Classroom Management Resource
Page – Shindler – School Climate – PLSI – Teaching
- Workshops
by JVS
Chapter 19: Moving Up the Teaching Style Continuum from the 4-Style “Dominator” to a 2- or 1-Style Approach
From Transformative Classroom Management. By John Shindler. ©2008
Reproduction is unlawful without
permission
In this
Chapter
·
Characterizing 4-Style Management
·
Assumptions behind the 4-Style Approach
·
Examining the Problems that the 4-Style Approach
Creates
·
Making the Shift Up the Continuum
·
The Paradox of Power
·
Locating the Roots of the 4-Style within the “Failure
Psychology”
·
Making a Transition In Practice
The purpose of this chapter is to examine the foundations
and common practices of the 4-Style approach to classroom management. We will
begin by exploring the fundamental nature as well as various manifestations of
this approach. Next we will examine why it leads to problematic and
dysfunctional results, and then finally, how one can move up the Teaching Style Continuum (see Chapter 4)
toward a more functional approach and a more effective set of practices.
A Case Study of Two Teachers Using a 4-Style:
Ron and Susan are veteran teachers.
Ron teaches High School and Susan Elementary. Each has their routine for
teaching pretty well established. When each thinks about the students they
have, they wish they were more responsible and respectful, but mostly blame
their parents for their lack of motivation and bad attitudes. There are
students they like, but it seems like there are fewer of them every year.
Each teacher has some creative
ideas, but mostly stick to the book, use a lot of worksheets, and what might be
called “busy work”. In Ron’s class, lots of students are receiving poor grades.
He wishes that they were more motivated and would listen during his lectures,
but he feels that if he adequately demonstrates to them that their work is
inadequate, they will straighten up at some point. He complains that too few
students do the homework and he is perpetually disappointed at the poor test
scores. Susan watches as some of the students show little motivation, and
assumes that they are just “low motivation” students. She sends students home
with examples of their poor work and negative reports in the hopes that the
parents will take some action to motivate their children. Both view themselves as doing a good job and
the kids as dropping the ball. They take every opportunity to lecture the
students on how their work is poor and they need to get motivated or as they
joke, “you will be working at McDonalds” for the rest of your life.
Ron and Susan want to shake their
students out of their complacency, so they use a lot of public embarrassment
and shaming. They feel that if they are exposed publicly they will be more
motivated to change. Classroom management includes a lot of cases where
students push them over the line and therefore need to be punished. They are not afraid of the use of punishments
and regularly remind students of the punishments that await them if they
misbehave.
Ron likes to use his “big
personality” to help control his class. He talks loud and is not afraid to
speak angrily to a misbehaving student. He also likes to motivate the group
with general challenges. He jokingly refers to some of his classes as his “bad
classes.” Susan is more passive and uses frequent disappointment messages to
modify student behavior, mixed in with occasional personal praise for her “good
students.” Each teacher assumes that if
they consistently “chronicle student’s failure” and let them know how
inadequate their behavior is they will someday get it. Phrases such as “quite down,” and “get to
work” are heard many times a day.
Ron sees other teachers treating
students with more respect, but Ron feels like that is just sugar coating the
truth. He proposes that they are not going to get fun and exciting lessons in
college and in the real world no one is going to tolerate their laziness. And
he does not think all students should go to college anyway. So it does not
bother him a lot when students drop out.
Susan knows that other teachers are more positive, but questions how
they can get order without letting the students know what they are doing wrong.
She recalls a group of students that she once had that showed her respect and
did good work. Some day she hopes to have a class like that again, instead of
these students that seem hopeless.
