Behaviour management or behaviour education?

Behaviour management or behaviour education? Some children need more external guidance, parameters set and reinforced by the adult mentor as they are yet to have developed the internal means to regulate the self especially in challenging situations.

But the end goal is to help young people develop the capacity to manage frustration successfully, to succeed at school in all facets of their learning and interactions, and to deal with disappointment in a healthy manner.

Dr. Albert Ellis, creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT) said the future of psychotherapy is in the school system and he invites us to apply his ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance principles in daily teaching practice. Ellis' paradigm teaches how thinking, feeling and behaving are interlinked and that events of themselves don't determine how we feel and behave as our habits of thinking has something to do with it. Do we tend to think in rational ways or do we have a more irrational slant on happenings in our lives?

Rational thinking is called Success Helper or Brain Friend thinking and irrational thinking is called Success Stopper or Brain Bully thinking. Each is linked to a different emotional and behavioural response to events. These ideas are introduced via the Have a Go Spaghettio! Success Helper approach to Social Emotional Learning (SEL). 

It teaches young learners that the belief constructions we build in our heads can either be helpful or unhelpful. This insight can help our young learners work towards developing a more internally placed locus of control and improved frustration tolerance.

I'm Worthwhile Crocodile Thinking - nothings good or bad but thinking makes it so!

 ‘Nothing’s good or bad but thinking makes it so’ says Shakespeare’s Hamlet. Alfred Korzybski said the ‘word is not the thing.’ If a child is not good or bad intrinsically but somehow determines they can be they’re not thinking straight according to Dr. Albert Ellis and others. Doing something well does not somehow suggest that it reflects how ‘good’ we are, that we are ‘good’ for doing good. Isn’t it more accurate to believe that ‘I did Ok’ but that has nothing to do with my OK ness? Believing we’re OK when we do well or others deem us to ‘be’ OK is what Ellis calls self – esteem, where he argues, we feel good when we do good or when others approve of us. He calls this conditional self-acceptance, where self-worth is determined externally; an externally controlled and determined sense of the self, good or bad.

Unconditional self-acceptance regards the ‘self’ consistently as one of worth even if one does good or bad or when others approve of us or disapprove of us. We accept ourselves unconditionally. Ellis would argue that this is a more substantial and evidence based self-assessment than relying on others to boost our ‘self-esteem.’

Alfred Korzybski said that when we assess our value based on an abstracted strength or failing and decide it defines us, we’re thinking ‘unscientifically,’ our self-assessment is not informed by the evidence i.e., we are allowing a particular aspect of ‘us’ and deciding it describes us in a global sense which doesn’t consider all the traits, qualities etc. that we possess. In other words, it doesn’t make sense, it is, as Korzybski says, crazy making thinking!

How so? If we conclude that we ‘are’ our smartness when we do something well, and it makes us a smart person how can this make us crazy?

I worked with a young person who presented with extreme anxiety and self-doubt as they had learned that because others assessed their capabilities in an area of learning as exceptional, they believed they had a reputation to live up to. They were obsessed with ‘what if’ thinking, what if I don’t get a good mark, what if I fail, what will people think of me if I don’t get a good mark etc. They began to withdraw, not take risks because if they didn’t live up to the expectations of significant others, it would mean that they ‘are’ failures. This is what Korzybski and Ellis calls crazy thinking induced, extreme psychological discomfort. This person has decided, errantly, that they need the approval and ‘esteem’ of others to be an OK person.

‘I’m worthwhile crocodile’ thinking teaches the young child that they are OK even when they don’t do so well at a task or when others inevitably disapprove of them. Their approval of themselves holds sway over the assessments of others. This kind of mindset will take on board the evidence, decide that ‘the word is not the person’ and carry on. They may take on board constructive criticism and advice, but their sense of worth remains strong, they accept themselves unconditionally!

Have a Go Spaghettio! I'm worthwhile crocodile!

The Have a Go Spaghettio! Success Helper approach to Social Emotional Learning is informed by Dr. Albert Ellis' ABC Theory of Emotional Disturbance and Alfred Korzybski's General Semantics Theory amongst others.

Dr. Ellis created Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT) and said the future of psychotherapy in the school system.

The Have a Go Spaghettio! chart represents the competencies and capabilities that help us achieve our goals, develop confidence and respect for self and others.

