Positive
Discipline and Assertive Discipline
Bonnie
J. M. Hall
Copyright
2000 by Bonnie J. M. Hall
Included
here with permission of the author
Extra! Extra!
Read all about it! A California based therapist has invented a
new way to parent and teach children! How would you like a cooperative,
self disciplined, compassionate child who knows how to solve problems
with confidence, patience, integrity and concern for others? What
is it? Positive Discipline! Thats right folks, throw away
all of those old dusty Canter-based assertive discipline techniques
and make way for Jane Nelson and her time-tested positive discipline.
By using her principles, you are guaranteed to raise children
who have excellent self-esteem, as well as a sense of responsibility
for themselves, others and their environment. Used in the classroom,
you will be amazed at how your students will become open-minded,
honest, as well as develop a respect and acceptance for self and
others. Learn how to replace those empty punishments and rewards
with firmness, dignity and respect. Turn the power of discipline
over to your students. You can do it! Come with us
Oh...wow!
I must have been dreaming. Theres no way that I could ever
get my second graders to solve problems on their own and behave
like that. No. I like the system that I am using right now. My
kids are well behaved...most of the time. Actually, I do get discouraged
at the end of each school year when I feel that my kids have developed
no responsibility for their actions. Maybe there is a better way.
Hmmmm. Im puzzled.
Background
Information
I conducted
this research using the Cultural Inquiry Process (Jacob, 1999)
in a second grade classroom in Stratford, Virginia. I am a graduate
student who volunteers in this classroom once a week, working
as a consultant to the regular classroom teacher. Millwood Elementary
School (all proper names are pseudonyms) is located in a rural
area about 40 miles southwest of Washington, D.C. Farms, older
homes with several new housing communities, townhouse, and apartment
developments, surround much of the area. Most of the children
come from middle class families although there are several pockets
of low social economic areas.
Miss Davis
second grade class is composed of 19 students: 10 girls and 9
boys. The majority of the class is Anglo-American. There are two
African American students and one child of mixed race. All of
the children are of average academic ability for this 7-8 year
old age range. Four of the children are below average in reading,
the rest are at or above level. Overall, Miss Davis considers
her class to be well behaved. There are approximately five children
that Miss Davis considers to be mild behavior problems, but they
are easily corrected.
Miss Davis
is a very innovative teacher who uses a variety of methods to
teach her students. She has been teaching for nine years and enjoys
her chosen profession. She has high expectations of her children
both behaviorally and academically. Her classroom rules are clearly
defined, with rewards and consequences for behavior. Her class
has a great respect for her, and in turn she has an excellent
rapport with her children.
Miss Davis
is in her early 30's. She is single and has lived in Stratford
County all of her life. She comes from a middle class family of
educators, her father being a retired principal from a Stratford
County Middle School and her mother, a second grade teacher for
25 years. She has one younger brother and one set of grandparents
who are long time residents of the area.
Puzzlement
My puzzlement
is based on classroom discipline and management. Miss Davis
main behavior modification system used in her classroom is based
on Assertive Discipline, a system developed in 1970 by Lee and
Marlene Canter. This world renowned, highly structured system
emphasizes clearly defined expectations that are followed-up with
rewards and punishments (Hill 1990).
Miss Davis
uses some of the methods encouraged by positive discipline, the
main component being the class meeting. She gathers her class
for a meeting twice a week. They sit in a circle and each child
in turn starts by complimenting somebody. They then turn to the
class problem book or agenda. Any child who had a problem and
could not solve it on its own writes about it in this book. Each
issue will be discussed with the class and they will help the
people involved to solve the problem. When a conflict is recorded
in the book, the student has to list what problem solving skill
they used previously. The school counselor has been working with
the children on problem solving using "Kelsos Choices."
This is a well known program that helps children to solve problems
rationally. The children list which of Kelsos six choices
they used to try to solve the problem. The goal is to teach the
children to become independent problem solver.
The teacher
does not leave all of the problem solving up to the students.
If a child is in danger or about to be hurt, the teacher will
step in. In the positive discipline approach, the teacher also
uses natural and logical consequences (Nelson, 1996). A logical
consequence is an effect to a behavior put in place by the teacher.
