Bill and Rick referred to the discipline program I described. Based on their
comments I need to clarify what I said.
First of all, while I described it as a version of Ed Ford's program, this was
misleading. It includes features of his program but is not meant to be a
replication. I did not design it. The people who designed it did not do so
with PCT in mind.
The point I wanted to make was that there are many aspects of Ed Ford's program
which are non-PCT based and are very common to "discipline" programs in many
schools.
The unique parts of Ed's program, as I see it are: (a) the questions or
discussion format which is used to structure the conversation with children;
this is clearly PCT based., (b) the fact that all the staff in the school have
adopted a single framework, namely PCT, to talk about student misbehavior.
I said the discussion format is PCT based. The questions which Ed asks and the
PCT relatedness are:
step1--Exploration: This helps to identify the perceptions
going on in the student when the misbehavior happened.
step2--Evaluation: This helps to identify the reference perception.
steps3 and 4: This helps the student to think of an alternative way
the goal could have been accomplished which would
have been more acceptable and to increase the
the gain of the alternative control system.
I considered the program I described to be a version of Ed Ford's program. This
was a mistake if we think about the truly unique aspects of his program
mentioned above. Hope it is clearer now.
···
From: David Goldstein
Subject: the "discipline" program I described
Date: 8/16/95, 10:50pm