Characterizing
the 4-Style Management Approach
Classroom management characterized by a 4-Style approach
exists at all grade levels in all types of schools. The stories of Ron and Susan characterize two
types of 4-Style management. Like many teachers who take a 4-Style approach,
Ron and Susan exemplify two individuals who are very competent and on top of
things. On many days there is a reasonable amount of order in their classes and
some of their students are performing pretty well. But Ron and Susan are
representative of other teachers using a 4-Style approach in that they feel the
need to be the “boss,” and as a result there is always at least a little
antagonism and stain in the room. They often relate being dominant with being
in control. They are more concerned that their students adequately fear what
might happen if they push them “over the line” than that the students have a
clear sense of what constitutes that line. Ron and Susan, like other teachers
who use a 4-Style, are comfortable being reactive and displaying anger and
other forms of negativity when they feel students deserve it. Each teacher is
comfortable raising their voice when they feel it is necessary. What they
believe is that if they give enough discomfort to their misbehaving students,
they will get the message that what they are doing is wrong. They likely have
never considered the notion of “pain-based logic,” but they do subscribe to the
idea that pain in the form of punishments, shaming, public embarrassment,
disappointment, name calling, and put downs are useful in teaching students
lessons when they misbehave. Many 4-Style teacher are like Ron in that they
like to use their dominating personalities as their means of gaining control,
others are more like Susan and use more subtle and often passive aggressive
forms of control. Very commonly, especially for those who teach at the primary
level, a favorite practice of the 4-Style teacher is the use of praise and
affection, and withdrawal of that affection in the form of disappointment in an
effort to modify student behavior. The result is a class very sensitive to the
moods of the teacher. Given that there is little that promotes intrinsic
motivation in this approach, the teacher relying on a 4-Style usually feel
dependent on extrinsic motivation strategies such as bribes, gimmicks, preferred
activity time, rewards, names on the board, or colored cards to get students to
perform. The result is a motivational climate that is nearly entirely
extrinsic, and defined by fear and desire (i.e., fear of punishment, fear of
loss of love, desire for praise, desire for a reward).
Chapter Reflection 19-a: Bring to mind those teachers that
you have observed that you would characterize at using a 4-Style. If they were
your teachers, revisit how you felt in their class as a student. If you
observed them teaching as a peer, student teacher, or volunteer, recall the
looks on the students’ faces. How did they feel typically? As you reflect on
these teachers as a group, what did they have in common?
The Assumptions
Behind 4-Style Management Thinking
Typically, a 4-Style approach is built on a series of
strongly held beliefs and assumptions. As a result, most 4-Style teachers are
convinced that what they are doing is “working” and what they are not doing
would not “work” (Recall our discussion of the term “It Works” in Chapter 3).
These assumptions tend to override any evidence to the contrary. The 4-Style
teacher tends to hold to their view of the “real world” in the face of a great
deal of evidence that things could be better or that there are other paths that
would lead to less stress and strain and more effectiveness. The problem is not
that the 4-Style teacher does not learn, but that they are relearning a set of
faulty principles that are rooted in mistaken assumptions. We know that habits are difficult to break.
And behaviors that seem to “work” or work occasionally are especially difficult
to change. Figure 19.1 contrasts some of the most common 4-Style management
assumptions and the conflicting evidence that refutes those assumptions.
Figure
19.1 Contrasting A List of Common 4-Style Management Assumptions with
Conflicting Evidence
|
4-Style
Management Assumption |
Conflicting
Evidence |
|
If I do not show strength and dominance the students will see
areas of weakness and take advantage of the situation. |
This
assumption sounds like it is logical, but as we examine the reality more
closely we find that this assumption is based on a false choice, dominance or
weakness. Being clear and consistent does not require any level of dominance,
but does result in gaining respect and legitimacy. Moreover, students act to
meet basic needs. Observe a class where basic needs are being met, there are
clear behavioral expectations and they have genuine respect for the teacher.
You will see almost nothing that resembles students taking advantage of the
situation. When basic needs are met, there are few problems, when they are
not there will be many, and it has little to do with the demeanor of the
teacher. |
|
If I am supportive and positive, the students will assume
that anything that they do is fine, and as a result will not work as hard. |
This
statement is certainly logical. But in human terms it almost entirely untrue.
To test this assumption it only requires a little common sense and
self-reflection. Recall learning situations in which encouragement was
withheld from you. Was it motivational? Recall the social frames discussed in
Chapter Three. When students act responsibly and make an effort the adult in
the equation needs to display a corresponding degree of recognition and
awarding of an increased level of responsibility, or the frame becomes
broken. |
|
If I get
upset and give the student enough pain, they will see that their behavior was
unacceptable and change it. |
As we
will discuss in the next section, this is assumption is based in a
“pain-based logic.” This can take the form of shaming, humiliation, put
downs, threats, victimizing humor, and most notably punishments. In chapter
10, a clear distinction is made between punishments and logical consequences.
