. On the surface they all appear to be common sense. But the
power of these ideas lies primarily in what they instruct us not to do.
Since the social contract is fundamentally about each participant’s commitment
to an agreement, then adding anything other than facts shifts the focus from
the agreement (and locus of control) to the teacher (external agent) and
weakens the relationship. Adding a little guilt, shame, or lecturing, or
putting the behavior into a generalized context such as “this is the third time
you have done this,” or “if you keep doing this…” is not only unhelpful, but
detracts from the power of the lesson. Even though it may feel natural and
common and our parents and teachers may have used this method, resist the
temptation to add anything to the basic message that the student made the
choice that violated the agreement, and now must accept the consequence for
that choice.
Chapter Reflection 10-h: Recall the last time
you (or another teacher) were in the position to deliver a consequence (i.e., discipline
a student). Did you or that teacher refrain from adding to the consequence,
with guilt, shame, or a lecture? In your assessment, why is it that we find it
so difficult not to add something to the equation?
What Constitutes a
Successful Implementation?
It may be useful to keep in mind what we are
trying to accomplish as we move to implement a consequence. First, the event
should help strengthen the students’ internal locus of control. That is, the
student should feel that their choice is the cause, and the consequence is the
logical effect. Second, the student should maintain a sense that they need to
be responsible for the group and making different choices in the future is not
only possible but good for the entire group. Third, we then walk away having
opened the door to the student’s own internal reasoning process. We cannot make
them learn a lesson. We cannot tell them they did learn a lesson. But we can do
our job and trust the process and the student’s sense of reason to result in
healthier choices in the future.
Chapter Reflection 10-i:
Recollect
the discussion of the construct for a “psychology of success” in Chapter 8.
When delivering a consequence we might ask ourselves, “Am I taking the
opportunity to have a transformative influence on this student by promoting
their psychology of success or am I simply ‘giving them what they deserve’?”
Conversely, we may see signs that behavior
will likely not change in the future. First we see a student who is acting
highly repentant and projects a shameful affect. When we see a high level of
repentance, it is probable that the student will exit the interaction without
having learned a lesson that will lead to long-term behavior change. This may
be an unfamiliar notion, but as we examine the student’s thinking more closely
we see that they are caught up in the “sorry game” instead of thinking of ways
to do better next time. Second, the student has difficulty accepting ownership
and projects an external locus of control. The student gets overly fixated on a
perception of you as unfair, wondering why you are picking on them, and
focusing excessively on the personal aspect of the event. It is likely that
this student is used to punishments and will translate your clear
cause-and-effect consequence language into their being punished. To help these
students grow and become better members of the community we need to help them
with their cause-and-effect processing, approach them with unconditional
positive regard, gently help them understand that our intention is not to make
them feel bad and that consequences are not personal, and that we are sincerely
and steadfastly behind their efforts to make thoughtful choices.
Step-by-Step
Consequence Implementation Examples for Elementary and Secondary Levels
Elementary Level
Case: Interfering with others during a learning
activity
Social Contract
Agreement: We give our attention to those speaking and
keep our hands to ourselves when we are on the carpet. If we need to speak, we
raise our hands. The consequence for failing to do so is removal from the
activity. If the problem is chronic: an individual behavioral contract.
Student Behavior:
A teacher is leading a lesson as the students sit on the carpet. Liko is not
listening, and is touching and trying to engage other students near him.
Teacher
intervention: For mild cases in which students simply
appear to be fidgety or distracted and have lost focus (i.e., level I
problems), it may be most efficient and helpful to use a combination of eye
contact and a clarifying statement or clarifying question. For example, we may
stop (an active consequence), give Liko a second to recognize that he is
violating the contract, and then resume our lesson after we get active
recognition that the student understands and is ready to be more responsible
(e.g., they stop and demonstrate attentive behavior). We may also use a
clarifying statement such as “We all need to have our eyes up here right now”
or “We are all giving José our undivided attention. José, could you start over,
and we will all do a better job of listening this time.” Or we could use a
clarifying question such as, “What would it look like if we were all doing a
great job of listening right now?” or “Are we all listening like Pumas right
now?” Use a positive tone and avoid glaring at the student. As we discussed in
Chapter 6, avoid all negative recognitions such as “Liko, I need you stop
talking and pay attention.” They may feel occasionally necessary at the
beginning of the year, but eliminate them from your language quickly and
completely. You will be surprised at how you do not miss them.
