Hi John,
I'm a teacher and social pedagogue on high school. And I can say I'm practicing PCT teaching. Who are you ? Can you specify why do you need informations you wanted ? You need assistence for some specific reason ? How deep is your PCT knowledge ?
As Martin kindly and friendly directed you on me and you didn't make a contact, I can also suspect that your writings could be provocation. In that case, any explanation would be waste of time. And time is something I haven't. It's also possible that I didn't understand the whole meaning of you message as I have problems with language.
So I'll launch just two premises :
1.. NON-PCT teachers usualy don't understand children "real nature" (as they didn't get it with education) so they are "launching knowledge" to match what they want with what they actualy perceive. NON-PCT teaching is somehow equal to "shooting in the fog". Teacher persue their goals or goals set by society in school program without concern to children actual state of "stability", thus mostly producing discrepancy in respect to children wanted state. Naughty behavior, playing with phones or other "machines", agression, violance, not listening, doing something else, talking to each other... and so on....show that children are controlling for their important variables or they are learning to do so, as that is what they will do all their lives (with school knowledge or without). All children behavior that have names we already mentioned, are just teacher contruct for lack of their control over own important variables (teacher goals). So when NON-PCT teachers are disturbed in achieving their goals, not being succesfull in controlling children important variables (as teacher don't know which they are, and how they are controlled), teachers perceive disturbances (discrepancies) to their control and usualy "react" with punishment to children unwanted behavior as that is by their opinion the way how to establish their control again. The problem is that "lack of control" is a result of discrepancies in variables which should be controlled by teacher or society oppinion. But what should really be controlled in children development (where to help or suport their inability to control) is ussually not included in school programs. The main problem is probably, that we can never know what children are really, really controlling, or what they need for their organization of nervous system to be optimal (problem of succesfull reorganization as probably Bill would call it). By my oppinion that's the most important thing chldren should be let to learn in their child-hood, as people are learning that all the time in their lives. So the main problem I see in NON-PCT classroom is : which variables are necesary for people (children) to control, considering their individual characteristic of development, so to achieve optimal control. I mean here "optimal control" as values of essential and other self-important variables as minimal discrepancies to genetic "set-points". Most problems of NON-PCT teaching are with children, which are ussually called "children with special needs". The term "special needs" or the problems with "not-standard" children shouldn't be attached to children, but to teacher and society, because the term is just a synonym for being unable to understand what these children are in fact controlling (problem of setting the right reference for children development). The term "special need" is just showing the problem of teacher and society for their misunderstanding of special caharacteristics for children individual development, which classical school system and NON-PCT teacher can't provide as they hadn't been educated in this complex control matter.
2.. I think it's easy now to gues, what PCT teacher will do in the classroom, because they understand the "real nature" of children and consequences of "blind" control which classical schooling is proposing with programs of children development. School programs are full of facts, accompanied by punishment and reward just for the case if children will try to reject "eating" the facts or will take it as a gift.
Maybe some more "talkings", if you reveal your real interest....
Best,
Boris
···
----- Original Message ----- From: "John Kirkland" <johnkirkland@GMAIL.COM>
To: <CSGNET@LISTSERV.ILLINOIS.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 11:12 PM
Subject: School's in
[From John Kirkland (2012.04.12.0825 NZST)]
This is a request for some assistance from CSGnetizens. Let me
present the crux of this matter as a question: When observing and
reporting about what's going on in classrooms, in what ways would a
teacher under the influence of PCT do things differently from those
adopting alternative theories?
Specifically, how would Rick's 'teaching' differ from that of a
non-PCT colleague just down the corridor. In more general terms then,
what would a PCT-influenced teacher be doing that sets their actions
apart from others?
Let me welcome comments from teachers as well as theorists, keeping in
mind Kurt Lewin's quip about practicality of theories.
Here's looking forward to reading a range of views as well as some
pointers towards relevant literature on this topic.
Best regards
JohnK