Using pain to change behavior is like using Draino to cure the hiccups. They
may stop in the short term, but you have created a whole series of other
worse maladies as a result. Punishments are more likely to create hostility,
a desire for revenge, and a depressed motivation than any behavior change.
Consequences do change behavior because they are logically related and teach
meaningful lessons. |
Chapter Reflection 19-b: Reflect on the assumptions above.
Why do you think that they are so prevalent? Why do so many of us want to hold
on to them so fiercely in the face of the evidence that they lead to
dysfunction and a perpetuation of our problem condition?
Examining the Fundamentally
Problematic Nature of the 4-Style Management Approach?
While teaching style is something of a relative matter, and
no one style is right for all teachers, our style choice makes a difference.
Different styles can produce vastly different results in practice. The
practices that characterize the 3 and 4-Styles depicted in the teaching style
continuum (see Chapter 4) are inherently problematic and will lead to a
dysfunctional climate. The problems with the 4-Style approach are varied with
many of them being rather significant. Five of the most noteworthy problems are
described below.
1.
Does Not
Lead to Better Behavior
The first problem with the 4-type
approach is that it does not work very well to produce function and/or
efficiency. The myth is that with a
stern “boss” approach student will be more likely to fall in line and/or be on
task. The reality is that a strict or
stern affect has little effect on how well managed a class is. The interest in being orderly may lead to
strategies that create some degree of order, but the stern affect is, if
anything, counterproductive. You might test this assumption by doing your own
survey and observing the effects of a variety of management approaches. What you will likely find is that the classes
where there is are fewest management problems usually are the ones with very
little or no yelling and/or angry displays by the teacher. In the 4-Style class
you will likely find a lot of energy put into management in the form of the
teacher making threats and chronicling the unwanted behavior, but you will not
see improvement in behavior from day to day.
Chapter Reflection 19-c: If you have the opportunity,
survey classrooms. Listen to the noise level. When you heat a class where the
teacher is using a loud or abrasive voice. Observe the quality of the classroom
management. What is the relationship?
2.
Depresses
the Motivational Level in the Class
The second problem with the
4-style of management is that inherently undermines the motivation level of the
students. In chapter 8, the pathway to a “success psychology” was laid out.
There we identified that at the heart of building a sustainable foundation for
motivation the teacher needs to foster an internal locus of control in the
students. The 4-style of “boss management” maintains the focus of the control
on the teacher as the external agent. The implicit message to students is that,
“good things happen when you do what the teacher says.” The misguided
assumption is that “staying on” the students helps them get more done. In the
immediate short term, this may be true on occasion, but in the long term,
students are robbed of their sense of agency and become more passive and
dependent on external prodding each day. With the inclusion of extrinsic
rewards which are popular in the 4-Style classroom, there is a further erosion
of the students’ intrinsic motivation. The combined effect of a hostile
environment, the promotion of an external locus of control, and the undermining
of intrinsic motivation is to create a perfect storm that depresses the
motivational level of each student.
3.
Decreases
True Discipline.
As we examine the effects of the
use of punishment (recall Chapter 10), we can see that their continual use
leads to a decrease in genuine discipline. In the short term, there is may be a
sense that the shaming, humiliation, anger and reactive punishments are
resulting in improved behavior. But what
is more likely is that they students are learning to avoid being caught by the
teacher. The motivation not to misbehave is fear of the annoyance of having to
listen to the lecture or be the object of ridicule, and the motivation to
behave well is absent all together. In most cases, what is most likely is that
the climate in the class simply becomes progressively worse as the negative
energy is reflected back and forth between the teacher and the students,
becoming magnified over time. The reality is that the only true discipline is
that of “self-discipline” and the 4-Style approach leads to a deterioration of
self-discipline. The intention is that
being a “no-nonsense” hard-nosed teacher will lead to discipline through
obedience, the reality is that this approach leads to two choices on the
students’ part – submission or rebellion. Neither of these options leads to
either healthy growth on the part of the students, or a climate of genuine
discipline.
4.
