Hello Teachers Network Leadership Institute (TNLI) MetLife Fellows:

Happy New Year!
I am Raymond Lau, a MetLife Fellow in Chicago. I will be moderating our January discussion about “Unconditional Teaching,” an article by Alfie Kohn published in the September issue of Educational Leadership (http://www.alfiekohn.org/articles.htm).

Last year I joined a school in one of the most violent neighborhoods in Chicago. Like many other low-income communities of color, the level of anger and violence amongst students is extremely high. One day, when I was losing my temper because students wouldn’t cooperate at all after lunch, one girl blurted out, “Mr. Lau, will you love us no matter what?” I had no adequate answer. I was unwilling to say yes because that would be untrue, and yet I did not want to say no and hurt my students’ feelings. This question has haunted me ever since. I believe it also lies at the heart of Alfie Kohn’s article.
According to Kohn, we must practice “unconditional teaching” if we want to help our students become interested learners and better people. We must “accept students for who they are rather than for what they do.” Students must be able to feel cared for and respected by us unconditionally, that is, even, or especially, when they fail to meet our academic or behavioral expectations.

I doubt many of us will argue with Kohn up to this point. However, from this rather uncontroversial starting point, Kohn draws conclusions with which we may feel less comfortable, in particular, his insistence that unconditional teaching requires the abolition of all extrinsic rewards and punishments in the classroom. In doing so, Kohn challenges most commonly-accepted classroom management techniques; such as time-outs, detentions, and other punishments. Perhaps more arguably, Kohn claims that public recognition of “good” performance or behavior, such as praises, stickers, and awards, is similarly damaging. Whether they are being rewarded or punished, students will believe that their teachers’ acceptance of them is contingent upon their performance or behavior.

While Kohn’s ideas are interesting and worth discussing in themselves, we may do well to situate them within the context of our previous listserve discussions. To begin, I pose the following questions:

1) Is “unconditional teaching,” as defined by Kohn, even more crucial in schools that suffer disproportionately from the structural inequalities and systemic injustices of our society?

2) Does the unusually high level of anger and violence in many low-income schools of color make it impractical or unrealistic for teachers in such schools to practice “unconditional teaching”? If so, what are their alternatives?

3) Is it possible to create a stimulating and caring classroom without abolishing all extrinsic rewards and punishments? How?

4) What structural conditions, inside and outside of the classroom, must be met to make “unconditional teaching” possible? In this NCLB-age, when standardized test scores are considered all-important, how do we create or defend an “unconditional acceptance zone”?

5) If we agree with Kohn, what policy changes should we, both as teachers and TNLI Fellows, advocate to promote “unconditional teaching”?
Kohn’s article is short and easy to read. It questions the hidden assumptions behind many everyday practices in our classrooms. Whether we agree with them or not, Kohn’s ideas should be examined thoroughly.

Looking forward to hearing from all my fellow Fellows. (Please remember to include the subject heading in your response.)

Sincerely,
Raymond Lau
Chicago
1/1/06

Happy New Year All!

Raymond is right the article by Alfie Kohn on "Unconditional Teaching" is short and easy to read.

The article really left me with mixed feelings on my teaching style.

On one hand -- I can think of an instance of "Unconditional Teaching" where I did not "punish" a student's bad behavior and later talked with him after our tempers cooled. It indeed lead to better behavior from the student.

Then on the other hand -- there is that time when a student blatantly disobeyed me three separate times in a matter of 20 minutes. After one minor correction, he took his coat and curled up on the floor to go to sleep. This was a high school student whom I had gotten an email message that informed me, he could be "set off" and turn violent quite easily. What does Mr. Kohn recommend I do in a case like this - just continue allowing the disrespect to occur? I knew something happened that morning and the student needed time to talk it out - however, I have a class to teach and am not qualified to be the student's counselor. So indirectly - I gave the student a time out because I called for the school psychologist. When he came back from that meeting he was fine. Plus after that morning, the student would come and tell me when he needed a "time-out".

Based on these two examples, I want to offer my thoughts on Raymond's third question "Is it possible to create a stimulating and caring classroom without abolishing all extrinsic rewards and punishments? How?" I do not think it's necessary to abolish all the extrinsic rewards or punishments. Teachers do need to take the time to develop a working relationship with all students, especially our lower achieving students. We may give stickers to those who achieve an 'A', but why not also give stickers to any students who may have improved one grade level. If a student is really struggling, applaud his effort and take the extra time to reteach the information to him or her.

As for punishments - I do think that after non-verbal and verbal cues to redirect bad behavior we have no option but to rely on some form of punishment. At times it may be as I did, a time-out with a school counselor, who is better able to listen to the more serious issues that a student may be dealing with. Other times it may need to be more severe - it comes down to teachers having to make judgment calls and at times our own humanness may get in the way. In my first example, my own anger with the student impeded my judgment. Fortunately, I gave myself time to reflect on the situation, before deciding the course of action (which should have been a write-up). However, I left it be. When the student later decided to try that same behavior "pushing my buttons" - I was ready to discuss the first time with him and we settled it without any further problems.

We have been to school to become teachers -- but it's our passion to teach that keeps us here. If we focus on our passion then we will be "Unconditional teachers"!

Sincerely,
Catherine Young
Sussex Technical High School
Georgetown, Delaware
1/2/06

Catherine,

I agree with what you have to say. I also really liked your quote at the end of your letter.

A great article and an interesting point of view. My question is, why did we go to college, learn to write grants, etc? I think it is because of the rewards....whether monetary or intrinsic, there is a reason.

I find that the article referring to unconditional acceptance, when really looked at, is just another word for best practices, positive reinforcement, etc.
The article clearly defines postive behavior intervention in its intended method. Children are reinforced throughout each day with various consequences whether they be positive or negative.

Being a true positive behavior interventionists means you look for the teachable moments whether behaviorally or academically. The purpose of a time-out is to teach a new way of doing something. It is not to be used as a punishment even though out children may view it that way. Ideally, having a child who teases another to sit-out (time-out) to think about treating people...other students....nicely, meaning with respect for our differences. This is the intended way of using time-out. It is a learning opportunity. Often, when we sit down and process situations with our students, there is no need for time-out anyway. Is it a bad thing to teach our student's to take a break if they need to? I don't think teaching children to self-monitor themselves is a useless idea. In fact, it opens a door to a more unconditional acceptance of self and ones environment.

