[From Bill Powers (950822.0400 MDT)]
Phil Runkel on 21 Aug 95 --
In reference to Rick Marken' post of 12 Aug 95 about PCT
application, especially the point about validating a program (such
as Ed Ford's).
Oh, friend, I hope we are not going to get into a technical
discussion of validity, program evaluation, and all that.
Oh, I hope not too. On the other hand, when one is about to buy a new
car, it's a good idea to lift the hood to see if there's an engine with
all the spark plugs, go around and kick the tires to see if one suddenly
goes flat, and drive around the block listening for squeaks, groans, and
scrapes.
And if you're selling a car, what with implied warrantees and a
litigious public it's a good idea to do all these tests yourself,
because that's cheaper and less embarrassing in the long run than
letting the end-user do the quality control.
I consider Ed's program, where it's being implemented seriously in
schools, to be on a shakedown cruise (to change metaphors in mid-
stream). If anyone should be looking critically at this program, it's
Ed, his co-workers, and the rest of us who have a considerable stake in
its success. I would much rather have it be me who asks "Why isn't this
just another application of operant conditioning, of reward and
punishment, of control of children's behavior?" I'm on Ed's side; I want
his program to succeed beyond his wildest hopes. I think we all do,
because everyone smart enough to see the merits of PCT will get a little
reflected glory from success. So if there are valid criticisms please
let it be we who discover what they are rather than someone who is
pushing another approach and would love to see the program fail.
The greatest potential for failure that I see is in the teachers who are
the primary point of contact between the program and the children. If
the teachers don't get more than just a passing (and temporary)
acquaintance with the basic principles behind the formulas, then as soon
as the immediate problems are solved, they'll think the system has fixed
the trouble and they'll relax right back into their old ways. LeEdna
Custer has already told us that this is happening and that she and
George are planning some new moves to counteract this regression.
The reason that PCT works in schools, to the extent it does, is NOT that
children will behave in order to avoid losing their privileges. They
will, of course, do that in a system that is set up that way, but they
will be turned into actors and cynics by such an approach, not into
happy people who love school and learning. In one of the news videos
generated by a Phoenix TV station, there's an interview with a couple of
boys who had been in the Social Skills Room in which they're asked
something like why they are now behaving better in the school. One of
the boys, obviously very bright, says in a half-mocking sing-song tone,
"In order to enjoy the company of my peers" (at least that's how I
remember what he said). I thought "Oh-oh, what this very smart kid has
learned is to play the system well enough, he thinks, to fool the
teachers." And he was giving, in my opinion, the wrong message, which is
that the reason you behave is to be allowed to be with your friends --
exactly the reason Ed gives in his explanation of why the system works.
Maybe I'm misreading this boy, but having been a smart-ass kid who knew
how to work the system myself, I don't think so.
What I wish this boy had said is "Nobody punished me, nobody made me
feel bad. The teacher was nice to me instead of yelling. In the social
skills room they helped me to figure out how to get what I want without
bothering anybody else. I didn't mind going back to class, because they
didn't make a big fuss about having me back. And what I really like is
that I have rights, too -- it's not all one way." Or words to that
effect.
What I wish another boy just graduating from the Social Skills Room
HADN'T said when asked about his plan was "keepmyhandstomyself", looking
down and mumbling. I thought "What have they done to this kid?"
I'm ready to learn that I'm being completely subjective about this and
reading things into the children's words that aren't really there. I'll
look at that video again to see if I'm misremembering it. To me the
indicator of how the system is working isn't that the administrators are
happier or that the teachers are happier; it's that the miscreants
understand the system and would rather have that system than not have
it. Somebody tell me that this is true.
···
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Best,
Bill P.