Limits
What Can be Achieved.
If one has a desire to promote
such qualities as a democratic classroom, community, self-direction, intrinsic
motivation, and/or a safe emotional climate within the class, it will be
impossible within a 4-Style management environment. Democracy requires a shared
voice. In the authoritarian 4-Style approach the voice of the teacher is
overriding. There may be a pretense of democracy in a 4-Style class, but in the
end the students learn where the real power lies – solely with the teacher.
Community (as discussed in Chapter 17) requires a sense of collective vision.
In the 4-Style classroom the vision is absent or maintained entirely within the
teacher’s mind. In the 4-Style classroom students cannot develop the skills of
self-direction as the teacher directs and the students learn to simply do what
they are told. And while many 4-Style teachers lament that the students in
their classes do not feel confident enough to share, express, or challenge
themselves, they only need look at the structure of their class to find the
cause. When the students do not feel emotionally safe in their relationship
with the teacher, it is nearly impossible for them to muster it in other areas.
As a result there is a marked climate of fear and shaky confidence in the
4-Style classroom.
5.
Produces a
Dysfunctional Ripple Throughout the School.
One of the significant problems with
a 4-Style approach is that it puts a strain on the efforts of the 1 and 2-Style
teachers in the school. The
dysfunctional effects of 4-Style teaching will be felt school-wide. To better
understand what these effects are we would want to ask the 3rd grade
teacher who is passed the students of a 2nd grade teacher used a
4-Style, or the other teachers in the Middle of High School who teach the
students of the teacher from another period in the day who uses a 4-Style. If
one is attempting to promote a clear sense of logical consequences, intrinsic
motivation, an internal locus of control and/or a sense of self-direction the
influence of previous or concurrent 4-Style training will be counterproductive.
The 1 and 2-Style teachers will find themselves working not only to help
students overcome their personal dysfunctional habits, but also to overcome the
4-Style training that is taking place in the other classrooms. A handful of teachers using a 4-Style can
greatly hamstring the growth of an entire school.
Chapter Reflection 19-d: Imagine that it is the beginning
of the year, and you are attempting to help your students develop a cause and
effect relationship between their choices and the consequences that have been
developed for the class. You notice one of the students talking while he is
supposed to be doing a task independently. You walk over to the student and
gently remind him of the expectation and the consequence for inappropriate
talking. He gets very alarmed and says to you, “Why are you getting me in
trouble, I am not doing anything wrong. Why are you always on my back?” How do
you explain this students reaction?
“But I’ve Seen the 4-Style Work”
There are likely those readers that are at this point thinking,
“Hold on! I had a hard-nosed strict teacher, and he/she got a lot out of me and
my classmates.” This may have been the case. There are teachers who use a
4-Style and do get results. But as you examine your experience in that
teacher’s class more deeply, reflect on a couple of ideas. First, as you
explore your memory in more depth, recall how many of your fellow students were
frequently engaged in power struggles with the teacher. Were most students
motivated to learn out of a love of learning, or out of a fear of the teacher?
As the year went on, did the fear of punishments and shaming maintain its
effectiveness or did students begin to challenge and/or “tune out” the
teacher’s threats? Moreover, reflect on the list of problems listed above. Were
these problems present in this class? If so, would you say that the means that
this teacher used to gain control was worth the ends?
Second, when we recall our strict teachers we often
misattribute the causes of their effectiveness. Many times the strict teachers
in our past seemed effective because they were strict, when in fact they were
effective in spite of the fact that they were strict. A notable example of this
principle can be seen in the portrayal of Jaime Escalante, the famous Math
Teacher of Los Angeles, in the movie Stand and Deliver. He was depicted in many ways as using a
4-Style approach. He used a lot of public shaming and was a very dominating
presence in the class. It is easy to
assign the cause of his success to his strict style. But, it is useful to
remember that there were many teachers in the same building that used the same
4-Style techniques but we nowhere near as effective with the same population of
students. If we examine his teaching closely we see that at the heart of his
success was a steadfast belief in the potential of his students, and not his
management techniques. In fact, it is likely that he would have been even more
effective had he used a healthier brand of management strategies.