Ideally, the notion of positive behavior interventions, is to teach children to reward themselves, to create an environment of trust and mutual respect for others, and have to ability to problem solve when issues arise. I do not think removing consequences in the name of unconditional acceptance leaves much room for teaching how the world works. I do not place conditions on my students...I place expectations most definitely. In my 17 years of experience working with children who have Emotional/Behavioral disorders and Autism Spectrum Disorders, using positve based reinforcement interventions, is extremely successful and teaches our student's to be respectful and respected members of our communities and society as a whole.

Thank you,
Chad D. Kirkpatrick, MSed, NBCT
Chicago
1/2/06

Happy New Year to all. I hope everyone is getting some much needed rejuvenation during the break.

As I read the article, several quotes jumped out at me in relation to our current situation here in Chicago.

Kohn quotes Hogan when he writes, "We come to lose sight of children 'except as they distribute themselves across deciles.'" Each year in recent history the Chicago Board of Education has chosen to fund certain academic support initiatives tied in some way to NCLB. Last year, the Board funded school-based tutoring by outside companies like Sylvan and Score! Eligibility last year was based on income. This year, a new "academy" model is in place that will be a school-based intervention. Students eligible this year scored in the 2nd and 3rd quartile on the ITBS tests from last year. In the fast-paced race to keep students just above the 50th percentile, there seems to have been some abandonment of those at the bottom AND the top. Why worry about challenging students who are already bored in school or why worry about giving extra support to the students who cause trouble because they don't have a clue what's going on around them academically? We seem here to be supporting keeping average kids average and helping slightly below average kids move up to meet their average brethren.

In my school, we gave letters to students who met the average criterion. They had to have the letters signed and returned the next day. Many of the students who fell into this category were seen by their peers as "stupid" while others were seen as "smart"... Students in the hall debated who qualified for "Saturday School". Was it for "stupid kids" or "smart kids"? The top quartile wanted in. "Why can't we get extra help?" The bottom quartile reasoned why they didn't want it. "Ain't goin to this dumb a** school on Saturday." Certainly as Kohn suggests, we're sending a message to our students that they are conditionally important. I didn't have any good answers for those who did not get selected. I had one-on-one talks with those who were invited to assure them it wasn't a punishment.

As for Kohn's distaste for discussions of "behavior", he seems to relish in the idea that a disruptive student removed from the learning community is being sent a message that he is not accepted and valued. To me, Kohn's glaring omission is in the affect a consistently disruptive student has on how valued other students feel. When one student throws pencils and paper at other students in class and, after exhausting instructive consequences, I move that student to a place where he cannot throw pencils and paper, Kohn suggests I'm devaluing that student because of his behavior.

In some of my attempts to try reasoning with consistently disruptive students, I have had instances like one where a student asked me, "Can't you just teach those of us who want to learn?" By focusing so much on assuring misbehaving students that I value them unconditionally and focusing on ways to keep them in the community, it seems that by Kohn's measure, I am necessarily sending a message to all other students that I don't value them as much; that their desire to learn is less important than little John's desire to feel accepted.

I would love to be able to understand the motives behind the actions of disrespectful and even violent students, but I wonder where we draw the line between helping those disruptive students when that help destroys the possibility for other students to learn.

Faren
Mr. Faren D'Abell
fdabell@cps.k12.il.us
Chicago Foundation for Education/TNLI/MetLife Fellow
1/3/06

Happy New Year to all!

Kohn's article made me feel both irritated and guilty at the same time. On one hand, I wonder what I should have done with the student who repeatedly threw tantrums, hit others, threw the contents of his desk onto the floor, refused to do classwork, and became the class clown. I tried to ignore him, talk to him, tell him that he is a good person, highlight his academic and social strengths, and bent the rules over and over again. What didn't I do? I didn't give him detentions, separate him from others, remove him from the class, acknowledge his negative behavior,deal with the fact that he never completed his classwork. What type of class environment did this create? I had challenges every single day from all of my students. I can only think of a handful that had good behavior. In retrospect, I believe that my "unconditional" approach to teaching led to an unstable, unstructured, free-for-all environment in which all students tested me on a daily basis.

This year, I started off the year with an iron hand. I let my students know what the expectations are and hold them to this. There are rewards and punishments in my class. On the other hand, I tell my students how special they are and how much they mean to me. I bring them treats, reward them as a group, write personal notes on their homework assignments, send them cards, and try to make them feel cared for and special in any way I can. From time to time, of course, I flounder and lose my temper. There is a huge difference with respect to classroom behavior now. Only about 4 students misbehave from time to time. My students are engaged and learning. They like school.

Sorry, Mr. Kohn, but there are occasional students from time to time that make us dread coming back to work the next day. There are students who sense when teachers are trying to be empathetic and take advantage of that. There are students who need psychological help way beyond what a classroom teacher can accomplish. There are students who will not make that emotional connection, no matter what.

I respect Mr. Kohn's point of view in that teachers should treat students equally and infuse caring, love, and respect into the classroom environment. I don't believe in singling out students or humiliating them in front of peers. I can understand how negative treatment of students can lead to issues like bad self-esteem and academic failure. What I'd like, however, are some specific ideas on how to help these children. I do not believe that it is as simple as loving them, no matter what. I don't believe that understanding why students act the way they do is simply enough to deal with the problem. I understand his theory, I just don't buy his solution.

-Norma Garrity
Chicago
1/3/06

 This is a very interesting topic! While I admire Kohn and his work, I think he is out of touch with the reality of classroom life in many ways. I spent all last year engaged in an action research study of student behavior in my first grade class. One of the things I discovered is that, if students come to school with five or six years of experience with a system of rewards and punishments, then just jumping in with Kohn's idea of "unconditional teaching" will rarely be successful. Here's why: Vygotsky. Remember the zone of proximal development? You have to take students where they are, and provide scaffolded experiences to move them to where you want them to be. For me, this meant that I was faced with students who didn't respond to a gracious request to listen respectfully while their classmates were talking. Instead, they became quiet when they saw me get out my "Recess conversation" clipboard, b/c they knew I was about to write their names down as needing to miss the first part of recess to discuss their rudeness with me. They responded to "punishment," b/c that's the kind of behavior system they experienced at home (if they even had a behavior system at home--many students these days don't--it seems that "anything goes" in some households). I HATED having to use such a method to get students to do something they should have been taught already. But I had to take my students where they were, as they were, and work from there. No matter what Kohn or any other "expert" says, there is NO WAY I will allow disruptive students to ruin the educational experience for other students. If, at first, punishment is the only way to reach them, then that is what I will do until I can get them to the point where my preferred method of classroom management--Responsive Classroom--will reach them.