The goal is to introduce the early childhood learner to their thinking nature and to help them underrated that thinking, feeling and behaving are linked to each other. For instance the Red Success Helper, 'I'm worthwhile crocodile!' represents REBT's unconditional self acceptance, the idea that a persons worth is not tethered to how others view them i.e., that they are not what others might deem them to be e.g., dumb, smart etc.

Self approval is important and learning to need the approval of others is an unhealthy philosophical perspective because it can give rise to severe psychological upset e.g., anxiety.

So Have a Go Spaghettio!

The Have a Go Spaghettio! Success Helper Chart for Early Childhood

This is a short video about a an approach to teaching the fundamental principles of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy to young learners in early childhood. It's tried and tested and many early childhood teachers say it is well received by students. Teachers relate that students pick up the language readily and enjoy the songs that reinforce key concepts.

Albert Ellis, the creator of Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy said:

"l read your presentation on 'Have a Go Spaghettio!' a resilience building program for young learners. It seems to hit the spot and be excellent for your young audience."

Give it a go (Spaghettio!) and let me know how you goeeoh!

 

Ms Prudence Putty-Nose Needs an Ambulance

Ms Prudence Putty Nose wanted to impress her colleagues and her line managers, to demonstrate her dedication to her job and to illustrate just how much of a hit she was taking for the good cause.

She pondered a while and considered how she might best get the attention of the esteemers and sycophants, her narcissistic suppliers, to keep her fragile ego buoyant.

She had been under a fair bit of pressure as she'd been planning the demise of a colleague whose position she coveted and as her line manager also wanted him gone, they concocted a plan to get rid of him. Deceit and unethical collusion with co conspirators was a debilitating and tiring endeavour but it could be used to her advantage. So what did she do?

She gathered her close and trusted sycophant others to her office and declared she had been feeling dizzy and needed to lie down. She suggested she may need an ambulance as she had been under a fair deal of pressure. They pandered to her of course and diligently phoned for an ambulance. There was much ado about the traumatised patient as her buddies milled around her ministering to her poor ailing self.

Initial concern gave way to scepticism and doubt as to why this all came about. Was she really sick? Was it a ruse to attract attention?

Maybe she was under the weather but a few close to the situation suggested it was all an attention seeking exercise. She bounced back rather quickly and after the ambulance left and she had been treated she perked up and felt much better. This was all part of the expensive ruse to demonstrate her special person status, that she was a cut above the rest and people should know this. Narcissistic supply at the taxpayers expense!

Her line manager responded as planned and a few brownie points were accrued and noted. Yes, she was in the good books so to speak as she played protégé to her line manager mentor. Together they would concoct a plan to get rid of the thorn in their side, their nemesis, the bloke they didn't like.

Ms Putty-Nose of course is a composite of characters one meets along the way, people who you negotiate as you trundle on trying to get a job done, to support children and their families.

Ms Putty Nose was not without peer like Dodgy Dan  Doodle, another FIGJAM contender and of course there was good old Roger Bent who would present with all manner of physical contortions and mental gymnastics to please and appease those whose approval he needed. Knots and contortions, tangles and tears. Get me to the physio!

Ms. Putty Nose would spend a lot of time feeding and nurturing her narcissistic suppliers and all hell would break loose if, quelle surprise!, they rescinded their goodwill or forgot their daily salutations at the altar of Priestess Putty Nose. Tears might be the order of the day or an hour or two of in office sulks. Look at moi!!

She would buy them gifts on the schools dime, and they would be strategically placed around the place to signal to those on the outer that only those who played the FIGJAM game would qualify for preferential treatment.

The job though is not what's important, it's whether or not one is on side or not. Those who are independent and don't need the needy amongst us better be vigilant, as Ms Prudence Putty Nose types are out there ready to undermine and vilify them to get what they want.

Ms Putty Nose, Dodgy Dan Doodle, Roger Bent and others of their ilk are dedicated types and committed to their own health, wealth and happiness. The hangers on and wary others who sit at the periphery ponder what to do in a system that encourages and enables the Putty Noses of the teaching and learning world to dance their merry dance!

I need an ambulance, those nasties aren't paying me enough attention!!!