It is very likely that the teachers who used a 4-Style that
you recall as being effective were effective for reasons other than their
management strategies. It is likely that they had high expectations and did not
accept poor behavior or work. It is also likely that they projected an implicit
or explicit respect for you as a student and as a person. Any teacher can
choose to have high expectations and demand a lot from his/her students, they
do not need to use a domineering style, resort to public shaming, or the use of
angry outbursts.
Chapter Reflection 19-e: Think of the teachers who used a
4-Style that you have perceived to have been “effective.” Aside from being
dominant and intolerant, what else did they do? What other qualities did they
have? Is it possible that these other qualities were responsible for the
success that they had getting students to learn?
But What
If It Is the Only Thing That Works With “These Students?”
As discussed in Chapter 10, some students, as a result of
their context outside of school, and/or a constant diet of 4-Style learning
environments, have become acculturated and accustomed to a pain-based logic and
the use of punishments to modify their behavior. Frequently, these students
will catch a new teacher by surprise. These teachers may enter the situation expecting
students to respond to their 1-or 2-Style approach and what they find is that
the students seem only to respond to pain and punishments. Occasionally, one is
given an entire class that has been conditioned to respond to a 4-Style and a
pain-based logic. In these instances, it will appear on the surface as though
the only thing that the students will respond to is the giving of pain. So when
we give in and engage in such strategies as yelling, threatening and/or using
personal attacks, we might find that the students seem to respond. While, it is
true that a group like this implies that it will be difficult to introduce a
more functional and healthy discipline logic, at least right way, we need to
step back and look at the big picture. Do we really want to become what is in
effect “abusive” because we are leading a group of people who have become used
to abuse?
It is understandable that when we find ourselves in this
situation we tend to want to do something in the short-term to get a sense of
order. But while being in survival mode is understandable, if we stay in that
mindset, we will be there all year. It will be helpful to keep in mind when we
look at each of our students who have become accustomed to a pain-based context
that they are longing for a safe and sane environment. Because they do not know
how to function in one as yet is not their fault. However, it is our job to
help them adjust to a more functional set of patterns. In chapter 16 we
discussed how to succeed with the student with a “negative identity” pattern.
At the heart of this pattern is a deep-seated attachment to a pain-based logic,
and a past that was defined by a co-mingling of pain and love. In that chapter,
we discussed how to lead a student to a more functional self-image. The process
outlined is effective for both individuals as well as whole classes.
The 4-Style approach at its core is a crime and punishment
model. Behavior is discussed in terms of “good” and “bad” rather than
functional and dysfunctional. It is no coincidence
that we find the quantity use of 4-Style management and the quantity of
students involved in the criminal justice system strongly related. In fact, if
look below the surface of the students in the school that exhibit a comfort
with a criminal identity, you will discover a past grounded in the pain-based
logic in each case. Do we want our teaching to contribute to the problem or be
the catalyst for change?
Chapter Reflection 19-f: Put yourself in the role of a new
teacher that has the goal of creating a 1-Style Classroom. What would you do if
you were given a class or students who were used to a 4-Style management
approach? This scenario is depicted rather accurately in the movie Freedom-Writers.
Making the
Shift Up the Continuum
To transition from a 4-Style to either a 1- or 2-Style
management approach, it will require a shift in both thinking and practice. For
many teachers who use a 4-Style approach, through the process of action and
reflection they discover a set of more effective practices. This transition is
depicted below in the story of Therese.
Story of
Therese
Therese is a middle school teacher who works in a large
public school. She began her teaching career using prototypical 4-Style
Approach. Most of the teachers that she had as a student took a 4-Style
approach, and she assumed that that style was what was required to teach in the
public schools. Her teacher preparation reinforced her assumptions in many
ways. It emphasized control and encouraged extrinsic reinforcement strategies.
When she began teaching she took on what she called her “drill sergeant”
persona. She was demanding. She showed little genuine emotion. She was critical
and spent a lot of time chronically the failure of her students. At first she
felt rather successful in so much as she was succeeding at this approach. But
as the months went on she grew in the recognition that she was not getting the
most out of her students. Her approach was not motivating. Her students did not
really respect her. Some of them feared her, but she did not inspire them to
any great degree. So she began to open her mind to new ways to improve and to
better accomplish her goals of high student motivation and achievement. She
began to allow students more freedom and trusted them to make choices. She
showed them more respect. She gave them more responsibility and expected more
accountability rather than obedience. She also began to use more logical
consequences and positive recognitions rather than punishments and negative recognitions.