I disagree with Kohn's notion of "time out," also. It is not intended as a punishment, and it is not supposed to be imposed on a child. Rather, it is an option provided for children--when a child feels s/he is losing control and needs the opportunity to cool off, s/he chooses to take a "time out" in a previously designated "cooling off" spot. Choosing this spot is one of the first things my class does each year. Again, helping students get to the point where they have enough self-regulation to realize they need to "cool off" takes time and patience. At first, I have to say things like, "I notice that you seem agitated. Would you like to visit our cooling off spot?"

Happy New Year!
Gail Ritchie
Fairfax County, VA
1/4/06

Hi all.

I always read kohn as a way to think further about my teaching - to push boundaries out of my comfort zone (what, no clip system on a stoplight; what, no time outs; chaos will ensue, no work will get done!)

I don't look to Kohn for practical answers about how to run my classroom (and I thought this article was one of his less persuasive pieces.) Instead, I value him for pushing important questions that underlie my practice. As Norma said, I too often feel guilty after reading him (which is why I waited months to read his book on parenting! It is hard enough to feel like a bad teacher, but a bad mom!!!) BUT it encourages me to think about the underlying messages and the ultimate short or long term effectiveness of clips, stickers, time outs, etc.

It is interesting he references Watson's book Learning to Trust. I love this book because it takes the philosophical challenge of Kohn and shows what happens when it hits the classroom floor. And it is not always so pretty, which I don't think Kohn really acknowledged. In fact, it is very complicated and this book has the courage to show that it is a long, difficult process. The book follows a teacher for 2 years (where she looped with her students) who is teaching in a high-poverty school and who is struggling with questions of building trust with students, creating a stable, firm, consistent classroom in the midst of chaos, taking problems in the classroom and changing them into moments of problem-solving, of creating community.

And none of this happens in the book or in our lives in some sort of quick fix; it is a long process that requires getting to know the students well, like Kohn argues for. I have found our morning meeting time (where we do a song or activity that involves greeting every student in the class, sharing something important and planning our day) and our class meetings to be one of the important times for community building. It helps build trust and knowledge between the students and myself but just as important if not more important, it builds it between the students themselves. I feel some of the pressures Kohn talks about in terms of time crunch for "academics," but as with most good teaching, the time it takes it pays off in being able to have a functioning classroom in a very difficult situation.

I do subscribe to many of Kohn's underlying assumptions and try to implement some of the theory into the real world of teaching on the west side of Chicago. I did away with my clips, my stickers, almost all of my extrinsic rewards. I found many of the approaches of Responsive Classroom to give me the answers to how to create a community in a classroom, how to learn about students (their hopes and their dreams), how to implement logical consequences, how to help them learn to problem solve and make amends when they make mistakes. It is not a perfect classroom, but it is much more functional than before for all of us. It is more stable, more loving, more engaged. the students are now talking through many of their problems and figuring out how to solve it in ways that respects all sides - often, without my help! It took months of modeling, but now they have some great skills.

I think Kohn offers some great challenges and I think we have the real world workshop in which to figure out what it look likes in our own classrooms, how it fits best for our students and for ourselves.

Liz Goss
Chicago
1/4/06

Norma and Faren have taken the words out of my mouth and trumped Mr. Kohn's "unconditional teaching." As I read the article last week, I tried to imagine a place where this idea of a class without a system of consequences for behavior could functionally operate ... perhaps in a dream world. An organized classroom where positive behavior is reinforced and students are loved (i.e. notes,one-on one conversations) and yet negative behavior that disrupts learning processes is discouraged is a model for real-world interaction. When our students go out into the working world, they will expected to greet their co-workers, work together and be respectful to their bosses. Why shouldn't they start these habits in school?

Although I agree that tactics like humiliation, yelling and you-messages do not promote success, sometimes a time-out, a whispered warning or a talk outside the class are necessary to quickly thwart disrespectful behavior and keep the lesson going for those 28 other students who are on task and ready to learn.

Amber Moss
New York City
1/4/06

Alfie Kohn, if nothing else, is provocative. I'm glad that, in just four days, he has already provoked a variety of perspectives from us. Wouldn't it be wonderful if, out of this diversity of opinions, we come to know ourselves and our teaching a little better? Let's keep this up!

In struggling with Alfie Kohn's ideas, I keep coming back to the following questions:

1) Are extrinsic rewards and punishments effective? For what purposes? For how long? And for whom? (For example, do "Student-of-the-Week" awards help students become more interested learners in the longrun?)

2) Do extrinsic rewards and punishments help our students become better, morally speaking, individuals? Or do they encourage students to do the right things for the wrong reasons? (For example, "Hmmm, I'd better not cheat on this test because I don't want to get caught...")

3) For classrooms (such as mine) that has an extremely high level of anger, punishments seem to only make things worse. What alternative strategies can we use to create a caring community?

Raymond Lau
Chicago
1/4/06

I've greatly enjoyed reading the responses to Kohn's article and feel moved to share my own thoughts...I teach 6th graders in an ILC (Intensive Learning Center) in Delaware. Just as I differentiate instruction for my students I do the same with regards to 'classroom management.' My students have different academic AND behavioral strengths and weaknesses, but just as our country has certain expectations for the way people should behave (rules, laws, etc.), our classroom community as a whole needs to, also. I begin the school year allowing my class to be a apart of this process, thus taking responsibility and contributing to their education and allowing them to have a voice/choice. From there, I explain the following quote: "Some people regard discipline as a chore. For me, it is a kind of order that sets me free to fly." ~Julie Andrews-It can be a pretty philosophical viewpoint for some young minds, but one that is learned through examples, modeling, role play and experience. Whether folks think my approach is right or wrong, it is one that has worked for the past several years, however, I believe that teaching is much like parenting...trial and error and what works for one child or group of children may not work for all. I'll continue to read and learn from others' thoughts and opinions. Thank you.

Whitney Price
Special Needs Parent and Educator
Delaware
1/5/06

Greetings to all from "Sunny California?" I hate to be redundant, but I've enjoyed all the responses to all the articles we have been reading. This one seems to have hit a nerve in many of us, including myself. Liz Goss' response echoes my own sentiments.

I have been a Cooperating Teacher (Master Teacher) for a number of years, and classroom management is always the most challenging piece to teach. My message to pre-service teachers is always the same. Every teacher, regardless to length of time teaching, struggles with this area-some years more than others. I also tell them that anything I model, good or bad, are tools to add to their arsenal of knowledge. When I made the transition from corporate America to the classroom, I brought much of that experience to the classroom. I had to learn that children are not "widgets," just like we are not "widgets." What works for one group of students oft times does not work for another group. The more strategies we have at our disposal will only better prepare us for that group of students for which our past strategies have not proven successful.