For example, if students forget their homework, they can do it
during recess. A natural consequence occurs naturally, with no
adult interference. If students forget their coats, they will
get cold. This, along with open communication between the students
and teacher, is the basis of how positive discipline is applied
in the classroom.
My initial
puzzlement started as why boys respond differently to assertive
discipline as compared to positive discipline. Miss Davis and
I noted how the boys, more than girls, are reprimanded under the
assertive discipline program or they seem to have more pin moves.
Under positive discipline, gender difference was not noted. There
seemed to be an equal number of boys and girls who made entries
into the classroom agenda for discussion. After researching my
initial puzzlement during a class interview, I found that it was
not only the boys that were responding differently to the two
systems. Although both systems are forms of classroom management,
the children looked at the two systems very differently. Therefore
I changed my puzzlement. I am puzzled as to the way in which the
children are responding so differently to the two systems of classroom
management. Any reference to the pin board is part of the assertive
discipline program. References made to the classroom meetings
or class agenda are related to positive discipline.
What further
sparked my interest in looking at these two forms of discipline
was some recent and controversial research on the topic. Assertive
discipline is under attack by proponents of positive discipline
and vise-versa. Both sides seemed to have viable and well-supported
claims for their theories.
Proponents
of positive discipline claim that assertive discipline ignores
principles, or attitudes and expectations for long-term behavioral
growth. Examples of principles are: be respectful, care about
others, and be prepared. They argue that power-based models of
classroom management rely on obedience because simply telling
the children what to do requires the least amount of work on the
teachers part. The result, students obey orders but learn
little about responsibility. Critical thinking skills are sacrificed
when the students are constantly told, "Do what I say or
else youll be punished" (Curwin and Mendler, 1988).
Some feel that this program is "among other things dehumanizing,
humiliating, and dangerous" (Hill, 1990). The prospect of
having your name put on the board, being held in from recess,
or being reprimanded in front of the class can cause damage to
a young childs developing psyche.
Proponents
of assertive discipline cite research to back up the effectiveness
of their program. A study conducted by Crawley and Bauer in 1982
indicated that observable pupil behavior continued to improve
two to five years after the introduction of the program (Canter,
1988). This systematic approach to discipline improves on task
behavior, an increase of five percent per day. They also claim
that without positive and negative reinforcement, the students
will not choose to follow the rules. "Any classroom management
program not based on positive reinforcement ignores the behavior
of those students who regularly choose to behave appropriately"
(Canter, 1988, p.73).
Cultural
Questions
The culture
I am looking at is not an ethnic culture. Culture in this classroom
is defined in terms of classroom culture, with the two forms of
discipline contributing to different cultures. After looking at
the possible cultural questions, I decided to focus on CIP questions
3.1 and 3.5.
CIP
question 3.1 asks if the beliefs and values of the educator
could be contributing to the known puzzlement. Miss Davis is very
comfortable with assertive discipline. She has many reservations
about positive discipline leading me to believe that these beliefs
could be influencing the students views of the two systems.
Since Miss Davis comes from a family of long time educators, that
may also be influencing her decision to put more emphasis on assertive
discipline and not seriously look at different way to manage the
classroom.
After some
data collecting, I couldnt help but notice that the children
were having trouble negotiating between the two systems, which
led me to CIP question 3.5.
Although both positive discipline and assertive discipline are
viable classroom management options, the students did not view
both of them in that way. As I discuss below, they had developed
more trust and comfort with assertive discipline as compared to
positive discipline.
Data
Collection
My first
step in collecting information was to interview the class and
teacher to find out their initial feelings about both assertive
discipline and positive discipline. As mentioned earlier, I initiated
these interviews to try to find a gender difference in reaction
to the programs. The information I gathered did not solidify my
initial hypothesis leading me to eliminate the gender factor in
my research.
Interview
with Miss Davis
I started
my data collection by interviewing the teacher. Miss Davis shared
that she looks at positive discipline as having some value because
it adds to her existing system, but she will never totally switch.
She likes the "compliments" part of the class meeting.
