[Jim Dundon06.24.07.1010edt]
Boris wrote:
Hello Bill, it's really nice talking to you. I see you are very patient men.
As I think that there is too much opened problems, I'll try to go "piece by
piece"...
Hope don't mind
Jim wrote :
CAUSING CONFLICT ?>>>
Boris,
I did not write this. I copied it from your post of 6/23
Sorry if your thinking I wrote it caused you any disturbance. :-}
No, trying to "listen", learn and cooperate. Isn't it that obvious ? :))
Best,
Boris
Boris Hartman (2007.06.23)
[From Bill Powers (2007.06.24.0815 MDT)]
For example I
already introduced, if teacher says : "Tom, please stop doingthat with your pencil" or “stop talking to your
neighbor”, Tom wouldprobably stop doing it, but that means that conflict has occur in
student.He wants to do something else. That’s the most common situation in
classrooms. Teachers are disturbing students control with their talking
whatever they think they have to talk about, student’s are disturbing
teacher’s control all the time with whateverthey want to do, and teacher of course disturb students control again and
soon in circle of causation.
I think this depends a lot on the social relationships that have
developed in the class between the students and the teacher. I have been
a student in both kinds of classes: those where the students and teachers
acted like enemies, and those in which they acted like friends. When the
teacher disregards the goals of the students, the students do resist just
as you say. When the students disregard the goals of the teacher, they
get an unpleasant teacher who spends more time correcting unimportant
behaviors than teaching. When that happens, little learning will happen
in that classroom, and a lot of conflict will occur.
But I think that
students don’t stop doing whatever they want to do, whenseemingly accepting the control of teacher : be quite, don’t move.
Theymostly in fact control whatever they want to, because only outside
withvisible actions, they show teacher that they comply, but in fact
theyussually “search” for other means how to control their
perception.For example Tom could start to turn his pencil not on the table, but
underthe table. In the fact he is looking at the teacher but he is not
presentwith his thoughts. He is somewhere else, and turning his pencil is
maybejust the result of some internal conflict. He could start to write
messages on paper and send it over and thus communicating on this way,
still looking at the teacher, but of course not thinking what teacher
thinks that he think.
Right. This is a description of a classroom in which the social
relationships are malfunctioning. Both the teacher and the students need
to learn about showing and getting respect.
You say “seemingly accepting the control of the teacher.” What
if the teacher says “What you’re doing with that pencil is
distracting me – would you mind doing it where I can’t see
it?” It’s likely that the student will move the pencil out of
sight, isn’t it? Then the student can continue doing what is important to
the student, and the teacher experiences what is important to the
teacher.
Many problems in the classroom arise because the teacher wants to feel in
control of everything about the students. In some school systems (maybe
in most), teachers are evaluated on how well they control their classes,
so control itself becomes a big issue, and conflicts are inevitable. And
of course it is the very attempt to control all of what the students do
that creates the resistance that results in an out-of-control
class.
Ed Ford gives newcomers an exercise in the form of a list of things that
students do in class. The object is to check the items on the list that
would be considered disruptions (a disruption is something that
interferes with the teacher’s presentation of the lesson, or the other
students’ ability to learn if they want to learn). Here are some items
like those on his list:
Student gets out of seat, talks to another student.
Student forgets to bring pencil to class.
Student fails a test.
Student yawns and groans, stretches, belches loudly.
Student looks out window instead of at blackboard and
teacher.
Student tips chair back too far and falls on floor.
Student fails to do homework.
Student falls asleep in class.
The disruptions are numbers 1,4, and 6. Repeating them would result in
going to the RTC. The others are not disruptions.
When the classroom rules are discussed, the students are not asked if
they will agree to them. The teacher has the right to be allowed to
teach, and the other students have a right to learn if they want to.
Students usually agree that this is reasonable. But students, too, have
the right to do as they wish in class as long as it does not disrupt, by
the definition above.
RTP does not abandon common sense. If a student often falls asleep in
class, fails tests, does not pay attention, the teacher might notify
someone that there is a problem, and someone might interview the student
to see if there is something wrong in the student’s life. But that is
done in the setting of a school psychologist or counsellor, not as a
punishment or a correction. The whole point is that everyone wants every
student to succeed and will do whatever they can to help. If a student
knows the work forward and backward and is bored to death, it is
perfectly acceptable to read a comic book in class. That’s up to the
student. If the student is learning during the school year, that is all
the teacher cares about. The teacher does not try to control the
student’s behavior just to show that the teacher is in control.