Side
Note:
It is useful to keep in mind throughout the process that the contract is not
intended to corral students or offer short-term solutions. It is intended to
change awareness and as a result patterns of behavior. So solutions such as
proximity alone, or what Jones refers to as “camping out” will most often stop
the behavior in the short-term, but send the message that the teacher is the
police and that one should not misbehave around them (as well as result in the
need for an increase of the same intervention in the future). Also, the
technique of using personal recognitions (discussed in Chapter 6) such as the
phrase, “I like the way Kabira is listening right now,” will have a limited and
confusing affect, and will lose power over time.
Assume this is the
beginning of the year, and Liko is still learning how to be a functional part of
a group. We may want to give him a break due to what may be a lack of
understanding of the expectation (if it is not the beginning of the year, we
may want to omit the warnings and move straight to the consequence). If eye
contact and clarifications get the result we need, we should then make private
and personal contact with the Liko. Subtly, and without drawing the attention
of the other students, we need to get close to Liko and help him understand the
expectation and the consequences. We might say, “Liko, what is the expectation
when we are all on the carpet?” There is no need to include any negative
language. Liko may need some help, but at some point we need to hear him
correctly state the expectation. Then we need to ask the student what the consequence
is (that has been agreed to in the social contract) for failing to be
self-responsible during time on the carpet. If the student does not know, we
need to remind him (and again, not knowing is a defense that needs to be
sincere and in any event cannot be used long). Warnings and reminders send the
message, “I will assume that you did not understand what you did, and from now
on, after this warning, you will.” If this is the case, we might say to Liko,
“So Liko, when I look back here later, what am I going to see?” Liko states the
expected behavior. “And what is the consequence, if you aren’t able to show me
that you can be a responsible part of the group?” Again, Liko needs to state
the consequence. At that point we can smile genuinely at Liko, and then shift
our attention back to the group. We do not want to hover, or get caught up in
anticipation of what Liko is going to do. We need to be in the moment, and let
Liko make his choice.
In most cases, eye
contact and clarifying recognitions will do the trick. When that does not work,
making personal contact and reminding the student of the expectation will take
care of most problems. But we need to provide meaningful and related
consequences that fit the severity of the situation. If we look back and see Liko
talking to his neighbor, we should not repeat the more subtle consequences such
as eye contact. We asked Liko to act responsibly. He told us that he understood
and was committed to fulfilling his responsibility. His behavior demonstrated
that he made a choice to violate his agreement. Therefore the time for warnings
and group consequences has passed and we need to deliver the next level of
consequence. In this case, Liko has lost his opportunity to be part of the
group. We need to approach Liko, and privately, speaking softly and plainly, we
need to tell him in so many words, “Liko, I just observed you talking to your
neighbor. What was the consequence that we agreed to when one of us does that?”
(Let Liko answer.) “That’s right, so since you chose to talk, I want you to sit
by yourself at your seat while we continue here on the carpet. Can you do that?
Do you understand why? (Wait for recognition.) And when we are on the carpet
tomorrow, you will have another chance to show that you can listen and keep your
hands to yourself.”
It is important
that in this case that we send the message to the rest of the class, that we
put our energy into those that are choosing to be responsible. If students see
us putting a great deal of attention into Liko, those who are seeking attention
may (usually unconsciously) conclude that misbehaving is a good way to get it.
At some point during the transition to the next activity we will want to send
the quick private message to Liko, “Thanks for sitting quietly, I know that you
will be able to do better next time.”