For some troubled children like Frankie, just one compliment makes
him feel valued in the classroom. The downside is that the class
meetings are time consuming. Assertive discipline is something
that she cant let go of because she is (in her own words)
a "control freak" and "if it isnt broke, why fix
it." She believes that there should be immediate consequences
for inappropriate behavior and that assertive discipline better
prepares children for reality in the real world. She stated, "There
wont always be a committee of peers to help them discuss
every problem that they have." In addition, she felt that
assertive discipline is very easy for the parents to understand,
keeping that line of communication open. When a child comes home
with a note that says "10 minutes off recess", they
know that their child received one warning and two additional
reminders about inappropriate behavior in the classroom. I asked
Miss Davis if there has been any students for whom assertive discipline
has really worked. She mentioned Raleigh had a hard time adjusting
at the beginning of the year. He often misbehaved, didnt
follow the rules, and disrupted the class. Through home communication,
a supportive mother, and the powerful pin board, the problem was
solved.
Interview
with the Children
The information
I collected came from conducting two class interviews and one
activity where the children compared positive with assertive discipline
on a Venn diagram. I found the children to be very up front, honest,
and forward. They gave me a wealth of information and insight
into how they felt.
Most of
the children saw the pin board (assertive discipline) as a more
powerful, immediate and efficient way to solve problems. Some
of the children said things would be chaotic with people pushing
and shoving if there was not a pin board in the classroom. They
did not like the idea of waiting for a problem to be solved at
a class meeting, held twice a week. One child stated "people
can do very bad thing and they could get away with it very easily
if they wrote it in the agenda." The children were able to
verbalize the differences between the two systems. One child stated
that Miss Davis and Mrs. Williams (the principal) solve the problem
and that you dont get to talk about it until there have
been many warnings (with the pin board). During a class meeting,
kids solve the problems and you get to talk about them.
Some children
liked the class meetings and looked at them as a good way to talk
and solve problems. "It gives people a chance to say they
are sorry before the class meetings so you dont have to
solve it", "we get to solve problems better." One girl
stated that if you were having a problem with a friend, you could
solve the problem without getting your friend in trouble. Many
expressed fondness for sitting in a circle, getting compliments
and the fact that not everyone can see your name in the agenda,
whereas your name and pin can be seen on the pin board. When asked
how they would feel about getting their name put on the agenda,
they said, "bad," "embarrassed," and "scared that they are
going to get in trouble." One child said that it made her
feel better because she did not want the problem to happen again.
One said it would make you feel good because you would not get
your pin moved.
Many of
the children felt that a class meeting is a way to avoid getting
into trouble. According to one child, "I would rather have
class meetings because you wont get in that much trouble
because you just have to talk." One stated that the pin board
might make a friend loose recess and then you would have no one
to play with. Another boy stated that if he was the one in trouble,
he would rather put it in the agenda; if it was someone else,
they should get their pin moved.
The children
like the pin board because of "hornet points" they earn
for not having their pin moved. They trade these in for a toy
from the treasure box that Miss Davis fills with treats from the
dollar stores. The children expressed that getting a pin moved
is embarrassing because the whole class looks at you and sees
your name on the pin board. They also do not like the consequences
of the pin board, one child stating that you get into way more
trouble! All of the children seemed to be very aware of who the
frequent offenders were as far as pin moves were concerned.
I interpreted
my findings to mean that the children simply did not see much
value and trust in the positive discipline system. Assertive discipline
gave them a level of confidence that the teacher would handle
problems in the classroom appropriately. The agenda was not a
viable solution, just a way to stay out of trouble.
Observation
Miss Davis Class Meeting
All of the
valuable information that the children shared with me sparked
my curiosity to see a full class meeting. I had observed half
of a meeting once before, but at that time there were no new problems
in the agenda and the meeting ended after the compliments.
Before observing
a class meeting, I wanted to find out a little more about the
agenda. The rules in Miss Davis' classroom for using the agenda
are: (a) write and circle your name; (b) write about the problem;
and (c) list Kelsos choices that you tried. Most of the
children wrote about actions from the other children that bothered
them such as being hit, kicked, pushed, having something knocked
off their desk. Some children wrote about teasing, picking, or
being made fun of. Miss Davis even took advantage of the opportunity
to use the agenda to express her frustration with getting the
children to line up and transition quietly.