Self-reflection is always uncomfortable. It forces us to look at ourselves and practices critically. If we are truly objective in our reflection, we find that there is always room for improvement. While meeting the needs of all students is somewhat unrealistic, it should still be our goal. When I read Kohn's article, I too had visions of students over the years that made me search deep within myself each morning to be happy to have that child in my classroom. My responses to their constant interruptions have not always been ones that I would replay again. I reflect on those frustrating instances later, and have always thought of other responses that may have been better. What Kohn suggests is not a magic wand, but yet another tool that can be employed as a possibility. Building meaningful relationships has always been a time consuming endeavor. His suggestion may not work for all those students that challenge us behaviorally, but it may work for one and that's one more than before.

Wow! Who knew I had so many thoughts to share.

Happy New Year to us All.

Asa Salley-Fellow
3rd Grade Teacher
John Bidwell Elementary
Sacramento, CA
1/5/06

This indeed has sparked, if anything, a reflective look at we do on a daily basis. One idea I keep thinking of is teaching "replacement behaviors". When I was consultanting for an area that was experiencing a huge change in the population of students it was serving, I had to teach the teachers about replacement behaviors. Teaching replacement behaviors means setting behavior management in your classroom that is fair for all students. That does not necessarily mean doing the same for everyone because not everyone needs the same treatment. In this district I am referencing, they were once a highly affluent district where many languages were spoken, parents were involved, and they had lots of money. Well, things changed and industries moved and their student population began to change.
Housing became much less expensive and low income families from a large urban area moved in. Now they were dealing with street smart children and children from single parent homes, etc...I am sure you understand what is happening. These teacher's tried to continue to teach as they always have and it was not working. My job was to set-up programming in these schools that helped these students and teachers work together. Replacement behaviors was a new idea to this faculty. They were expecting these children to know cerrtain ways of behaving and they kept hitting a brick wall. I basically explained that they could no longer expect these children to know what to do on their own. When the ask the student to stop some behavior, they had to teach them what to do instead...a new replacement behavior. Kohn does not address these behavioral concerns in my opinion. It seems he is relying on students already knowing how to act. Many of them do not and it is yeat another responsibility we educators have.

I feel very passionate about positive interventions to support student behavior and help them to learn.

Consequences are not bad. I use them all of the time...the thing is, consequences can be positive or negative. It is up to the individual depending on what choice they make. I may be way off, but this is the way I am interpretting Kohn's article.

The comments I have read today are fantastic and I am very grateful that I can participate with such a vast body of knowledge. I look forward to reading more comments on this issue.

Hello Raymond and fellow Fellows:

Here's a different perspective from my last email.

Although I've enjoyed a couple of weeks off, I occasionally think about how much I miss my first graders. I recall a time about a month ago when I told my class how proud I was of each and every one of them (I don't exactly recall for what reason). Their beaming faces and the proud looks on their faces helps me get through the tough days. I smile when I think about how exicited and happy they become when I say, "ok, today we'll dance the cha-cha slide." I laugh out loud when I envison how much they are trying to concentrate when we dance the Macarena. On the other hand, my heart broke the week before winter break when we had a classroom spelling bee. It was my task to select the best 3 spellers to go on to represent the class for the school spelling bee. Although I explained several times that not all students have the same strengths and that our winners would go on to represent us, it didn't stop one student from tearing up and crying on my shoulder. It didn't stop the sad looks on the faces of about 4 other students. One boy put his head down shamefully.

This was the first time I'd had my students "compete" against each other (this school year). Sadly, our society is based on a system of punishments and rewards. We, as adults, are definitely motivated by rewards, whether monetary or not. Why wouldn't kids be motivated by this as well? I suppose one thing to keep in mind is the types of rewards we offer and to whom. When I reward my students for one thing or another (usually bevavior-based), I find some way to reward the rest of the group for effort. I do have a "Star of the Week" in my class that is randomly selected, but each student will eventually be "highlighted" and it's a great way for all of us to get to know each other a bit more. I can't imagine a classroom without some type of reward system. With rewards, however, punishments must exist.

Last year, I had a student who was constantly talking in class. He was a good kid and so affectionate, but I found myself calling his name over and over again. In another teacher's classroom, he might have received a detention, but I would just talk to him in private. It turned out his home life was much less loving and nurturing than one could hope for. I realized that the only "normal" part of his life was in the classroom. That is why he was always talking, trying to make friends. Our little talks seemed to help him at times, but not at others. I did "punish" him from time to time, but without humiliation or in a way that might make him resentful. I see him in the hallway now and he always says hi to me. He will give me hugs, with his head hung low. He still struggles in the classroom and his reading skills are very poor. He always seemed to like school, though. I talked to his 2nd grade teacher at the beginning of the school year, hoping she could help him or at least understand him. I was infuriated one day when I walked by and noticed that she had separated him from the rest of the class and pushed his desk in front of the chalkboard. Obviously, this didn't change much because a couple of weeks later she gave up on that idea.

That incident made me think, "Am I a hypocrite? Do I justify certain types of punishments while condemning others? Would I have treated this boy in the same manner if I did not know the type of home environment he lived in?" I still cannot answer those questions.

Norma Garrity
Chicago
1/5/06

Chad, I enjoyed your comments about replacement behaviors.

The common thread, throughout the responses is building relationships with the students. As a secondary technical related teacher - I do not usually have the luxury of building a relationship with the student prior to behavioral or academic challenges. We have block scheduling and my courses are only one semester long. That means I have the students for about 45 class periods before getting a new group. Not exactly an ideal situation to build these relationships.

I have found that rewards do work. It's amazing when I break out the stickers - these high schoolers actually start doing their homework so that their quiz grades go up and they can get a sticker. Since the quiz is based on their homework, the stickers for getting an 'A' on the quiz creates a double plus for all students. Their homework grades go up which in turn brings up the quiz grade.

I like your comment about consequences being good or bad based on the choices the student makes - that is in effect what we are teaching the students. And as adults, I am sure we have all learned how true that is!

Catherine Young
Sussex Tech
Delaware
1/5/06

Happy New Year TNLI Fellows!

I agree with all of the comments made thus far and have enjoyed reading and reflecting on my own teaching experience concerning "unconditional" teaching. My first reaction is answering the question of, "Do I do life unconditionally?" My answer is I try. I try in my personal relationships with friends, family, and co-workers. However I am unsuccessful most of the time because our society is built upon conditions. This however doesn’t mean that I will stop because I do believe that that kind of acceptance will change our society for the better.