What she found is that she got more out of the students. They achieved at a
higher level. They worked harder and liked the class more. Part of this, she
found, was because they respected her more now. The more respect she gave, the
more she got. Something else that she found was a bit of a surprise. She found
that when she gave the students more power, she actually felt more powerful.
She felt that her power was rooted in a collective effort toward shared goals
rather than in the students’ fear of retribution. She also found that teaching
was less stressful and less of a grind. She fought the students less. In her
early years, she felt a certain level of antipathy and resistance in the room.
Now she felt little of that. Students mostly felt appreciative that her very
organized but empowering style helps them get results.
Paradox of
Power
What Therese recognized was that when it comes to trying to
achieve power there is a paradox – the more we want the less we get, and the
more we give away the more we get. Real power is the force that brings us
closer to our goals. A leader is only as powerful as her/his ability to get
results. What usually passes for power in the 4-Style classroom is an overt
desire for control. As we discussed in the previous chapter, control is rooted
in an attachment to a mental concept of what “we” want for ourselves. And for
the most part it is an illusion. When we have clear expectations and a shared
vision, it will appear that the students are on the same page, and as a result,
thing are somewhat predicable. Therefore it looks like we have control. But, if
we examine things more closely we see that it is not so much that “we have
control” as there is an environment that is producing controllable outcomes. If
we lost our students’ respect or they no longer felt any reason to meet our
expectations, our control would disappear. The most powerful teacher is the one
who has empowered his/her students by
promoting a high level of intrinsic motivation and the skills of self-direction.
In this teacher’s classroom there is powerful movement toward the shared goal
regardless of the teacher’s direct efforts.
Chapter Reflection 19-g: If this paradox seems a bit
abstract imagine the following two situations.
1.
Your
class is out of control and you are threatening them with “0” grades,
detentions and the worst punishments that you could deliver.
2.
You
are peaking in the door of your class and observe your students working hard,
acting in a manner consistent with your social contract, and intrinsically
motivated to produce high quality.
In which situation would you feel more “powerful?” Why?
Respect
and Revisiting the Social Frames
Another phenomenon that Therese learned was that social
frames (as discussed in Chapter 3) operate in a very noticeable way. Students
did not respect her, until she learned to give respect to them. They did not
like her until she showed that she liked them.
When she expected more responsible behavior, she got more responsible
behavior. At the same time, she began to recognize the power of making students
responsible for their own learning. She gave more choices, put students in more
situations in which they were the authority, and her students responded with a
greater sense of ownership and motivation.
Losing the
Pain-Based Logic and Lose the Struggle
Therese also found out first hand that she did not need to
use punishments, as she had assumed for the first few years of her teaching. For
the first part of her career, she was convinced that she needed to hold on to
some level of a pain-based discipline model – that is, if she gave or threaten
to give sufficient amounts of pain to students, in specific situations, that
the fear of pain would cause her students to behave in a manner that she
wished. What she found was that it was not pain that changed misbehavior, but
the certainty of logical consequences. Now, in her classroom there is little if
any of that sense of antagonism or struggle that she first experienced. She
always assumed that it was necessary to use punishments and that the stress
that it caused was normal. Commonly, when former 4-Style teachers look back at
their early years, neither can they understand why they believed punishments
were so necessary, nor did they fully appreciate how much stress that they
experienced as a result of the hostile climate that they created.
Why Am I
So Attached to My 4-Style Approach?
For many teachers like Therese who begin their careers working
from a set of 4-Style assumptions, experience, evidence, intuition and
reflection lead to a cycle of growth out of the dysfunctional practice. However, for many 4-Style teachers they find
that regardless of the evidence that things are problematic, they remain
attached to their 4-Style approach. For the principals and colleagues of these
teachers this is often troubling and can even be something of a puzzle. For
clues into why some teachers remain attached to an approach that those around
them recognize as dysfunctional, yet they do not, it may be useful to employ
the lens of “success vs. failure psychology” as outlined in Chapter 8.