Miss Davis
started out the meeting by encouraging the children to use "active
listening" with their bodies and their ears, as well as some
rules such as being helpful and not hurtful. She reminded the
children that they need to be calm enough to talk about the problems
they put in the agenda. A general rule is that they do not discuss
problems that were written that day because they need a day "to
cool off."
Miss Davis
started the meeting by passing around the "wild thing"
stuffed animal. Only the student holding this could talk and give
compliments. The "wild thing" went around the circle
twice to make sure everyone had a chance. Here were some of the
compliments: Miss Davis complimented Frankie on having a good
week; one student complimented his mom for helping with his dragon
project; another complimented Travis for playing with him; mom
got a compliment for giving the child a present; dad got a compliment
for allowing his son to use the power tools; and Matt thanked
Miss Davis for allowing him two more days on his project.
Cindy entered
the first problem discussed in the agenda. Cindy reports that
Sarah was hitting her. She tried Kelsos choice #5 (ignore
it), and #6 (try to talk about it) and neither of them worked.
Cindy then gave a more in-depth description of what happened.
Sarah said she was just playing and did not mean to bother anyone.
Miss Davis looked in the agenda and noted that this problem had
been entered on the agenda once before. Next it was time for student
questioning. Some of the questions were: Why didnt you stop?
Did it happen at lunch? Was it like Mark McGuire hitting a baseball?
Why did you hit? When did it start?
The "wild
thing" was passed so the students could make suggestions to solve
the problem. Some of the solutions mentioned were: stop playing
with each other; dont hit anyone' stay apart; say youre
sorry, Sarah; cool off and talk; stay away from each other for
a week; think about how Cindy would feel; and treat people the
way you want to be treated.
The two
girls were then asked to consider all of the suggestions to decide
what their final answer would be. Sarah was not ready to apologize.
The two girls decided to go discuss their problem in private.
When the girls returned from their meeting, they had apologized
to each other. Since the most popular vote was spending time apart,
the class was asked if they still needed to do this. The class
said no that they were happy with the results.
The meeting
took a long time, almost half an hour to solve one problem. The
process was effective and the girls were happy. I was very impressed
with how well Miss Davis kept her role as a mediator, careful
not to interject her opinions. She truly did leave the problem
solving up to the class. At times I wondered if Sarah felt like
the others were picking her on. She said she felt good that her
friends were helping her to solve the problem. She did not feel
picked on or upset at all. I asked Miss Davis if this was typical
of Sarah. She described Sarah as a very well behaved child but
sort of a "tom boy" who sometimes did not realize her
roughness with the others.
Observation
of Mrs. Laws Class Meeting
I took an
extra trip to Millwood Elementary to observe a teacher who primarily
uses positive discipline in her classroom. Mrs. Law trains other
teachers in her school and the county in this method. The day
I decided to visit was not a good day for the children's behavior.
With "spring fever" running rampant, the teacher was
not very happy with their behavior. I personally felt like this
class of 23 kindergarten/first grade children were pretty much
in control and calm given that it was 3:00 in the afternoon. Mrs.
Law interacted with the children very calmly as she reminded and
redirected behavior. She conducts a class meeting every day at
this time.
Mrs. Law
started her class meeting much like Miss Davis. The children quickly
settled in and started the compliments. All of the childrens
compliments mentioned someone either playing with them or sitting
with them at lunch. One child mentioned that someone helped him.
Mrs. Law complimented him and asked the children to share if anyone
helped them that day. She shared with me later that she tried
to get the children to think beyond themselves and to think of
others. It is developmentally appropriate to be self-centered
at this age and her goal it to take them to the next level of
reasoning. Children go though three predictable stages according
to their interpretation of the rules (Charney, 1991). Between
the ages of 5 - 7, children feel that rules are based on the all-knowing
power of adults. Their main goal is compliance and wanting to
please. During the next stage, rules are based on social conventions,
not individual authority. Mrs. Law sees the importance of encouraging
the children to the next stage of social development.
The agenda
is a poster on which the children can write. There was a little
confusion because the writing was so messy. I noticed that the
children were not as patient while the other person told their
side of the story. While the first problem was being reported,
the bell rang. It was time for the children to go home; the meeting
would continue the next day.