Chapter Reflection 10-j:
As you
read the intervention above, where is the locus of control? If you are Liko,
and you have been asked to sit out of the activity, who do you feel is
responsible for what has just happened? What would you guess Liko is thinking
in terms of the choices that he intends to make in the future?
Secondary
Case -- Abuse of the Pencil Sharpening Privilege
Social Contract
Agreement: In this class we use the pencil sharpener
when absolutely necessary, and do not disturb others when we sharpen. The
agreed-upon consequence is loss of opportunity to use the sharpener.
Student Behavior:
During one period,
Teacher Intervention: If we
interpret that the expectation is weak and that most students do not assume
that there is any problem with using the sharpener multiple times in a period,
we may want to take the opportunity to clarify the expectation and remind the
class of the consequence. This is may be especially useful at the beginning of
the year. A reminder is not a consequence, but we may need to take
responsibility this time for a poorly understood expectation.
However, if the
consequence is clear and well understood, we simply need to implement the
consequence. If we feel
You approach
Insert
as Dialogue Box to Right
Eye
Contact and Culture:
Culturally, eye contact can be problematic. It can make students feel either
threatened or disrespectful to be forced to look us in the eye. Try to become
aware of what works with your students; it will probably be a variety of
behaviors.
Speaking in a soft
tone, we try to help
In this scenario,
it will be important to help
Chapter
Reflection 10-k:
Ask yourself an honest question. If you were the teacher in the situation
above, as you walk away from
Dealing with
Bargaining, Pleading and Whining
In the development of the social contract,
the existence of bargaining can be a healthy thing. As events arise where the
students and the teacher recognize that a new expectation, rule, or procedure
may be in the best interest of the collective, negotiating revisions to the
contract or class expectations can be valuable (Bluestein, 1999). These are
pro-active, democratically developed changes.
Nevertheless, it is rarely a good idea to
bargain after the fact with a student who is trying make a deal to avoid a
consequence. For example, either
Chapter Reflection 10- l:
Have you
ever told a student/child “no” (when they made a request for something that you
had clearly let them know they could not do or have), and had to endure the
look of resentment in their eyes as they walked away? When they came back was
the look still there? You may have assumed that they would hold it against you,
but did they? Did they respect you more or less in the future? What is your
explanation for this?
What if a Student
says “No” to You and the Contract?
The more consistent we are, the more clear
and related the consequences are, and the more carefully implemented in a way
that preserves the students’ dignity and sends the fundamental message that “we
know that they are capable of responsible, mature and considerate behavior,”
the more we will get an ever-decreasing amount of bargaining, whining and
excuses, along with fewer contract violations (Wang & Anderson, 1994).
However, the possibility will always exist that a student says “no” to the
contract. When the student says no to the contract, they have raised their
problem to level II, and our response needs to reflect the level of the
problem. As we will discuss in more detail in Chapter 14 when examining
conflict resolution and power struggles, the contract cannot maintain its
integrity if there are those in the class who deliberately disrespect it. A
student has the choice to say “no” to the contract (e.g., a reasonable request
from us), but the choice leaves them outside the community until they choose to
reaffirm their commitment to the collective by way of behavior and living up to
the agreement. We never have to fear a student saying no if we keep in mind
that all we can do is offer choices to students and encourage their success. We
cannot make students’ choices for them.
PROMOTING STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY
It is difficult to conceive of a more
important aspect of the job of teacher or parent than promoting a sense of
responsibility in young people in our lives. Responsibility is basic to a
psychology of success, being a member of a democratic society, and critical to
achievement in and beyond school (Bluestein, 2005; Elias & Schwab,
2006; Tracy, 2005). Talent and intelligence are
valuable, but more essential to one’s happiness and success in life will be the
degree to which students take responsibility for their thoughts and actions (
Chapter Reflection 10-m: Do you know anyone
whom you would consider highly irresponsible, yet happy and achieving to their potential?
