Dr. Marvin Marshall on Education and Parenting

Discipline & Parenting Without Stress Contact Marv Marshall Marv's Tweets FaceBook Fan Page Marv Marshall's YouTube Channel Subscribe to Marv Marshall's  

Counterproductive Approaches

Learning requires motivation, but motivation to learn cannot be forced. Highly effective teachers realize this, so they prompt students to want to put forth effort in their learning by creating curiosity, challenge, and interest in meaningful lessons. In addition, however, and especially with youth in poverty, these successful teachers also create positive relationships with their students by practicing positivity, choice, and reflection. These practices are part of the Discipline Without Stress Teaching Model. This teaching model avoids approaches that inhibit motivation for responsibility and learning.

Following are 10 counterproductive approaches that are commonly used. Unfortunately, they are so counterproductive that they actually exacerbate the increasing dropout rate of students—especially in low economic areas.

1. BEING REACTIVE
Teachers too often become stressed by reacting to inappropriate behavior. It is far more effective to employ a proactive approach at the outset to inspire students to want to behave responsibly and then use a non-adversarial response whenever they do not.

2. RELIANCE ON RULES
Rules are meant to control, not inspire. Rules are necessary in games but when used between people, enforcement of rules automatically creates adversarial relationships. A more effective approach is to teach procedures and inspire responsible behavior through expectations and reflection.
See Rules.

3. AIMING AT OBEDIENCE
Obedience does not create desire. A more effective approach is to promote responsibility; obedience then follows as a natural by-product.

4. CREATING NEGATIVES
The brain thinks in pictures, not in words. When people tell others what NOT to do, the “don’t” is what the brain images. Example: “Don’t look at your neighbor’s paper!” Always communicate in positive terms of what you DO want. Example: “Keep your eyes on your own paper.”

5. ALIENATING STUDENTS
Even the poorest salesperson knows not to alienate a customer, but teachers too often talk to students in ways that prompt negative feelings. Negative feelings stop any desire of students to do what the teacher would like them to do. People do “good” when they feel “good,” not when they feel bad.

6. CONFUSING CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT WITH DISCIPLINE
Classroom management is the teacher’s responsibility and has to do with teaching, practicing, and reinforcing procedures. Discipline, in contrast, is the student’s responsibility and has to do with self-control. Having clarity between these two is necessary for both preventing and solving problems. See Classroom Management.

7. ASSUMING
Too often, teachers assume students know how to do what is expected of them. A more effective approach is (a) teaching expectations and procedures, (b) having the students practice, (c) having students visualize the process, and later (d) reinforcing the procedure by having them practice again. This process is necessary in order to have students be successful in performing the activity.

8. EMPLOYING COERCION
This approach is least effective in changing behavior. Although teachers can CONTROL students temporarily, teachers cannot CHANGE students. PEOPLE CHANGE THEMSELVES, and the most effective approach for actuating students to change is to eliminate coercion.
NOTE: Noncoercion is not to be confused with permissiveness or not using authority.

9. IMPOSING CONSEQUENCES
Although consistency is important, imposing the same consequence on all students is the least fair approach. When a consequence is imposed—be it called “logical” or”natural”—students are deprived of ownership in the decision. A more effective and fairer approach is to ELICIT a CONSEQUENCE or a PROCEDURE TO REDIRECT IMPULSES that will help each student become more responsible. This can easily be accomplished by asking people if they would rather be treated as a group or as individuals. They will readily have a preference to be treated as individuals and have ownership in the decision that will help them, rather than hurt them.

10. RELYING ON EXTERNAL APPROACHES
We want to assist young people to be self-disciplined and responsible. Both traits require internal motivation, but rewarding behavior and imposing punishments are external approaches. They also place the responsibility on someone else to instigate a change and, thereby, fail the critical test: How effective are they when no one is around? The greatest reward comes from the self-satisfaction of one’s efforts. In addition, by rewarding kids with something they value (candy, stickers, prizes), we simply reinforce their childish values—when what we really hope to do is to teach them about values that will last a lifetime.

In contrast to these counterproductive approaches, the DISCIPLINE WITHOUT STRESS TEACHING MODEL uses approaches that eliminate counterwill, the natural response to coercion.

A more comprehensive list can be downloaded from Counterproductive Approaches.

Authority and Coercion

Each time you coerce someone into doing something by using your power of authority, you deprive that person of an opportunity to become more responsible.

A Coercive vs. a Noncoercive Approach

Jim Cathcart (author of RELATIONSHIP SELLING and the ACORN PRINCIPLE and a sought-after international speaker) relates how he worked in the mountains in Arkansas repossessing vehicles when payments were not made on the loan.