I had the
opportunity to talk to Mrs. Law while the children were leaving
to go home. She truly believes in positive discipline for many
reasons. She feels that although it takes a long time, the children
develop responsibility for themselves and respect for others,
as they become true problem solvers. She has a very challenging
class this year with 17 boys and 6 girls; all but two of the boys
are very active. Four of them are up for child study for emotional
disturbances. I was surprised to find a "red light chart" on the
back of the door. She said it was for those four boys who have
never known boundaries. She admits that she does use other methods
of discipline but her main philosophy is the positive discipline
and all of the children in her class participate.
Mrs. Law
has a two-year-old son and she said that this (positive discipline)
is how she would want her child treated. She uses it at home and
sees it as the most respectful way to raise and discipline a child.
She tried many years to find a good solid program that she believed
in and positive discipline is it. The teachers who do not want
to give up assertive discipline do not want to give up an element
of control with their class and she can understand how hard it
can be.
However,
in Mrs. Law's view, the teacher has to give up control of behavior
in order for the children to take control and be responsible.
She noticed recently that one of her most difficult students started
using some of the language that they use in class meetings. Knowing
where this child has come from, she considers this great progress.
Interventions
Miss Davis
is very comfortable with assertive discipline and that is something
that I did not want to challenge or change. I shifted my focus
to her attempts to integrate positive discipline into her classroom.
Although she did enthusiastically want to try the program, I thought
that her hesitancy towards positive discipline might be causing
her and the children not to see its full value (i.e., as CIP
question 3.1 suggests, the educator's beliefs and values might
be contributing to the puzzlement). My first attempts at intervening
focused on encouraging Miss Davis to look at positive discipline
in a slightly different and more effective way.
I also developed
interventions based on CIP 3.5
(students' negotiations of school culture). Because the children
started out the year using a firmly grounded assertive discipline
program, this created a very comfortable "boundary" for the children.
They saw the teacher stopping poor behavior and giving prizes
to those who complied. They saw the effectiveness and ease with
which Miss Davis implemented this program. Although many of these
children had experienced positive discipline in first grade, this
new system was much easier and less complicated. Suddenly, another
system was introduced, one that was not as cut and dry for the
teacher or children. Now there wasnt an immediate reward
or punishment--and worse yet, the teacher would not solve every
problem that came down the pike! Being aware of the differences
between the two systems, assertive discipline became a "border"
that the children did not want to cross. "Operating within the
constraints of cultural systems, individuals can accept, resist,
challenge, or attempt to change cultural pattern norms" (Jacob,
1999). This is exactly what I saw in Miss Davis' class. The children
were responding in many different ways to the "change" (positive
discipline) to their cultural norm (assertive discipline). Based
on this information, I decided to develop interventions to help
the children make the transition between the two systems.
Before I
wrote my intervention goals, I came up with a list of behaviors
that I would like to see from the class and teacher. These behaviors
included a sense of collaboration and independence when it comes
to problem solving. I wanted to help the children understand and
use positive discipline. I wanted the children to develop responsibility
for their actions as well as awareness of how their responses
effect others.
To address
CIP 3.1, I came up with the
following interventions:
Implementation
of the Interventions
Miss
Davis. The first intervention I tried was to find some literature
that would provide Miss Davis with some informative ideas and
suggestions about positive discipline. I copied a chapter from
a book called Teaching Children to Care (Charney, 1991)
that gave suggestions on how to make the class meeting effective.
I found a good article called "Positive Discipline: Fostering
the Self-esteem of Young Children" by Eaton (1997). This
article included conversations between children and teachers using
the positive discipline approach. Finally, I shared with Miss
Davis what I learned from observing and talking with other teachers
who use positive discipline. I also suggested that she check the
school copy of the positive discipline video and book.
Students.
Some of the strategies I implemented were during class interviews
and discussions. Questioning the children and having them think
and talk about the pin board and class meetings brought their
understanding to a new level.
I made a
poster to encourage children to be a class meeting team star.