Do you know anyone who may not have been the smartest person in the class, but
today is highly happy and successful? Would you say she was a responsible
person?
Making Sense of
Responsibility
At the root of a responsible attitude is acceptance -- acceptance of one’s
reality (i.e., what “is”), acceptance that our thoughts will manifest
themselves in behavior, and acceptance that we are the authors of our own fate.
There is a great temptation to resist what is. Our minds in desire for relief
from discomfort become skilled at the practice of denial, making excuses,
shifting responsibility, and taking on the role of the victim. If being
responsible were easy, we would see more people demonstrate it. But it is
difficult and takes a lot of practice and a lot of support from others,
especially those entrusted to teach us in our schools.
In an effort to operationalize the broad
notion of responsibility, we could begin by breaking it down to its essential
factors. The building blocks of responsibility include the following:
·
A sense of cause-and-effect.
Recognizing what we choose to do will have consequences and what we think will
manifest itself in our actions. Like the law of the conservation of energy,
there is a natural law that what we think and do matters and will cause effects
to come into our experience.
·
An internal locus of control. If we
see ourselves as the authors of our fate, we have the capacity to be
intentional and become what we choose to become. Research in human behavior demonstrates a consistent
relationship between one’s level of internal LOC and the degree of personal
responsibility one exhibits (Chubb, Fertman & Ross; Adolescence, 1997;
Elias & Schwab 2006).
·
Social
Frame. The working social frame defined by the relationship between freedom and
responsibility is essential to any functioning social environment (e.g., class,
family, team, group, etc.), and is fundamental to promoting responsibility. It
sets out a clear agreement that when the young person demonstrates a sufficient
level of responsibility, they have earned more rights and freedoms, and when
they do not demonstrate it, they must wait until they do show the necessary
responsibility to earn those freedoms.
·
The
law of responsibility. Tracy (2005) defines the law of responsibility in four
parts; 1) You are completely responsible for
everything you are and for everything you become and achieve; 2) You are always
free to choose what you think and what you do; 3) Responsibility begins with
your taking full and complete control over the content of your conscious mind;
4) No one is coming to the rescue. He states that one’s degree of
achievement will be directly related to the degree that one accepts
responsibility for all outcomes within their power--most importantly their
thinking.
·
Making
choices and learning from the consequences of those choices. Most of this
learning occurs naturally, but it can, as we discussed in this chapter, also
include consequences that are manufactured within a situation,
such as a classroom with a social contract (Doyle, 2006).
·
Being in the moment -- responsible
thinking is not rooted in the past or what may be in the future. It is grounded
in WIN, or “what’s important now.”
Conversely, those factors that could be
considered “responsibility destroyers” include the following:
·
An attitude of blame -- when we blame,
we inherently fixate on the past and on an external cause.
·
A victim mindset -- when our thinking
goes to “poor me,” we lose not only a clear sense of cause-and-effect with
regard to the past, but in essence toss the law of responsibility out the
window. We make the psychological trade in which we give up power and an
opportunity for growth to get (temporary) pain relief.
·
Making excuses -- when we make excuses
we essentially externalize the cause-and-effect of the situation (Butler &
Wittenbaum, 2000).
·
An external locus of control -- as
discussed, basic to a psychology of failure is the externalizing of the cause
of one’s fate or “fatalism.” The external LOC views life as a series of
accidents, and there is nothing that we can do or could have done. As we look
closer at this mindset, we see an effort to avoid guilt and ownership (Butler &
Wittenbaum, 2000; Wang & Anderson,1994).