Question: if the teacher asks the student to twiddle the pencil where she
can’t see it, and the student deliberately goes on doing it in the
teacher’s sight, is that a disruption?
Best.
Bill P.
Hello Bill,
...:))
Bill wrote :
I think this depends a lot on the social relationships that have
developed in the class between the students and the teacher. I have been a
student in both kinds of classes: those where the students and teachers
acted like enemies, and those in which they acted like friends.>>>>>
YES, I couldn't agree more. You described in very simple words two major
models that are happening in classrooms and that are described also in
pedagogics.
I'll call them, if that is alright with you "TOTAL CONTROLLING MODEL" or
classical schooling model and "EDUCATING MODEL". Please take both terms with
a little reserve, because they are extremes, which can be in practice mixed
in different ratio, but not often. Usually I think they exhibit these
extreme characteristics.
"TOTAL CONTROLLING MODEL" or it is called also AUTOCRATIC MODEL is based on
total quite and unmoving in the class (keeping at zero) while teacher is in
action, and exhibit some very typical characteristics :
Bill Wrote :
teacher disregards the goals of the students, the students do resist
Bill Wrote :
This is a description of a classroom in which the social relationships
are malfunctioning.
Bill Wrote :
Many problems in the classroom arise because the teacher wants to feel
in control of everything about the students. In some school systems (maybe
in most), teachers are evaluated on how well they control their classes, so
control itself becomes a big issue, and conflicts are inevitable. And of
course it is the very attempt to control all of what the students do that
creates the resistance that results in an out-of-control class.
Bill wrote :
If the social system is set up so one person has to control the behavior
of another with force or threats to get any help, there is something wrong
with the system.
I can add some other characteristics :
- keeping the unsolicited (by teacher) talk and moving in class at zero
- teachers acting (un)kindly, rudely or violently when children talking are
moving or turning their bodies to classmate, or playing with something (not
paying attention to teacher)
- "teaching" is reduced to "STIMULUS-RESPONSE" while students are perceiving
and recording what teacher says and after that they are solicited to
reproduce the knowledge or answer teachers questions. Teachers are keeping
students knowledge on the level "what the teachers want the students to
experience". Students are in fact not "working" as Perceptual control
system, but as "reinforcement" system
- The usual means of control are reward and punishment...
"EDUCATING MODEL" or I could say DEMOCRATIC MODEL (term use by pedagogics)
exhibit some of these characteristic :
1. Boris wrote :
So if I understand right, teacher who does care about students goals
(not conflicting with their goals) would exhibit non conflicting behavior.
Bill Wrote :
Yes. The teacher would at least be alert to the possibility of conflict,
and when it appeared, would back away and try some other approach.
2. Bill wrote :
I would teach children to negotiate with each other and with adults. If
you will do this for me, I will do something for you, this time or next time
-- what do you want ?
3. Bill wrote :
As long as producing the behavior you want the other person to carry out
does not conflict with any of the other person's goals, you can probably
control that other person's behavior as you perceive it.
4. Bill wrote :
The smart teacher will figure out how to allow the students to go on
controlling what matters to them, while still behaving in a way that
satisfies the teacher.
5. Teacher want to avoid conflict and violence with interpreting the
resistance as a signal to cease trying to control (interpretation of your text)
6. teaching includes student as a whole "working" control system with
perceiving, comparing, acting, controlling what he want to experience.
With these two models I'd just like to show that atmosphere in classrooms
depends much on how teacher is "controlling" classroom. If teacher wants,
with all means of interpersonal control, students to experience what teacher
wants, then it's highly likely that conflict of different intensities will
occur, and if teacher allow students to experience what they want and
students allow teacher to experience what they want, it's not likely for
conflict to occur.
So that's why I think is, that PCT is so powerful research tool which helps
recognize the problem as pedagogics can't.