It included six suggestions with an illustration to go with each:
(a) A team star listens to others ideas; (b) A team star
brings important ideas to the group; (c) A team star is careful
not to hurt others feelings; (d) A team star works hard to involve
everyone; (e) A team star supports team decisions; and (f) A team
star builds others ideas. I introduced the poster to the class
and we discussed each idea. I encouraged them to get this out
during every class meeting to review before starting.
My next
intervention was to present several positive discipline "buy
in" lessons with the purpose of helping the children to become
more familiar with the methods and strategies. Since the teacher
had not tried any of these types I lessons, I chose two that I
thought would be effective. The first lesson was called "mistakes
are a wonderful opportunity to learn." We started the lesson
by discussing our ideas about mistakes. The children shared what
adults had told them as well as their own personal feelings. Most
children thought that mistakes were bad, that one gets punished
for making them, and that they should not be made. I told them
that was nonsense and we talked about learning from our mistakes.
I shared a couple of stories about mistakes that I made and the
children did as well. I introduced them to the "Three Rs
of Recovery from Mistakes:" (a) recognize, (b) resolve, and (c)
reconcile (Nelson, 1996). The children were taught to recognize
that they made a mistake, resolve or apologize to the people you
hurt, and reconcile or come up with a way to solve the problem.
I encouraged using the agenda to solve problems. The children
seemed to enjoy this lesson so much that we did a worksheet on
the three Rs. On this worksheet, each child shared a story
where they made a mistake and how they resolved the problem.
Next I did
a lesson on "four problem solving steps," introducing the
children to Nelson's (1996) strategies: (a) ignore the problem;
(b) talk it over respectfully with the other child; (c) come up
with a win/win solution and; and (d) put it in the class meeting
agenda. After discussing and sharing ideas about the four strategies,
we did some acting. I came up with eight different scenarios for
the children to help me act out. The kids had to guess which strategy
I used to solved the problem. The scenarios included problems
such as: another child has a book that you want to use, youre
mad that the whole class lost recess for a week, or youre
best friend wont be your partner. The children had a great
time doing this activity and did an accurate job guessing the
strategy.
Monitoring
Since I
was a weekly volunteer in the classroom, I had to rely on the
teacher to monitor the interventions that I tried with the children.
I sat down with her on my last day in the classroom to discuss
the effectiveness of my interventions. Overall, Miss Davis was
very pleased with the change in her children. She feels that her
students have become much better and more effective problem solvers.
During class meetings, they come up with thoughtful answers, look
for deeper ways to solve problems, and more easily arrive at a
consensus. She hears the children reminding each other about the
agenda and using Kelsos choices to solve problems. She feels
like the whole positive discipline program has come together for
her and her class. Miss Davis is much more comfortable turning
over the problem solving to her children. In fact, now she only
uses the pin board as a very last resort. Over the past two weeks,
the behavior grades have improved with all but one child getting
either a G (good) or an O (outstanding).
Miss Davis
attributed some of the success for this program to small class
size. With 19 children, it is much easier for all of them to get
a turn to talk during a class meeting. There is more space so
that the children can sit facing each other. She has developed
a level of confidence and support for positive discipline, and
she plans to use it next year.
The last
time I talked to the students, they expressed more pride in being
able to come up with creative ideas to solving problems. Most
of them said that it would not bother them to get rid of the pin
board and use only the agenda and class meetings for problem solving.
That is a far cry from where the children were five months earlier!
References
Canter,
L., (1988). Let the educator beware: a response to Curwin and
Mendler. Educational Leadership, 46, 71-73.
Curwin,
R., Mendler, A., (1988). Packaged discipline programs: let the
buyer beware. Educational Leadership, 46, 68-70.
Charney,
R., (1991). Teaching children to care: management in the responsive
classroom. Greenfield, MA: Northeast Foundation for Children.
Eaton, M.,
(1997). Positive discipline: fostering the self-esteem of young
children. Young Children, 52(6), 43-46.
Hill, D.
(1990). Order in the classroom. Teacher Magazine, 1, 70-77.
Jacob, E.
(1999). Cultural boundaries and borders, in Cultural Inquiry
Process Web Site. [Online]. http://classweb.gmu.edu/classweb/cip/
Nelson,
J. (1996). Positive Discipline (Rev. ed.). New York: Ballantine
Books.