Now, back to teaching...Because most of us are not proficient in living life unconditionally, I feel the best way to teach this to our students is to make our thought processes transparent, thoughtful, and realistic to our students. Kohn has brought up two excellent ideas that help bring us closer to unconditional teaching. Involving the student in the problem-solving process is key and actually accomplishes both awareness of the problem and showing that you care to solve the problem with the student. Also, addressing the behavior head on by announcing to the student that you are not going to "get me to dislike you" by doing the disruptive stuff separates the child from the behavior and places the dislike on the behavior.

I do not agree with Kohn’s analysis on using the "time out." Nobody likes to be "placed" anywhere against their will, but I don’t think he would disagree with using the "time out" as a choice. As a teacher, I sometimes get frustrated and need a time out. To lead by example I state this to the class and explain that one, I need it and two why I need it, this teaches them that we all need some down time and need to know how to identify our own "down time." Modeling self-awareness throughout the day helps me to monitor myself. How lucky we are as teachers to have the opportunity in our jobs to "think out loud" about our processes, both positive and negative. Imagine sitting in a cubicle in corporate America talking out loud about your thought processes. You would certainly be called into question.

One thing that seems to bother me most about this idea and the article is how teacher focused it is. What happen to the notion of using other classmates and trusted guides to help in this process. In my class when there are "distracting" behaviors (that is our label in room 9) everybody is responsible for one letting me know, and to help if needed. For example, I had a student that gets up our of his chair all the time. I talked with him privately about it and other students identified this behavior as distracting to them. So the student agreed to get some help from a student he trusts. He picked the girl sitting next to him. Her responsibility is to mark a tally on a post-it everytime he gets up. Everyday he tries to beat his "score" from the previous day. We all publicly acknowledge his growth and reflect on how improved our learning environment has become. This was facilitated by me as the teacher, but it is also in the hands of the learning community.

Thanks for all your insightful responses,

Dana Grimes
2nd grade
Fruit Ridge Elementary
Sacramento, CA
1/7/06

Hi TNLI Fellows,

As the moderator of this discussion, I've been really resisting the urge to jump in and take a position vis-a-vis Kohn's ideas even though I do have strong feelings about them; I was afraid that I would overstep my boundaries. Dana's heartfelt response today pushed me over the edge. I'm in total agreement with her thoughts and sentiments. I think Kohn is, too.

So, I'm going to take off my moderator's hat and get a few thoughts off of my chest.

I think it is wrongheaded to argue that we should model our classrooms after the "real" world and to propose that if extrinsic rewards and punishments constitute the operating principle of the "real" world, then, by all means, they should also form the foundation of our classrooms. I, for one, but I'm sure there are many others, became a teacher because I was not content with the "real" world. I fight to help bring about a better society in the future by trying to create a more caring, democratic community within my classroom in the here and now. I struggle to enable my students to grow up to be independent learners and moral individuals who can help transform a world that has treated them with such disdain and injustice. I don't want my classroom to be like the "real" world; I want it to be better than the "real" world!!

Lest you think I am a naive, ivory-tower idealist, like so many people suspect Kohn to be, let me hasten to add that I teach in one of the toughest schools in Chicago, both in academic performance and discipline. Everyone is bombarded by outbursts of anger and violence constantly. A fellow teacher told me just before the winter break that she had been going back home in tears every day. Rewards and punishments don't work in my school. In fact, they make things worse! When I reward a student, I hurt the feelings of others. When I punish a student, I make him/her even angrier. I think my students are so sensitive because they have been hurt and rejected so much and so often before. The most common response I hear is "I don't care!" Somehow, they think that comment will protect them from being hurt further. A few times, I became so exasperated that I ended up saying "Well, if you don't care, I don't care, either!"

What do I have to do to break this vicious circle of "I don't care!"? I have tried many things, but nothing really worked. I now believe that the only hope I have in turning things around in my classroom is through "unconditional" teaching. It sends the message that "No matter what you do, I care!"

In previous listserve discussions, we have talked about poverty, funding inequities, racism, unions, etc. If we are serious about doing something about them, I believe we must begin in our own classrooms. We are teachers, afterall. It is in our own classrooms that we must say, "This is where I draw the line. This is where I begin to fight back." And I fight back by asking my students to help me create and maintain a learning community that is caring, moral, and democratic, one that is distinctly different from the angry and violent environment that is immediately outside of our classroom. I actually told my students that I would no longer reward and punish anyone any more, and I explained why to them. (I teach 5th grade, so I can have these conversations with my students.) I told my students that they should do the right things for the right reasons and not just because they are afraid to be punished by me or their parents. I think engaging students in moral dialogues is the best way to help them develop the ability to think and make decisions about matters of right and wrong for themselves. In addition to these moral dialogues, I also hold class meetings regularly and conduct activities that improve my students' problem-solving skills.

My experiment began over a year ago. How successful has it been? Well, it's too early to tell. I'll be honest, I was an emotional wreck most of the time last year. If it weren't for the support of my fellow Fellows here in Chicago, I simply would not have been able to survive the year. But then I was a new teacher at my school last year, and students really knew how to push a new teacher's buttons. Things are much smoother this year. I think it's mainly because incoming students were impressed by the interesting and outstanding work that my students did last year and that they had already heard about my reputation of doing things very differently. But things can still get really rough once in a while. The bottom-line is: I think most of my students have grown significantly in their ability to tell right from wrong and that they are more willing and ready to monitor their own academic and behavioral performance.

I still use punishments more often than I like, when I get angry and lose control myself. But after I have calmed down, I always explain to my students that I still believe that punishments are wrong and ineffective; it was just that I had lost my temper. And if I think I had made a mistake, I would apologize to the class or to the individual student publicly. My students know well that I don't pretend to be perfect at all and that I make mistakes just like they do. And they can be amazingly understanding and forgiving.

Once in a while, when the going really gets rough, I am tempted to give up my experiment and just give the whole class detention or something. But then I resist the temptation. I dig a little deeper to try to find a little more energy and inspiration to keep going. We don't give up our dream of democracy just because it often seems unattainable. By the same token, I don't give up my dream of a caring, moral, and democratic classroom just because it seems "impractical" at times!

I am grateful for all the thoughtful and heartfelt responses to this discussion so far. I am learning a great deal from them and they keep me fired up.

Raymond Lau
Chicago
1/7/06

Hi there.

I have been reading the list serv discussion with excitement this month.
I've tried to use Kohn's writings for inspiration in my teaching and in my parenting.