Advantage of PCT I see in fact that theory shows how both teacher and
student are control systems in interaction. That probably means that both
are perceiving each other, comparing, and acting thus to control the
perception they want to experience. In the matter of fact they are trying to
control each others behavior.
Bill wrote :
When the teacher disregards the goals of the students, the students do
resist just as you say. When the students disregard the goals of the
teacher, they get an unpleasant teacher who spends more time correcting
unimportant behaviors than teaching. When that happens, little learning will
happen in that classroom, and a lot of conflict will occur.
Well I think this is the major point of PCT about school systems. We have to
recognize the problem as possible conflict of two control systems, that both
sides can solve, not that only students are "guilty" for everything that
happens in the classrooms and shouldn't happen.
Bill wrote :
In some school systems (maybe in most), teachers are evaluated on how
well they control their classes, so control itself becomes a big issue, and
conflicts are inevitable...>>>>
I think it's the very most school systems that are practicing this sort of
control.
So my opinion is that the most powerful message from PCT is in recognizing a
problem (cause of conflict) of schooling and of course I see powerful role
of PCT in solving these conflicts.
Very most school systems which do the "controlling" in this way operate in
the hierarchical threatening scheme :
1. LEVEL : Recognizing that student is disrupting teachers "control", we
have to stop him or punish him with all means.
2. LEVEL : Teacher can not stop student with his means of control, so the
conflict is "pushed" on the next higher level. The administrator will do it.
3. LEVEL : The administrator can not solve the conflict, so it had to be
"pushed" on higher level. The local community must interfere, police will do
it or the administrator call the parents.
4. LEVEL : If they can't solve it, the problem will be "pushed" even a level
higher : the court will do it.
"Pushing" the problem away without even recognizing what is a problem of
conflict, is for me "blind" acting of teacher, administrator and so on.
Question "What are you doing ?" by my opinion is not solving the problem of
conflict. It just reminds student of levels and means of control that can be
used on him if he don't comply. I see the question as a threat.
If you want to solve the problem I think right question for he start is :
"Why are you doing it ?" or "What do you want ?". But that probably needs
approach of PCT or MOL.
Bill wrote:
Ed Ford gives newcomers an exercise in the form of a list of things
that students do in class. The object is to check the items on the list that
would be considered disruptions (a disruption is something that interferes
with the teacher's presentation of the lesson, or the other students'
ability to learn if they want to learn).
Here are some items like those on his list:>>>>>>>>
I think that beside this list, Ed Ford's program should provide also
checking WHY the conflict occured (which goals of student were disturbed).
There must be some internal conflict in student. Maybe MOL could reveal that.
But my discussion doesn't mean that I don't approve using Ed Fords program.
I do because momentarily with the most common "total controlling" school
systems, I think that Ed Fords program is acceptable for school
administrators, and as you say it helps. Maybe it could need some
improvements with MOL (what's the ussual cause of conflict), and Richard has
by my opinion some good ideas.
But I also think that PCT should define the school system that is in
accordance with whole PCT knowledge and try to control the school system to
develop in direction "PCT want to experience" and I think it can experience.
My opinion is that PCT could prevent more conflicts and violence in school
systems then all other approaches can, because PCT understands what is going on.
Best,
Boris
Bill wrote :
Question: if the teacher asks the student to twiddle the pencil where she
can't see it, and the student deliberately goes on doing it in the teacher's
sight, is that a disruption?
I agree this could be a disruption or even maybe provocative behavior for
many teachers.
But playing with pencil is not disruption for me. Maybe other teachers do
counteract. Better example could be disturbing with talking. And more
students are talking, more they prove that teacher is doing something wrong,
if he wants to see it. He is boring students. And to cover his own
incompetence to motivate students, he tries to control.
I think if we want to solve that problem, there are many different
approaches that can handle it, with different consequences :
1. I wouldn't ask him "What are you doing ?", because he could say : "Are
you blind, I'm twiddling the pencil". If he deliberately do that, he is
capable of something more. I wouldn't "push" with threats either. And I
wouldn't kindly ask him to leave the classroom to go to Eds program. I have
caused the conflict and I have to handle it.
