I would be a teacher in the future and I plan to get into
the most challenging schools to make a difference. Hence, I am prepared to deal
with difficult classes and deviant children. I have done one month stints in
one such school over the last 2 summers and have learnt and used many
techniques. If you have caught the movie “Coach Carter”, you would also have
seen many techniques which the inspirational coach used to motivate his difficult
players to achieve the best they can. Looking back, those techniques were
rooted in APA principles- punishment and positive reinforcement.
One common punishment I used with my students was time out-
either standing at a corner of a class or leaving the floorball rink for a few
minutes (I taught in class and coached floorball as well). All along, I have
understood that the rationale of time out was for them to cool down and think
about what they had just done (shouted out or not following instructions).
Hence, it was really interesting to see that time out was more broadly defined
in the literature- it includes isolation of the child in a specific area devoid
of persons and/or reinforcing objects (Resick, Forehand & McWhorter,
1976), the withdrawal of stimulus
materials (Barton, Guess, Garcia, & Baer, 1970) and ignoring of the person
(Forehand, 1973).
After punishing them with a time-out, I always make it a
point to ask them if they understood why I chose to punish them. This was
because I believe firmly that punishment should always be reasonable and the
student should always have the right understanding about why they were
punished. Without doing so, it can run the risk of a poor teacher student
relationship as the student will start to see the teacher as an unreasonable
dictator. Hence, I was really pleased to know that I have been backed up by
research. Resick et al. (1976) pointed out that providing an explanation for
the punishment is one of the important parameters to ensure that time-out works
effectively. Other important parameters include level of isolation and consistency
of use (Hobbs & Forehand, 1977).
Apart from punishment, I tend to single out students for
praise when they have performed or behaved well. However, I admit that I tend
to use more punishment than positive reinforcement. This is probably because
deviant behaviours tend to attract more of my attention and I mete out
punishment more frequently. After reading the literature, I am more determined
to make it a point to use more positive reinforcement. One of the studies which stood out was by Morgan
(2006), who demonstrated that frequent reprimands and infrequent praise often are
not effective and results in students showing challenging behaviour. This is
definitely not something I want to end up with.
References
Barton E. S.. Guess D., Garcia E. and Baer D. M. (1970)
Improvements of retardates’ mealtime behaviors by timeout procedures using
multiple baseline techniques, J. appl. Behav. Anal. 3.17-84.
Forehand R. (1973) Teacher recording of deviant behavior: A
stimulus for behavior change, J. Behav. Ther. & Exp. Psychiaf. 4.39-40.
Hobbs, S. A., & Forehand, R. (1977). Important
parameters in the use of timeout with children: A re-examination. Journal of
Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 8(4), 365-370.
Morgan, P. L. (2006). Increasing Task Engagement Using
Preference or Choice-Making Some Behavioral and Methodological Factors
Affecting Their Efficacy as Classroom Interventions. Remedial and Special
Education, 27(3), 176-187.
Resick P. A., Forehand R. and McWhorter A. Q. (1976) The
effect of parental treatment of one child on an untreated sibling, Behav.
Therapy 7.544-548
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.