[From Rick Marken (960430.0800)]

This is a reply to Tom Bourbon's (290496.2253) post on his observations of
the Responsible Thinking Program as it is implemented in some Arizona
schools. I am cross posting to CSGNet (I hope).

Tom says that the following ingredients are necessary for the program to
work well:

Someone in the school's administration must understand the program and
support it, without reservation. Successful programs all have that support;
all unsuccessful ones do not. The "Responsible Thinking Classroom," or
"Student Responsibility Classroom" (known by different names, in various
schools) must be staffed by a person who understands the program and uses it
diligently, preferably a certified teacher. That person must have a close
working relationship with the administrator who "drives" the program -- in
the most successful schools I saw, those two form a very tight "team."
"Enough" of the faculty must participate in the program -- it looks as
though 40-50 percent is not enough, but 75-80 percent can make it go.

I have a question or two for Tom (or Ed or anyone else who would like to

1. What does it mean to "understand the program"? How does one determine that
an administrator or teacher understands the program?

2. What is the difference between "supporting the program without
reservation" and "controlling for the perception of the program being
carried out"? It worries me when people are asked to do things "without
reservation". I don't even support PCT "without reservation" (the
reservation being, of course, "as long as it fits the relevant data").