Needless to say, he and what he was about to do, were not welcomed by the mountain men. As Jim was about to be ushered off the property, he would say, “OK, I’m leaving.” Then he added, “But look out for the guy who comes next time.”

“What do you mean?” would be the response. Jim then would describe that since he was not successful in getting any money towards the payment of the loan, the guy who would come collecting next was twice his size, not nearly so nice, and likely to be accompanied by the sheriff.

Somehow Jim would always get some money toward payment of the loan.

When he moved up the company ladder, his replacement was a veteran of the Marine Corps. A noncoercive approach is not the hallmark of these warriors. The former marine used the same tactics his drill instructors had used on him. Predictably, he met with resistance every time.

In fact, Jim’s replacement landed in the hospital for an extended stay only ten days after he was on the job.

Why did Jim succeed staying in good health and always reaching his objective of collecting some money while his successor was unsuccessful in both? The reason is that Jim behaved as a partner in problem solving and his replacement behaved as a “persuader.”

Need I explain the difference in effectiveness between a noncoercive vs. a coercive approach?

Parent Struggles

I believe most theories about the stress and strain of adolescence have focused incorrectly on such factors as physical changes, emerging sexuality, new social demands, struggles between being a child and an adult, and other such reasons.

This period is difficult for both youth and parents largely because adolescents become so independent of parents that controlling them is difficult. Attempts at continual control often lead to a reluctance to do what the parent wishes, which in turn leads to a power struggle, resulting in even more reluctance, resentment, and rebellion.

Parents assume that adolescent rebellion and hostility are an inevitable function of this stage of development. However, I believe the real reason is that these young people become more able to resist parental power. Many adolescents behave as they do because they have acquired enough strength and resources to satisfy their own desires and have attained enough of their own power so that they do not fear the power of their parents.

Adolescents, therefore, do not rebel against their parents; they rebel against their power.

If parents were to rely less on power and more on noncoercive types of influence from infancy on, there would be little left for children to rebel against when they become adolescents.

The use of power and coercion to affect change in the young (really, with any person) has severe limitations. These limitations with the young come before parents realize the power struggles they have created.

Many of these struggles are the results of using external coercive and manipulative approaches described in the last section of the parenting book.

Seabiscuit and Coercion

Laura Hillenbrand’s award-winning book, “Seabiscuit: An American Legend,” was first made into a PBS documentary and then into a motion picture. The book has been referred to as the best sports book ever written.

Seabiscuit—a descendant of the mighty Man o’ War—was an undersized, crooked-legged racehorse but was the subject of the most newspaper column inches in 1938. The horse was nothing short of a cultural icon in America.

In a test race, Seabiscuit once ran a quarter of a mile in an unheard of 22-2/5 seconds. It may have been the fastest quarter mile ever run by a yearling. However, the horse was rather lazy—really lazy—so the trainer was confronted with a behavioral problem.

When the rider asked him for speed, the horse slowed down When he tried to rein him in, the horse bolted. Asked to go left, he’d go right; tugged right, he’d dart left. The beleaguered rider could do no better than cling to the horse’s neck for dear life.

At only three years old, Seabiscuit had already run forty-three races, far more than most horses contest in their entire careers. Raced constantly, he surely no longer lacked for fitness. His problems were predominantly mental.

He was showing signs of burnout. He became edgy, stopped sleeping, and spent his nights pacing around his stall. He fought savagely in the starting gate and sulked his way through races, sometimes trailing the field from start to finish. He was considered mean, restive, and ragged.

The horse was sold. Seabiscuit’s new trainer knew what he was seeing. The horse’s competitive instincts had been turned backward. Instead of directing his efforts against his opponents, he was directing them against the handlers who tried to force him to run. The horse habitually met every command with resistance. He was feeding off the fight, gaining satisfaction from the distress and rage of the man on his back.

The trainer knew how to stop it. He took coercion completely out of the equation so the horse could rediscover the pleasure of speed.

Neither the trainer nor his rider raised a hand to him. Their noncoercive approach transformed Seabiscuit from a rogue to a pliant, happy horse. He never again fought a rider and went on to win races—including beating War Admiral in the “race of the century.”

The lesson as it applies to promoting responsibility, increasing effectiveness, and improving relationships: Coercion gets you reluctance, resistance, resentment, defiance, and rebellion.

Nurture the nature of whom you are trying to influence—without coercion. You will not only enjoy the process but the successes of your approach.

How to accomplish this is clearly shown in Part I and Part II of the parenting book.