2. If I had to "react" 25 years ago I would probably use the means of
interpersonal control or administrative control. So I would try to persuade
him not to do it anymore, threaten, maybe yell, trying to use reprimand,
maybe show student that I see his behavior as disruptive
.....whatever...... I would act as a typical "total controlling" teacher...
3. If that would be 10 years ago, I would maybe ask him why he is doing
that, or what he wants to prove with that act, or what he wants to do
instead of listening to me...I would surely try to find a reason why he is
doing that, trying to talk with him friendly and nicely. I would take time,
because I have to educate...not just "force" knowledge...
4. If I would act know, I would let him do it, because twiddling pencil is
not disturbing for me, as I'm not using any more classical methods of
teaching (not keeping quite and moving at zero).
After all these years of teaching I think I'm using what you called...
...Bill wrote :
I would teach children to negotiate with each other and with adults. If
you will do this for me, I will do something for you, this time or next time
-- what do you want ?>>>>
This seems to be natural and life-looking way how people usualy solve
problems. Somehow it seems that all people must control intrinsic error to
some level, that satisfy them, not only one or few. So the usual ways are
agreement, contracts, "giving words", keeping promises etc., where both
parties get approximately what they want. They can't get it all what they
want. They'll probably never do. Knowing to communicate or negotiate is a
very good start.
And I deeply agree with you Bill that children in school have to learn this
LIFE LESSON. Students have to learn to respectfully communicate with each
other or with adults trying to control their wanted experience.
So final answer to your question if student is chronically disturbing : "If
you stop doing it (actions are disturbing me), I'll do something for you in
the limits of this classroom...but then all students will want
that...Question : what would you do ?"
Best,
Boris
[From Fred Nickols (2015.11.12.0540)]
I was looking through the control theory folder on my PC and came across several versions of a paper by Bill Powers titled “PCT for Beginners.” If memory serves I was doing some editing at Bill’s request. What I don’t recall is the end result. Did he publish it? Is there a paper of his bearing that title? Can someone point me to it?
Regards,
Fred Nickols, CPT
DISTANCE CONSULTING
“Assistance at a Distance”
The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room
Be sure you measure what you want.
Be sure you want what you measure.
[From Fred Nickols (2015.11.12.0613)]
Ignore and excuse my inquiry; I found it in my CSG folder. It was a paper I edited for Bill that he gave to Ed Ford to use in RTP.
Fred Nickols
From: Fred Nickols [mailto:fred@nickols.us]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 5:43 AM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: PCT for Beginners
[From Fred Nickols (2015.11.12.0540)]
I was looking through the control theory folder on my PC and came across several versions of a paper by Bill Powers titled “PCT for Beginners.” If memory serves I was doing some editing at Bill’s request. What I don’t recall is the end result. Did he publish it? Is there a paper of his bearing that title? Can someone point me to it?
Regards,
Fred Nickols, CPT
DISTANCE CONSULTING
“Assistance at a Distance”
The Knowledge Workers’ Tool Room
Be sure you measure what you want.
Be sure you want what you measure.
Fred; I’m glad you found this paper. FYI, I’m working on finding out when the archiving of Dad’s papers will be complete at Northwestern Univ. There, of course, will be access in that department on campus, and they also offer on-line searching capabilities. I’ll keep you posted!
Best,
*barb
On Nov 12, 2015 4:33 AM, “Fred Nickols” fred@nickols.us wrote:
[From Fred Nickols (2015.11.12.0613)]
Â
Ignore and excuse my inquiry; I found it in my CSG folder. It was a paper I edited for Bill that he gave to Ed Ford to use in RTP.
Â
Fred Nickols
Â
From: Fred Nickols [mailto:fred@nickols.us]
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2015 5:43 AM
To: csgnet@lists.illinois.edu
Subject: PCT for Beginners
Â
[From Fred Nickols (2015.11.12.0540)]
Â
I was looking through the control theory folder on my PC and came across several versions of a paper by Bill Powers titled “PCT for Beginners.� If memory serves I was doing some editing at Bill’s request. What I don’t recall is the end result. Did he publish it? Is there a paper of his bearing that title? Can someone point me to it?
Â
Regards,
Â
Fred Nickols, CPT
DISTANCE CONSULTING
“Assistance at a Distance�
Be sure you measure what you want.
Be sure you want what you measure.
Â
Â