The author of this week's guest column is Gary L. Crum, a retired teacher who worked mostly with disruptive and hard-to-educate students for over 25 years. The column first appeared in the Eugene, Oregon, Register-Guard on October 5, 1995).
Civilization is based on the assumption that individuals are responsible for their actions.
Most public school teachers would agree, classrooms are often not the safe, calm, productive workplaces they need to be. It's time we all acknowledge this fact and do something about it. I say "we all" because it will take a concerted, cooperative effort from all parties in education: students, teachers, administrators, school boards, parents, and communities to change what has become a pervasive negative climate in the public schools.
Next, we need to adjust our attitude toward nonproductive and disruptive students. Most of us who get involved in education do so because we're caring people. Unfortunately, that caring all too frequently translates into tolerance on the part of teachers, counselors, administrators, and school boards as we deal with dysfunctional students.
One of the key assumptions upon which civilization is based is that individuals are responsible for their actions. If we as educators or parents absolve students of this responsibility, we create "monsters." Our interactions with students must consistently tell them that there are limits to acceptable behavior, and that behavior outside those limits will result in predictable and consistent negative consequences.
We should always empathize with students who have experienced abusive childhoods, etc.; schools and other social agencies must provide counseling to address such issues. But we must, at the same time, hold those students responsible for their behavior. If we don't, we're doing a disservice to all students in the classroom, and especially a disservice to that dysfunctional student.
Tolerating unacceptable behavior tells all the students one of two things: the limits really don't count, so the behavior is actually acceptable, or the particular student is so "disturbed" that the rest of us can't expect him or her to behave acceptably. The first message leads to a total breakdown of any classroom structure, and the second has a devastating impact on any efforts to help the dysfunctional student change his or her self-image and behavior.
If we want "normal" behavior, we must define what we consider "normal," publicize that definition, believe all students are capable of behaving within that definition, expect acceptable behavior, and consistently punish behavior falling outside that definition. If we do anything else, (pardon the cliche) we become part of the problem instead of part of the solution.
I have used the terms "consequence," "negative consequence," and "punish." Yes, these are negative terms in that they are reactions to unacceptable behavior. On the other hand, they are positive in that they are efforts to extinguish unacceptable behavior and encourage acceptable behavior.
Our second needed attitude adjustment is simple: It's time we quit feeling guilty about providing negative consequences for unacceptable behavior.
It's really quite simple: Develop your boundaries or rules and the consequences for breaking those rules; be sure the students are aware of both; consistently enforce the rules; and provide the consequences. Most dysfunctional students come from backgrounds where rules were ambiguous or nonexistent, and enforcement was inconsistent or arbitrary. The last thing they need is for schools to continue in that same fashion.
It's important to mention that enforcing rules and providing negative consequences for unacceptable behavior is inconvenient for all parties. Of course it's inconvenient for the student - quite frankly, it's suppose to be!
But it's also inconvenient for the teacher who may stay after school, with a student instead of grading papers or planning lessons. It's inconvenient for the administrator who may become involved in the process, and for the parent who may have to pick up the student who stayed after school and missed the regular bus service, or who has to meet with a teacher, counselor or vice principal regarding his or her student's behavior. But, let's all remember, one of our jobs as educators or parents is to help civilize young people. It's a difficult and important job, perhaps the most difficult and important job in teaching or in family life.
Our next attitude adjustment, then, is to accept that discipline is important not only because it allows the academics to progress but as an end in itself. The out-of-control student usually becomes an out-of-control adult; the student who constantly disrupts the classroom becomes the adult who disrupts society. School affords the best opportunity to intervene in that negative progression; as caring educators and parents, let's not squander that opportunity.
Obviously, it's the responsibility of individual districts and schools to review their disciplinary procedures and make the changes that may be necessary to develop systems that work. There would be no better way to invest the time.