Recalling our discussion of “success psychology,” we
identified three key components that make it up – and internal locus of control
(LOC), a sense of acceptance and belonging, and a mastery orientation. The
practices that will lead to the promotion of these qualities are listed on one
side of the column for each area. Contrastingly, those practices that will lead
to the undermining of these qualities and a failure psychology defined by a
fear of failure, a sense of worthlessness and/or inadequacy, and an external
LOC are listed on the other side. When the teacher who is unable to give up
their attachment to their 4-Style of teaching examines each list, what they
usually find is that they struggle to accept that the success psychology
producing practices are actually preferable. When we examine this resistance
more closely we find that giving up an attachment to the 4-Style of teaching
requires giving up one’s “Failure Psychology.”
Chapter Reflection 19-h: To test the assumption above,
survey each list of practices in Chapter 8. As you scan down the practices that
are characterized as leading to a “failure psychology,” locate those that you
currently use in your teaching (or were planning to use). Does the thought of
having to give it up feel like you are giving up part of yourself or losing
something that is fundamental and familiar? If so, reflect on the roots of that
feeling.
When we feel a sense of resistance to giving up a
dysfunctional practice, it is usually more on the level of the psychological
rather than the practical. To explore this idea, it will be useful to examine
how our views of clarity, consistency, and pain, vary depending on our
psychology.
On a practical level, most of us would accept the notion
that creating clarity and clear expectations is a desirable goal. The evidence
suggests that it leads to better behavior and more achievement. But if we have
been conditioned into a “failure psychology,” we may very well resist the
creation of clarity in our classes. As discussed in the previous chapter, our
minds tell us that the more we are arbitrary and random, the more students are
dependent upon us. This dependency makes us feel powerful and needed. At the
root of the need to keep others dependent is a sense of insecurity. Likewise, when we resist the idea of being
consistent, it is a reflection that we want our class to be about “us” rather
than effectiveness. When we create an inconsistent and subjective environment,
we sacrifice the capacity for democratic qualities in the class to grow for our
egotistic need for feeling important.
If we are having trouble giving up our attachment to a
pain-based logic, the likely culprit is again a failure psychology and/or a
reverence for someone in our past who used it on us. First, the thought of the
use of pain-giving to create a distance between us and our students may seem
rather odd on first glance, but examine it closer. Are we committed to
accepting our students and caring about their welfare, or do we like feeling at
least a little hostile toward them? Does it make it easier to deal with the
failure by either party? Second, if we find it difficult to give up the idea of
the use of pain to modify behavior, we might look for answers in the
relationships that we have had with the adults in our past. Did you have a
parent or guardian that you loved but that used a heavy dose of pain-based
discipline with you? It might be useful to ask yourself the question, “Do I
feel like I am disrespecting my parent and/or being irreverent if I acknowledge
that, even if it was done with love, their punishing behavior was unhealthy for
me?”
As we examine the various ego-based “persona” of the 4-Style
approach, we can see an attachment to at least one element of the failure
psychology, as well as a resistance to embracing the success psychology. Figure
19.2 outlines some of the most common persona that are manifested out of a “failure
psychology.” These “persona” are often what is keeping any of us deeply
attached to the 4-Style approach to management, and limiting our ability to
move up the continuum to more effective practices.
Figure
19.2 Some of the Possible Persona by Which the Failure Psychology Manifests
itself.
A failure
psychology can take many forms. While at its core it has common roots, it will
appear in the form of a variety of persona. Some of these are depicted below:
Drama
Addict. This failure psychology persona likes it when things are
unpredictable or when they have to react to external conditions. At the heart
is desire to externalize LOC. Given that this persona is in it for the drama,
it is essentially using the others around it. It lack a sense of self-
acceptance and as a result wants to make others feel like they need to be
exciting or it will not love them.
Victim. The
victim persona wears its external LOC on its sleeve. Its message to students is
“I don’t deserve this!” Its operating thought process is defined by a fear of
failure. It is always ready with an
excuse to avoid the pain of feeling guilty or inadequate.