These are fictitious characters and any resemblance to people living or dead (or seem that way or who smell a bit off) is absolutely and utterly coincidental. 

Doing is Not Being! REBT and General Semantics

A global rating of another's worth is when a quality or characteristic or behaviour is abstracted from all the competencies and traits possessed by an individual and is then used to assess a person's entire personhood. For example, deciding a person is 'bad' because they do something we don't approve of e.g., they didn't wave back!

When discussing this with a teacher colleague, she notes that there are several fellow educators she works with who label some students in negative global rating terms, suggesting that ‘that’s the way they are’ and that they will not change.

These observations concur with my own experience as a teacher and counsellor, where a ‘fixed mindset’ mentality affects how some teachers behave towards their students, projecting a conditional acceptance of the other attitude, defining student worth in a negative way.

The word is not the thing. Alfred Korzybski

Albert Ellis, who created Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, spoke of unconditional other acceptance, the belief that a person's essential worth is unconditional where one quality, 'good' or 'bad' cannot define them. Similarly, Carl Rogers spoke of unconditional positive regard for the other person. 

What's the point of this and how does it relate to teaching practice? 

We have been taught via feedback that we can 'be' whatever someone deems us to be, unintentionally perhaps, in total ignorance but we have internalised these irrational and debilitating ideas as they are reinforced as a matter of course through language.

Consider the expression 'why are you angry? Can't you calm down!' This may be said in an empathic or in accusatory fashion or otherwise but what does it mean?

I've worked with kids who believe they are their anger, that their total being is characterised by this unacceptable, in their eyes, affliction that they shouldn't have. There's something wrong with them and they feel guilt and shame and extreme sadness. 

We are not the word assigned us Alfred Korzybski of General Semantics theory reminds us. The kid 'is' not 'an angry' kid but a person who feels angry at times. 

Hi there! 

It is advised that as mentors to others in the capacity of educator or parent we pay attention to what we say and the possible meaning it may convey; are we asserting you 'are' a 'bad' person for doing what you did e.g., swear at someone, or a person who did what can be assessed as a 'bad' thing. Doing is not being!

Food for thought.

 

The Word is Not the Person! General Semantics

Alfred Korzybski of General Semantics says that we ought to be more thoughtful about the language we use and to be mindful of the messages we are trying to convey. Too many and inappropriate words can confuse understanding and he suggests that we develop a scientist sensibility (Korzybski, 2000) for listening. He talks about creating a verbal pollution free zone by asking three questions that encourage specific answers. They are:

1. What do you mean?

2. How do you know?

3. What did you leave out?

Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy, created by Dr. Albert Ellis, incorporates Alfred Korzybski's ideas in his approach to psychotherapy and can be applied in counselling practice when working with young students.

Mary is an early childhood student who is not travelling OK. The teacher says she is self-critical and doesn't want to do things. 

We talk about Brain Friend and Brain Bully thinking. BF makes OK feelings and behaviours and BB causes us to feel not OK and we don't act as we could e.g., to try new things

We talk about Mary and how's she's been feeling and agree they are not helpful feelings she feels. She also says that she hasn't been doing her work and the teacher is wondering why. We talk about how BB thinking could be making her feel bad and she says she thinks 'I can't do this. I'm dumb.'

Maybe BB is tricking her into believing that she is totally dumb and hopeless. So, we say out loud together, 'I am dumb and hopeless.' We agree that it’s a Brain Bully way of thinking and so we decide to work on this together and we use the questions introduced above starting with #1

What do we mean?

We both answer this together and say things like 'because I am too scared to try, I am dumb and stupid.' Then we ask ourselves the question:

How do we know?

We say 'we are stupid because we are too scared to try. The teacher says we are not progressing and she tells mum she feels concerned so it must be true.' We think this kind of thinking is Brain Bully trying to trick us. We say together, 'BB is trying to trick us,' so we ask ourselves:

What did we leave out?

We talked about all the things we can do and made a list and we agreed that this proves we can't be totally dumb and just because we might feel worried about failing at something it is not true to say we are no good and that we shouldn't try.

We said that we'll work at the things we aren't so good at but we'll try to remember all the things we can do which we forgot to remember!

The word is not the person so why can a child believe they are the word 'dumb' when all the evidence suggests otherwise?

Food for thought.