Why
Do Students Make Excuses and What Can We Do to Encourage Fewer of Them
If
we deal with many students, we find that some are constantly making excuses and
others almost never make excuses. The student’s age, gender, ethnicity, or
learning style seem to make no difference when it comes to excuse making. So
why do students make excuses? There are three primary reasons (Butler &
Wittenbaum, 2000; Wang & Anderson, 1994). First, avoidance of guilt and an
attempt to protect one’s self image. Second, in situations in which there is a
perceived benefit within the context and/or a desire to manage the impressions
of others. Third, it can be a practical response to achieving a desired result
-- i.e., an excuse would potentially improve a desired outcome. Let’s examine
these reasons, followed by ideas on how to lessen the need for students to make
excuses for each of the three areas.
Reason
1: Protecting one’s self image and feelings of guilt.
When the student feels that if they admit to themselves that they did the act
(e.g., forgot their work, said the hurtful words, made the mistake, etc.) and
they do not see themselves as the kind of person that would do something like
that, they experience inner conflict (e.g., cognitive dissonance) (Butler &
Wittenbaum 2000). In other words, “Only a dumb,
irresponsible, or bad person would have done that, and I am not any of those.”
What can we do to support more healthy and
responsible thinking? An environment that promotes a success psychology will
reduce the students’ inclination to make excuses on all levels. In this case,
creating an environment in which making mistakes is acceptable will go a long
way. Moreover, as we focus more on process and mastery rather than a fixed view
of ability, it will help students see choices as opportunities to learn rather
than events that define who they are. In a success psychology environment, the
students learn to live and learn and increasingly adopt an attitude of
self-acceptance and progressively release an attitude stuck in a process of ego
management and shame.
Reason
2: The context encourages it. If the social
environment is hostile and students are put down for making mistakes or blamed
for things that they do, they will learn that excuses are a valuable tool for
protecting one’s reputation and ego (Wang & Anderson,1994).
What can we do to support less excuse making
and blame in the classroom? Create a “blame free zone” classroom. Encourage all
students to take responsibility for everything for which they are even remotely
accountable. Do not accept victim language from any student. Do not ask for
excuses or put students in situations in which they must save face. Moreover,
we need to keep in mind that the most powerful lessons we can teach our
students about responsible thoughts and action will come from modeling them.
Reason
3: An excuse would help secure a desirable outcome.
When we say to the late student “So, Alton, why are you late?” or “This better
be good,” we are telling them that if they have a good excuse then it will work
as a substitute for being on time, or whatever the expectation was in the situation.
When we ask for excuses, we encourage students to make them.
What can we do to promote fewer student
excuses and more responsible behavior? First, simply don’t ask for excuses.
Instead, build in ways in which students are held accountable. For example,
give the students three bathroom passes or homework passes or late passes at
the beginning of the year. Let them use them as needed. Watch the students
become very responsible about when they need to go to the bathroom. When we
build in room for mistakes and forgetfulness proactively, we put the locus of
control in the hands of the students. When we act as the judge of good and bad
excuses, we take the locus of control away. When we ask for excuses we train
our students not only to be irresponsible, but encourage the skill of lying
their way out of trouble. Let students know that you are interested in what is
going on in their lives, but that an excuse is not going to improve their
situation. You trust them and believe in them, and therefore trust that they
can problem-solve their way out of trouble or be mature enough to learn from
what they did. We like our students so much we are going to give them the great
gift of being responsible. We can be empathetic, and genuinely concerned, and
even share stories of our own life lessons, but the emotional connection that
we make with them is not a game. We are neither getting “played” by them, nor
are we taking joy in their “finally getting what they deserve” for being so
careless or irresponsible. We are staying in the moment, being present to them,
and on some level recognizing that this is a transformational event in which
they have been given the gift of another step on their journey toward personal
responsibility.
Chapter Reflection 10-n:
Consider
situations in which you felt the need to make excuses (or situations in which
you still do). Which of these three reasons played the largest role in how you
felt and/or what you did?
COMPARING THE USE OF THE SOCIAL CONTRACT
IN 1-STYLE AND 2-STYLE APPROACH
A social contract is an effective tool within
both the 1-Style and 2-Style approach. Used within the context of either style
it will lead to an ever-decreasing number of contract violations and
ever-increasing sense of ease and fairness on the part of the students.