Raymond's post, which really echoes my thinking on the subject, reminded me of a story (that I know I've told some of you). It's about my older daughter, Hannah. She's 11 now and the preteen behavior of telling me that she hates me began when she was around 9. The conversations usually would go like this: Hannah: "I hate you!!!" Judi: "Well, I love you" (to which would get angry and she would storm off) One day, I was pretty fed up and when she told me she hated me, I said "Well, I'm not too fond of you right now, either." She stood there a moment and her face crumbled and she started to cry and said, "No, you're supposed to say that you love me anyway!"

For me, the story has really epitomized the notion of unconditional love and acceptance that children need in order to feel secure. I think that they will always test us, as parents and as teachers, and I'm not sure why they just don't believe that we won't leave them or hate them when they do test us (maybe because adults have left them before?--but what's my daughter's excuse?).

My other thought on the subject, and something I've been mulling for a while, is that schools (and individual teachers) make a decision to treat children as "good" or "bad". I don't think that this is often a conscious decision, unfortunately. Instituting rewards and punishments, and no-excuses rules, assume that our students are bad and need to be controlled. Several of the schools that I work in in the South Bronx make this assumption and my new teachers are quickly realizing that the rewards/punishments system is sorely lacking. When we teach unconditionally, we are teaching under the assumption that our students are, and want to be "good" and we have to support them in trying to be. As many respondents said, it's about building relationships with students, and acting accordingly when it is necessary, based on the specific situation, instead of relying on "one-size fits all" external rewards, consequences and rules to determine behavior.

Thanks for such an enriching conversation

Judi Fenton
New York City
1/8/06

Isn't it wonderful that this article has caused all of us to stop and think about how we teach and interact with our students! I believe that each one of us aspires to be an "unconditional teacher". So often the circumstances in which we find ourselves can steer us off course....and hence the value of this article to guide some soul-searching. I was especially struck by a thought in the article that referred to a study where students who felt unconditionally accepted by their teachers were more likely to be interested in learning and enjoy challenging tasks, etc. It made me think that teachers need to be unconditionally accepted by their principals......think of the powerful teaching that could happen in an atmosphere of unconditional respect.

In reflecting on Kohn's article, I do believe strongly that in the area of rewards and punishments...I prefer the word consequences....there are many different and valid points of view. To be the critical component of either of these is the "HOW" of the reward or the consequence. The "HOW" stays with a child, or any of us, forever. I teach in a third grade class in a school in the Bronx. The students are very challenging and exhibit many anti-social behaviors. There have been situations when it was necessary to remove a student from the group or another child for everyone's safety and well-being.

HOW that is done determines whether or not it helps the child grow and develop as an individual. And the bottom line is that a child knows instinctively whether or not we value them...or are just putting up with them.

So as a new year begins, thanks for the opportunity to stop and reflect.

Maureen Connelly
New York City
1/8/06

I have enjoyed reading about how others teach and interact with students. I was consoled that so many responded with such honesty! Thanks for that! It sure is hard to respond correctly at all times to some students, I know I want to, but after over 30 years of teaching it doesn't get any easier. I often have to evaluate my "unconditional teaching."

Discipling children is difficult and risky. They all don't respond the same way to rewards and punishments. I recently read John Rosemond, the family psychologist, who wrote discipline is a matter of leadership, not punishment-ship. He states that disciplining a child should be different than the training of a rat---manipulating rewards and punishments. Missing from this equation is recognition that humans possess free will while rats do not. It is a difficult (sometimes impossible) task to deal with humans and get great results all the time just because we are dealing with individuals they may well make wrong choices or buck authority disregarding the punishment just to show that they have a free will and no one has authority over them. I think we all can relate to that to some degree.

So what is the solution to this frustrating, stressful situation that we have to deal with in our classes? Rosemond writes it's the old-fashioned understanding that discipline is a matter of how well one communicates, not how well one manipulates consequences. I thought his insights were helpful in deepening our understanding of unconditional teaching. I would just like to add that I also believe that communication is a matter of highly skilled teaching. Knowing when and how to talk to a student is the difference between annoying him or having him open up. We need to think carefully before we speak so we can be the diplomats we need to be in these tough situations in our classrooms. When we assume this role of leadership and thoughtful communication with our students, unconditional teaching will be there.

Jean Davies
Wyoming
1/8/06

Whenever I read Kohn or hear him speak, I am both energized to be a better teacher and depressed that I'm not better. At times, when he is giving examples of what NOT to do, I think to myself, "Damn, that's me."

Reading the article makes me think what I often have to remind myself - my students are just kids. Even when they make me angry, they are just kids who probably hurt inside and don't know what to do with that hurt. And, because I'm human, sometimes I don't see that - sometimes it's very hard to see that. Sometimes, I don't see the hurt behind the endless streams of curses thrown at me. But, that doesn't mean it isn't there.

What I take away from this article is that our students need our support - whether they behave well, perform well, make us angry, or fail at everything we give them. We are there to be their teachers and their guides.

I have never seen Tim Frederick teach, just observed his contribution to NYC TNLI work, and followed his always interesting and informative blog entries on teaching English Language Arts [http://timfredrick.typepad.com/timfredrick/]. But from what I have seen, Tim gives himself far too little credit below, and gives Alfie Kohn far too much credit. I had managed to avoid commenting on Kohn up to this point, but I can't bear watch Tim finding himself coming up short on the Kohnian standard.

It is not by accident that Tim is the self-depreciating teacher, and the Alfie is the self-promoting writer and speaker. Dr. Kohn offers a cure that others are supposed to apply, not himself. His Summerhillian view of the world works best outside of the confines of real schools and real classrooms. It is in the world of his libertarian abstraction that children's learning is entirely self-directed, that all learning takes the form of play, and that self-discipline grows organically from inside the child, without any external direction. It is on the lecture circuit and in the printed word [both forms of communication that allow him to evade the dialogue which at the heart of the classroom and the school] that this romantic view of the development and education of children seems most impressive. In the real world, it is otherwise. By measuring himself against Kohn's standards, Tim finds himself wanting in terms of a utopian benchmark that he -- and other real world teachers -- could not possibly meet.

Far too many novice teachers start out with Kohn's romantic, libertarian worldview, thinking that the only thing that keeps students from achieving and excelling is repressive schools and authoritarian teachers. If I really care about students, the logic of this view goes, they will respond to my obvious love and care. When combined with the inexperience of novice teachers, this approach is a formula for chaos. Students do not understand the lack of limits as caring, but rather as not caring -- if you really cared, they think, you would be working to keep me doing what is right. In very short order, most of these novice teachers go careening in the opposite direction, toward a very authoritarian presence, as a matter of what they decide is self-survival. Kohn's Summerhillian worldview is Manichean, polarized between his romantic libertarianism and authoritarian repression, and when the libertarian approach falls flat, it seems that authoritarianism is the only viable option left.