Harsh
Reality. The failure psychology can also take the form of a harsh
world view. Instead of admitting a deep desire for acceptance and belonging it
projects a perspective that the “real world’ is cold, harsh, competitive and
unforgiving. It then sets out to create conditions that mirror these survival
of the fittest conditions in its class. It sends the message that “there is no
support or comfort in the real world, so you will find none here.” (See also
Chapter 20 related to competition). It is rooted in a fixed ability view (See
Chapter 8).
Dissatisfied. Some
failure psychology persona hide behind a façade of dissatisfaction. It holds to
the belief that if it projects out to
others the message that “you will never be good enough,” it will protect itself
from its sense of inadequacy. This persona is rooted in a fear of failure and a
fixed ability view of the world.
Self-Centered. The
failure psychology can also take the form of a self-centered orientation that
holds tight to its own set of beliefs, attitudes, conclusions, and concepts.
When its views are challenged it takes great pride in telling others that they
are wrong. It maintains the delusion that given its vast experience in life, it
knows it all. This persona is rooted in a fixed ability view of ability and a
helpless pattern. The reality is that this persona holds tight to a fixed view
because it is threatened by what it perceives as a world it does not
understand. And the ability to come out of this shell to show acceptance of
others is difficult and rare.
Chapter Reflection 19-i: Reflect on the teachers that you
have observed who used a 4-Style approach. Did you see evidence of any of the
persona described above in how they managed? Save your ideas for Chapter
Exercise 2.
Making a
Transition in Our Approach
For those teachers currently using a 4-Style approach who
are looking to transition up the continuum, change can come as a result or a
variety of pathways. Gaining a new awareness of the reasons why the 4-Style
approach is ineffective and/or why one is drawn to it can be the catalyst for
change in many cases. However, changing practice alone will often lead to a new
appreciation for the new practice, and as a result a new set of working
assumptions. In other words, change can come be spurred by either the practical
or the psychological incentives that moving one’s practice up the continuum
offers. This chapter should have been helpful to raise your level of awareness
(i.e., why we were attracted to the 4-Style, the assumptions from which we have
been working, and the harm that the 4-Style can unknowingly produce) and
highlight the value and practical benefits of the use of more effective and
intentional practices. However, the other chapters in the book will provide the
more detailed road map to practical change.
If you discover that your long-standing attitudes and old
working assumptions are holding you back or undermining what you are doing, it
may be useful to listen to the resistance in your thinking. What is it that is
keeping you attached to the 4-Style? To do this it will be helpful to reflect
upon the contents of Chapters 8 and 18 periodically. It will be helpful to
become familiar with the practices that promote a “success psychology,”
outlined in Chapter 8, they will be the key to moving up the continuum. Second,
as you review the chapter, notice any mental resistance to the ideas. If you
recognize some defensiveness, ask yourself the question, “what is keeping me
attached to a ‘failure psychology?” When you read Chapter 18, identify those
areas in which you find yourself locked in negativity and/or a habitual “no”
mindset. A mental ‘no’ will keep us anchored in the 4-Style quadrant. As you
examine the more effective management practices outlined in the next section,
recognize the “yes’ mindset at the foundation of each of them.
Making a Transition in our Practice
Once you recognize the need to move from a 4-style to a 1-
or 2- style orientation, you will be ready to exchange those practices that
have kept you mired in an unhealthy and ineffective situation for those that
will be both more healthy and effective.
Figure 19.3 outlines a series of practices that are foundational to the
4-Style approach and contrasts them to those practices that will lead to a
shift up the classroom management continuum to a greater level of
intentionality and function.
Figure
19.3 A List of 4-Style Practices Contrasted to Corresponding More Effective
Practices.
|
4-Style Practice Practices that Lead to Management Dysfunction and a
Hostile and Unhealthy Classroom Climate |
1/2-Style Practice Practices that Will Promote the Shift toward a more
Effective and Healthy Classroom Climate and Increased Function. |
Accidental Practices
·
Reactivity ·
Use of subjective criteria ·
Social Darwinism Reduce the
amount of vagueness in your expectations and the use of reactive and personal
responses to students. They create an accidental quality to the class
resulting in an absence of vision and clarity. |
Intentional
Practices ·
Genuine Structure ·
Social Contract (see Ch’s 9,10,11) · |