However, it will operate somewhat differently in each case. At the beginning of
the year, both styles will need to rely heavily on demonstrating consistency
and follow-through. While the teacher attempting a 1-Style approach must make a
greater commitment to student involvement in the development process, teachers
in both cases will need to take a strong leadership role early. Over time, the
teacher using a 2-Style approach will be defined by the degree to which he/she
shows consistency and fairness in implementing the contract. In the 1-Style
classroom the teacher must make a greater effort to help students internalize
the purpose underlying the contract and its principles (Watson &
Battistich 2006). The ownership of the contract is shifted to
the members of the class society as a collective and away from the teacher as
authority (Rogers
& Frieberg, 1994). The locus of control for the
contract (e.g., responsible, healthy, considerate behavior) in the 2-Style
classroom will primarily rest with the teacher. Throughout the term the
students will see the teacher as the agent who keeps the class functioning
effectively. The locus of control in the 1-Style classroom will shift over time
to the students (Baker,
et al.1997; Rogers & Frieberg, 1994).
Why not test the boundaries of the contract?
The primary reason that a student in a 2-Style classroom thinks “why not?” is
related to the teacher -- the student does not want to elicit a consequence.
Eventually, the main reason that a student in a 1-Style classroom thinks “why
not?” is that they would be neglecting their commitment to their classmates and
diluting their own personal growth. While students in the 2-Style class will
feel secure in the judgment that their teacher has the ability to maintain a
functioning classroom, they will remain limited in their democratic
participation skills and moral development as compared to the students in the
1-Style classroom. Moreover, as the students in the 1-Style classroom learn to
take ownership for their classroom social contract, the foundation is being set
for their development as a community. We will explore the idea of “community”
and creating a 1-Style classroom in more detail in Chapter 15.
CONCLUSION
Our social contract can be an instrument of
coercion or empowerment depending upon how we implement it. The better we are
able to keep in mind the focus on the contract rather than ourselves, the more
successful we will be. In the next chapter, we will examine the relationship
between management and instructional choices. Effective instruction can make
our social contract feel like a covert safety net, whereas ineffective
instructional practices will act to keep our social contract continuously
tested and keep us thinking about discipline rather than teaching.
Journal Reflections
1. What are your
feelings at this stage in your reading regarding whether a 1- or 2-Style class
is more for you? What are your criteria for making your decision?
2. What are three things
that would like to change in your management plan or your current practice as a
result of your latest reading and reflection?
Chapter Activity
In the following exercise, you will take part
in a role play involving a student who violates the social contract and the
teacher who must implement a consequence. If you are part of a class, it will
be useful to divide the scenarios up among six groups. If you are not in a
class, you may want to find a small group to help you with one of the role play
scenarios, or write out your script on paper.
Directions: As a group, your
task is to create a life-like role play between a teacher and one or more
students. You are free to use whatever rationale you choose to inform your
thinking, but when in doubt try to base your intervention on the principles
outlined in the chapter. Your task is to develop two situations: one where the
behavior is dealt with ineffectively, and the other in which the behavior is
dealt with as effectively as you would consider possible. Take your job
seriously. You may want to script your role-play. Have fun with each, but you
will likely find that the “what not to do” scene is more fun. Go for it! And
before you begin the role-play, it may help your audience if you provide them
with a bit of background as to what has happened up until the point of your
play in your hypothetical classroom.
Situation
A:
One table of students keeps talking to one another while you are trying to
present material. What do you do?
Situation
B: A
reliable source tells you that at recess one student hit another student, and
there was no action taken by the recess supervisor (they never saw it). The
students are just returning to the class. What do you do?
Situation
C: You
have your students sitting in pods of four. At one table one of the more
fidgety students is pestering one of the other students at the table (e.g.,
taking things off her desk, staring at her paper, etc.). You have warned them
to stop but the pestering has not lessened. What do you do?