But successful teaching and efficacious caring takes root in something different than these polarized extremes. It does not involve either an abdication of authority or blind obedience to authority, but the elaboration of a democratic authority. There is a tension in that formulation, but it is a tension essential to the educational process. Education is necessarily an unequal relationship, since the teacher possesses knowledge that students need, and that must be imparted to them. And yet education must have a vital egalitarian component, because learning requires dialogue, as we knew as long ago as Socrates. The accomplished teacher is simultaneously a figure of authority and a democrat.

To understand this notion, let’s begin with the first, most fundamental forms of education. I am no fan of the market systems and behavorialist mechanisms of rewards and punishments against which Kohn polemicizes. But Kohn uses them as a straw opponent, to avoid the real issues of limits and consequences in education. Children are socialized into positive, social behavior – it does not happen by itself, and children are not by nature benevolent beings who will blossom into loving adults if only left alone. If anything, children are naturally quite selfish and self-centered little tyrants, starting from their infant experience that the world exists to serve their needs. Isn’t the world of an infant restricted to his or her immediate caregivers, and don't those people provide for every need, soon after he or she starts crying? Sharing, empathy, and care for others are the products of socialization, of education from the outside. While these sentiments and dispositions are not nurtured by yellow stars or by class dollars, they are most definitely taught. They do not arise naturally and organically, Rousseau's Emile and South Pacific to the contrary; they must be self-consciously taught -- they must be modeled, they must be demonstrated, they must be practiced, they must be advocated, and in all of this, they are taught.

One other point. I also do not know what conception of love eliminates all negative emotion, such as anger and disappointment, from its expression. There are times when anger is precisely the emotion of love. Let’s consider the most extreme example: what other feeling is an appropriate response, rooted in love, for example, to a student who is cruel, in the way we know young people can be, to another student. No doubt, there are appropriate and inappropriate ways to express that anger, but what possible good would come from pretending that one is not and should not be angry at such behavior. Some acts violate important moral codes, and do so in the most cavalier way, without any mitigating circumstances. To deny anger in that context is to deny the wrong of what was done.

Hi everyone,

I am worried that Leo's recent response to Kohn is so heavy-handed that it is making others feel too intimidated to share their views, especially those of us who may not be very familiar with Kohn. It is so vehement that it seems more an attack than a disagreement. And it seems to be based more on emotions and ideology than a careful analysis of the text.

I am not trying to defend Kohn; I am only trying to defend this listserve discussion as an open forum to which each and every one of us can feel safe and comfortable to contribute. I want to make sure that we can all feel free to express our opinions, no matter how unpopular they may appear to some, without worrying that someone is going to "jump all over us." Don't we do this in our classrooms every day? Isn't this what we mean when we say we want our students to feel safe to speak up, even though their views may be unpopular? Isn't this what democracy is ultimately all about?

Our discussion has been going strong; a wide range of views were expressed. I was touched by many comments and have learned a great deal. I have had to reexamine my initial impressions of Kohn, but I believe I now have a more accurate assessment of both the pros and cons of his ideas. More importantly, the discussion so far has given me new ideas and energy for the future.

There are still plenty of issues about "unconditional teaching" to talk or argue about. I encourage all of us, especially those who haven't joined in yet, to continue to contribute to this discussion, regardless of how unpopular you think your opinions might be.

Raymond Lau
Chicago
1/12/06

I think the main feeling/response I have to Kohn's article is guilt.

You see, I agree with Kohn's philosophy. I discovered Kohn in graduate school and his message resonated strongly. I am a career changer and have been teaching for 9 years. I have taught 1st through 4th grades. I teach in a middle class school in NYC where most children perform on grade level. About half of the teachers in my school use some type of behavior mod system for classroom management based on positive reinforcement. I have resisted instituting one in my classroom but have come very close during times of extreme frustration.

The problem is I would love to run my classroom the way Kohn describes but it feels almost "saintly" to me. I generally form a caring relationship with each student in my class but each year there will be one or two that I have to work very hard to like. In trying to find a balance with classroom management I tend to err on the side of having a "rowdy" class at times. I don't use techniques that control too tightly because I can't bear it when the class is bored and disengaged. I like it when the kids are animated and get excited about learning and at times this spills over into rowdiness. I tend to "scold" kids for misbehavior and will take time off of choice time when really pushed. Even after 9 years of teaching I find management to be the toughest part. I feel that an important part of my job is to get a kid to the end of the year still excited about learning. The kids seem to become attached to me year after year as well as make good progress. My management is definitely a work in progress. I lose my temper, yell at times but do my best to be respectful and caring of the kids. I continually reflect upon my practice. The bottom line is I love learning and communicating that love of learning to children. I care about the kids. I do my best.

I have found Kohn provocative and useful as a sort of gadfly to challenge my thinking. What I always find intriguing in discussions about Kohn is the ease with which teachers fall into a collective kind of self-guilt about not being able to live up to Kohn's standard in their classrooms. We tend to look inward as opposed to outward when both orientations are what is required. In essence, Kohn challenges us to think about the particular culture of our classrooms, but the culture of any classroom is deeply imbedded in the culture of the school. And most of us are acutely aware that the school cultures in which we work are often fundamentally at odds with Kohn's vision. On one level, Kohn falls short because he fails to offer a pedagogical approach to help teachers move towards "unconditional teaching;" as a result, he leaves teachers questioning their efficacy. More significantly, Kohn fails to offer a meaningful policy-driven critique.

How much more powerfully would Kohn read if he felt like an ally to teachers who was helping policy makers to better understand the structural barriers that prevent many teachers from implementing some of Kohn's ideas in a more sustainable manner? In his work with the Fair Test group, which can be looked at more as a student advocacy project and not necessarily a teacher-driven enterprise, Kohn has taken a step in the right direction. However, in light of the tremendous effort made by teachers to address the issues that he raises, Kohn falls alarmingly short for me in advocating for these very same teachers.

I would like to comment on Raymond's concern that Leo's response was heavy-handed and might intimidate others from sharing their views. In my first response to the Kohn article I noted, among other things, that my main reaction was guilt because I thought it was an admirable approach to teaching and I knew I fell very short of Kohn's vision. I found Leo's response quite refreshing. Leo made excellent points about how and why Kohn's approach would not be practical or doable in public/city schools. Leo's response initially had the effect on me of "The Emperor has no clothes!" which was an important new step in my thinking about Kohn but was not the ending point.

