Behaviour
Modification
Chicken or egg?
Most adults seeking advice on "behaviour modification" are usually
looking for ways to change the inappropriate behaviour of the children
for whom they are responsible.
There is a wealth of opinion and advice on what to do to change the
child's behaviour which tacitly places the fault within the child.
I have spent my professional life (30 years plus) working with
children, families and educationalists who were having difficulties
with children's behaviour. In a small number of cases, I was
totally baffled as to why the child behaved the way s/he did. Some
children seem born "naughty", but I think they are very rare.
In the great majority of cases I have met, the child was merely
responding to its environment and the adults within.
There are obvious cases where abusive adults almost consciously wreak
havoc on children which do not need further description here.
However there are often much more subtle forces at work. So
subtle, that some well meaning adults who are in charge of children,
are unaware of the extent to which they contribute to the problem.
Below are some examples which I believe demonstrate the point.
"Not my bag"
I once worked with a "disruptive" child whose father told me to speak
to the boy's mother as his son's management was not "his bag".
He presumed that leaving the mother a clear field, would
keep the lines of command simple (or at least exonerate him from any
responsibility). In reality, it gave the child mixed messages
about who was in charge of what and tempted the child to explore
boundaries further through misbehaviour. Had the parents come to
consensus about standards and then enforced consistency, the boy would
have felt more secure and less likely to disrupt.
"Couldn't afford
the time"
A teenage girl asked me to
negotiate designated one to one time with her mother as a reward for
handing in her homework on time. (The mother had a new partner.)
This arrangement worked well for a while and then the homework dried
up. The girl later told me that her mother had offered her money
instead of the meetings as she "couldn't afford the time".
The mother presumed that giving her daughter money would
work equally well as a reward. It did not. The consequence
was that the girl stopped handing in the work forcing the mother into
one to one attention, albeit of the nagging variety. Had the
mother fairly considered her daughter's emotional needs, a more even
balance could have been struck which would have maintained appropriate
behaviour on
both parties.
"How many times have I got to tell you.....?"
A secondary school involved me in its in-service day of devising
strategies for encouraging appropriate behaviour from the girls.
Despite my protestations, the day focussed on rewards and
sanctions for the girls related to their behaviour.
The following week I was in the Special Needs Office and all hell was
breaking loose in the corridor outside. Being an "Educational
Psychologist", I stayed well out of the action and just observed :-)
Ten minutes late for the lesson, a teacher arrived with a mug of tea in
his hand and started barking at the girls about their poor behaviour in
the corridor whilst waiting for him.
The teacher seemed unaware that the poor behaviour of the students
was down to him. Being late for his lesson, unprepared and with a
drink in his hand showed the girls that they were low down on
his list of priorities. Consequently they responded in kind and
showed, through their behaviour, what they thought of him.
Had he been waiting at the door of his class to meet and greet the
girls, having previously written up the work for the lesson on
the board, then all parties would have had a much better start due
initially, to mutual respect.
"There's a man
coming!"
At a supermarket
checkout recently, I watched a mother and toddler approach an array
of sweets on a handily placed display.
Mother: "Don't pick up any sweets"
Child: Picks up sweets.
Mother: "I have told you. Don't pick up sweets!"
Child: No response
Mother: "If you don't put the sweets back I will
smack you!"
Child: No response
Mother: "Look, there's a man coming and if you don't
put the sweets back, he will smack you".
Child: No response
Mother: "The man is getting closer and if you haven't
put the sweets back, he will hit me!"
Child: Child eats sweets.
The mother starts the interaction by telling the child what she does
not want him to do. When he begins the actions she has forbidden,
she threatens him with violence. When he refuses to co-operate
she does not carry out her threat and gives away any authority she may
have had, to a mythical man. When this next threat proves
useless, she appeals to the child's better nature by turning the potential
violence onto herself. The child responds to this third empty threat by
eating the sweets.
Had the mother negotiated the transaction before by promising rewards
for appropriate behaviour then the situation could have been avoided.
e.g. "When you have helped me with the shopping by sitting
quietly at the checkout, we will call at the library on the way home so
you can choose a book". The essence is to describe what you want
to see (not what you don't want) and promise rewards for appropriate
behaviour (not threaten violence for naughtiness).
"Time out"
Angela, a reception class girl, was sitting on the carpet
drinking her milk from a packet through a straw. Nobody made
any comment. She then took the straw out of her mouth and by
squeezing the packet was able to direct a jet of milk into her mouth.
The Classroom Assistant then said "If you keep on messing
about with the milk I will take it off you". Angela turned the
straw through 90 degrees and squirted the milk over another child.
What was left of the milk was duly removed from Angela.
The children moved to the work area. After class discussion, each
child was required to come to the front of the class to draw on the
board. Child number one duly came out, performed and was praised.
Angela then had her turn in the same process. While the
next few children were at the front, Angela seemed to be looking at the
length of the waiting queue. She got up, crossed the room and
slapped a girl's face. Straight away the teacher instructed the
Classroom Assistant to take Angela for "Time Out". The Classroom
Assistant asked Angela which book she would like to have read to her
during "Time Out". Thomas the Tank was agreed upon and the pair
left the classroom.
Once again descriptions of inappropriate behaviour are being fed to
the child. Eventually very inappropriate behaviour results in one
to one attention from an adult with Angela's choice of book.
"Time Out" is most effective when it is a short period of an
apparent withdrawal of adult attention.
Conclusions
Most children's behaviours are designed for the "maximum mileage".
They do what they do, because from their perspective it is the
most efficient. It may be a hard pill to swallow but young humans
need attention and if they can't get it one way they will certainly get
it the other.
There are many books, publications and web sites full of tips about how
to make things "better". I think that this is cart before horse -
shutting stable doors too late etc.
The above examples are used to show how the adults may actually be
responsible for the behaviour they wish to extinguish.
Once adults have consciously accepted that they are
responsible for arranging a set of circumstances that are likely to
bring about positive changes in children, then success is more likely.
Recommendations
Adults should:
demonstrate the behaviour they want to see,
agree consensus and show consistency,
catch the children being good and explicitly comment on the appropriate
behaviour,
tell the children what they want to see and promise and provide rewards
for delivery.
Children should:
be hugged at every appropriate opportunity!