Situation
D:
You are asking your class deeper-level questions to help them process a lesson
you are teaching. One of your students is acting particularly silly, raising a
hand and offering flippant and irresponsibly incorrect answers. What do you do?
Situation
E:
One of the students has just loudly discovered that their special pen is
missing from their desk. Another one of your students has in the past taken
things, but has always explained why it was just a misunderstanding. You saw
this student playing with the pen earlier before recess. What do you do?
Situation
F:
You are giving a test. You see one of your students copying answers from a
neighbor. It is obvious that they are trying to cheat. You have a rule against cheating
in your class. What do you do?
Situation
G:
As you are lecturing, three girls in the class begin to pass a make-up set
among one another, and use it when you are not looking. What do you do?
Situation
H:
As you are teaching, a handful of students find themselves being pulled into a
negative interaction. It starts small with a minor put-down, but soon grows as
each student escalates the conflict with greater and more significant put
downs.
Option
1:
As a class, discuss what you think is effective or ineffective about each role
play.
Option
2:
Develop your scenario in writing, and share it with someone else for feedback.
REFERENCES
Baker, J.,
Terry, T., Bridges, R. & Winsor, A. (1997) Schools as caring communities. A
relational approach to school reform. School
Psychology Review 26(4), 586-602.
Bluestein, J. (1999) 21st Century Discipline: Teaching Students Responsibility and Self-management.
Fearon Teaching Aides
Burden,
P. (2003) Classroom Management: Creating
a Successful Learning Community. Wiley,
Chubb,
N., Fertman, C., Ross, J. (1997) Adolescent Self-Esteem and Locus of Control: A
Longitudinal Study of Gender and Age Differences. Adolescence, 32, 113-129
Curwin,
R., and Mendler, A. (1986) Discipline
with Dignity.
Doyle, W. (2006) Ecological Approaches to classroom management. . In C.M. Evertson
& C.S. Weinstein, (Eds.) Handbook of
classroom management. (p. 97-126).
Elias,
M.J., & Schwab, Y. (2006) From compliance to responsibility: Social and emotional
learning and classroom management. In C.M. Evertson & C.S. Weinstein,
(Eds.) Handbook of classroom management.
(pp. 309-341).
Emmer,
E.T., & Gerwels, M.C. (2006) Classroom management in Middle and High school
classrooms. In C.M. Evertson & C.S. Weinstein, (Eds.) Handbook of classroom management. (pp. 407-437).
Emmer,
E.T., Evertson, C.M., &
Hines, C., Cruickshank, D. &
Kennedy, J. (1985) Teacher clarity and its relationship to student achievement
and satisfaction. American Educational
Research Journal, 22, 87-99
Manke,
M.P. (1997) Classroom power relations:
Understanding student-teacher interactions.
Osterman,
K.F. (2000) Students’ need for belonging in the school community. Review of Educational Research, 70(3),
323-367.
Robinson,
S.L., & Ricord Griesemer, S.M. (2006) Helping individual students with
problem behavior. In C.M. Evertson & C.S. Weinstein, (Eds.) Handbook of classroom management. (pp.
787-802).
Skinner,
C., Cahwell, C., & Dunn, M. (1996). Independent and interdependent group
contingencies: Smoothing the rough waters. Special
Services in the Schools, 12, 61-78.
Solana Beach
Wang,
D, and Anderson, N. (1994) Excuse-making and blaming as a function of
internal-external locus of control. European
Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 295-302
Yinger,
R.J. (1979) Routines in teacher planning. Theory
into Practice, 18(3), 163-169.
Watson,
M., & Ecken, L., (2003) Learning to
trust: Transforming difficult elementary classrooms through developmental
discipline.
Watson,
M., & Battistich,
Wubbles,
T., Brekelmans, M., Brok, P., & Tartwijk, J. (2006) An interpersonal
perspective on classroom management in secondary classrooms in the