After reading Leo's arguements I thought, well of course this couldn't work exactly as Kohn has laid it out in most schools and I should stop beating myself up for not having the type of classroom he describes. I differ from Leo in that I do believe there are places where Kohn's ideas could be implemented. I went to graduate school at Bank Street College and student taught at the elementary school that is a part of Bank Street College. The school is like a lab site for the ideas that they teach at the graduate school and they were doing a pretty good job at implementing Kohn's ideas. The conditions were very different than those that I encountered when I began teaching in a public school. The Bank Street Elementary School had a class size of about 22-25, had a head teacher as well as an intern who I'm pretty sure was full time and a student teacher. They also had support people who would come in and help struggling students with reading and math. In addition to the difference in the classroom conditions, the families sent their children to Bank Street because it was a progressive school and thus the kids were exposed to similar ways of thinking at both home and school,i.e. a wavelength very similar to Kohn's.

Bank Street was where I was first exposed to Kohn. As I mentioned in my previous response, I work in a middle class high performing school and yet the culture is still very different than the Bank Street School. Some of the teachers at my school do create an environment closer to the Kohn ideal than the rest of us in the school. These teachers have a strength in creating a certain type of classroom community. Myself and other teachers in the school may have different strengths but I believe our management styles reflect that we care about and respect the kids .

So I do believe Kohn's ideas can work under certain conditions but Leo's response started me thinking differently about Kohn. I always admire teachers whose classrooms reflect Kohn's philosophy but Leo helped me to realize I didn't have to feel "less then" if I was not able to be that way myself. Sometimes the culture of the school lends itself easily to implementing Kohn's ideas and than again there are school cultures that do not and yet are still caring places of learning. I also think there is the issue of teacher temperament; even if the school culture is not a Kohn model, certain teachers have classrooms that are because that is who they are as people. The important point for me was to realize that there are many ways to be a gifted teacher. Sometimes when I read Kohn I get so caught up in his world view that it seems like his is the only way. That is the spell that Leo helped to break and I for one, am happy for his response. I would hope, and tend to believe, that people taking part in this Fellowship are strong enough not to be intimidated by other peoples’responses. Also, many thanks to Raymond for facilitating this thought provoking discussion.

Dear TNLI Fellows,

My sense is that many of us believe in the following: To fundamentally improve the education of low-income children of color, we must struggle to bring about "drastic reforms" involving the "radical reconstruction of society itself." I particularly got this sense during our November discussion of David Berliner's article.

I keep wondering about the following questions:

1) As teachers, what kind of "drastic reforms" can we help bring about within our own classrooms? And how does "Unconditional Teaching" fit into these reforms?

2) Are there essential relationships between "drastic reforms" involving the "radical reconstruction of society itself" and classroom management?

3) How are the classroom management practices of a teacher with a Social Justice perspective different from those of a teacher without a Social Justice perspective?

Raymond Lau
Chicago
1/16/06

Dear TNLI Fellows,

I don't know if we have any more energy or interest left for Alfie Kohn, but I want to take advantage of the final week of our January discussion to pose two questions that I believe lie at the core of the philosophy of "Unconditional Teaching" but have been overlooked so far.

1) Kohn, and many others, believe that what is ultimately at stake in the debate about rewards and punishments is how we view the basic nature of our students. Do we see them as naturally self-centered and selfish beings who will do whatever they can get away with in order to maximize their self-interests? Or do we see them as beings who naturally want to belong and to do well but are lacking in the skills, know-how, and experience to do so? If we believe in the former, then we will more likely be inclined to try to control our students' behaviors by means of extrinsic rewards and punishments. If we believe in the latter, however, we will more likely be inclined to find ways to equip our students with the skills, know-how, and experience that they need in order to get along with others and to do well, rather than simply trying to get them to comply with our wishes.

Which view should we embrace? What are the implications?

2) In his book Unconditional Parenting: Moving from Rewards and Punishments to Love and Reason, Kohn can rely on the bond of love that naturally exists (often, but unfortunately, not always) between parents and children. In this context, unconditional acceptance is based upon unconditional love. However, in extending the principles of unconditional parenting to the teaching realm, I believe Kohn has neglected to determine a clear foundation for our supposed "unconditional acceptance" of students. Afterall, we are teaching somebody else's children, and thus can no longer take for granted a bond of love that naturally exists between us and our students. What is the source of our desire, motivation, or energy to practice "unconditional teaching"? What drives "unconditional teachers"? A sense of social justice? The desire to fight for the underdog? And how is our energy, motivation, desire sustained or renewed on an on-going basis? For those of us who teach in really "tough" schools, this question is immediate and urgent.

We usually spend more time talking about our students than ourselves, but if Parker Palmer is correct (in his book The Courage to Teach) that "we teach who we are," then perhaps it is high time that we examine a little more closely the "inner landscape" of ourselves, as teachers.

I hope we can discuss these two important questions before January is over.

Raymond Lau
Chicago
1/25/06

I know that I am way late in responding to this article, but here goes: I do believe that many of what Kohn says has value, however, I must say that it is often easier said than done when our classroom environment most often reflects society's view of rewarding positive "behaviors" while punishing negative behaviors. Culturally, I would say over 90% of my 7th grade students are in agreement with this philosophy as evidenced by a particular incident that happened just prior to Christmas break.

For the first ten weeks of school, only a small percentage of my students consistently missed numerous assignments, failed to actively participate in classroom activities and were often disrespectful to their own peers. Despite being given numerous opportunities to make amends for all of their misdeeds, my colleagues and I decided that students who consistently acted in this manner be excluded from the Christmas party.

After the party we had all of the students (including the students who were not allowed to attend) write their reflections (anonymously) on whether or not they felt that exclusion was appropriate. Out of 85 responses only 3 students felt that the punishment did not fit the crime and that they felt that the exclusion was too harsh. I was extremely surprised by this. Many wrote that although they were excluded, they thought the punishment was "fair" because it wasn't right for everyone to suffer because they chose not to follow classroom rules or complete homework. They expressed that although they were sad about being excluded, they took responsibility for their actions and vowed to improve. Of course this was no magic bullet, some of those students still continue to make mistakes--like any other human being, but since adolescents have a deep connection to what they perceive as "fairness" or "unfairness," all in all they felt that since they were being treated fairly (i.e. they had a privilege taken way from them for inappropriate actions), they felt that they had learned something from the incident.