1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

punishment science??!!

Discussion in 'Behaviour' started by taitie, Jan 14, 2011.

  1. YesMrBronson

    YesMrBronson New commenter

    I absolutely disagree because you used the word "all". Well-planned lessons do not inspire all children unfortunately.
  2. minnieminx

    minnieminx New commenter

    Well ok I cannot speak for absolutely ALL children, but all the ones in my experience. :)
  3. RaymondSoltysek

    RaymondSoltysek New commenter

    The research evidence is clear, minnie, that a well planned, motivating and relevant curriculum can inspire all children, regardless of their ability, social background or behaviour.
    Besides, given that the evidence for the positive effect of good lessons on behaviour is overwhelming, it is best to behave professionally as if all children can be motivated by well planned, motivating, relevant lessons; otherwise, we allow space for those who would say, "well, what's the point in creating decent lessons, the wee bu**ers don't appreciate it anyway!"
  4. garyconyers

    garyconyers New commenter

    I agree with this, as even in the worst classes there are pupils that can be motivated by good, relevent, well-planned lessons. As long as there is the expectation that some of the pupils may misbehave despite the best efforts of the teacher, due to factors beyond the control of the teacher, so the teacher can't be blamed if their well-planned lesson isn't appreciated by said pupil(s).
    The OP - as has been said by posters here there's nothing wrong with subject-specific copying. Boring, but it does sink in. Eg, as has been recommended, for science Periodic Tables. Just have a stack of photocopied sheets, send 1 with misbehaving child.
    Good Luck.
  5. PaulDG

    PaulDG Occasional commenter

    You're havin a larf!
    The notion that any educational research has produced evidence that is clear is almost an oxymoron.
    Oh, and BTW:
    We don't get to choose the curriulum.
    (I've no doubt a curriculum that included "how to get really wasted", "make up tips" and "is X actually a minger" would indeed go well and get significant engagement in lessons - but it would upset Ofsted quite a bit.
    Perhaps these are opportunities for Free Schools?)
  6. RaymondSoltysek

    RaymondSoltysek New commenter

    I'll ignore the comment about research: I'm sure that you7 looked at some of the most relevant research in your own teacher training.
    However, HMI identify the curriculum as:
    1) areas of experience
    2) essential issues
    3) elements of learning, including knowledge, concepts, attitudes and skills, and
    4) informal, extra-curricular activities and
    5) the characteristics of breadth, balance, relevance, differentiation and continuity.
    Now, I don't know about you, but there seems to be a great deal of leeway to put a spin on your curriculum to make it motivating and relevant for pupils and to justify that to OFSTED within the context of that framework. If the choice is between "bad" teaching that fits into the narrow confines of what you define as the imposed curriculum or "good" teaching that stretches and bends the curriculum to fit those principles, then I'm sure OFSTED would prefer the "good" teaching. Again, I don't think the fact that you have prescribed content in the National Curriculum justifies or excuses teaching which is demotivating, boring and irrelevant.
    But then I come from Scotland, where we've always had a greater degree of teacher autonomy. Still, I don't think any of the many teachers I regularly work with in England would disagree with me.
  7. Raymond the only people I've met who refuse to reference their sources of evidence are people who have no evidence to begin with.
    You referred to it and PaulDG has called your bluff - you ought to do the decent thing and provide a reference for the research.
  8. YesMrBronson

    YesMrBronson New commenter

    You decided to change the keyword "do", choosing to substitute it with the word "can".
    I agree with "can" (though there are a whole load of circumstances standing behind that word).
    I disagree with "do" as this strongly implies the favourite equation of every apologist for poor behaviour, namely 'bad behaviour is always due to poor lessons'.

    You then continued with the "can" substitution in your second paragraph as if that's what minnieminx said and as if that's what I was disagreeing with.

    Obviously I'm sure this was an honest mistake.

    Wasn't it?
  9. Why is it unprofessional to believe that children are individuals who have different motivations and interests?

  10. RaymondSoltysek

    RaymondSoltysek New commenter

    No attempt at a bluff at all, Mr L.: just as attempt to save time by not stating the bleedin' obvious. It seems to me telling a teacher that a well prepared, motivating lesson will reduce problem behaviours is like telling a gardener that grass is green. Of course, you will now point out that there are varieties of grass that are blue and yellow and think you've struck a fatal blow, but hey ho, that's what you enjoy! [​IMG]
    However, if PaulDG really hasn't come across any relevant research in his professional development, then I'd recommend as a starter:
    George Head, Better Learning, Better Behaviour, which clearly uses an evidence-based approach to show the link between learning and behaviour.
    Brian Boyd, The Learning Classroom, which links management of learning experiences and management of behaviour.
    Alan McLean, The Motivated School, a seminal book on how a whole school ethos of learning can improve motivation and behaviour.
    Paul Hamill, Challenging Behaviour - Understanding and Responding, a useful book which takes an evidence-based approach to examining the problem of behaviour management in a climate of inclusion.
    All of these are clearly based on and cite a wide range of research into the complex relationships between curriculum, planning and behaviour.
    I haven't read Tom's book yet - I have it on order - but I notice he has a section on "Getting really motivated: making them want to learn", which sounds as if it handles just the same issues, and I'm sure will be clearly evidence based rather than anecdotal. I'm looking forward to reading it.
    However, if you know of any research which shows that well planned, relevant and motivating lessons have no effect whatsoever on pupil behaviour, I'd be really interested to read it. I'm all for considering a variety of viewpoints - as I'm sure you are - and I'd happily include it in the reading list of the behaviour management courses I run.
  11. Firstly I hope you realise there is a world of difference between books and published academic research that has to go through the peer review process.
    Secondly I've already looked at 'The motivated school' website and couldn't find any evidence at all for anything. It was claimed that one school that follows the regime have improved outcomes for their students - some digging reveals that their results have not improved.
    Now I'm getting confused - first you say it's bleeding obvious that well planned lessons cause good behaviour then you say there are complex relationships between curriculum, planning and behaviour which suggests that the relationship is anything but obvious. Which is it?
    You have also watered down your claims about lesson planning (as pointed out by YesMrBronson) and you are now trying to imply that it is me who has the extreme position here.
    I didn't say that the quality of a lesson plan will not effect the behaviour of children at all. I'm sceptical that the quality of a lesson plan can be used to confidently predict how badly behaved children will react to it.
  12. PaulDG

    PaulDG Occasional commenter

    You do like distorting what others have said, don't you? Come to that, you aren't even ashamed to misquote yourself.
    If you remember, you did not use the word relevant when I quoted you. You used the word clear.
    So, do you think that instead of posting references to various non-peer-reviewed books that may or may not be relevant, you back up your original claim that the "evidence is clear".
    Because misquoting yourself and me certainly does not lend support to that claim.
  13. taitie

    taitie New commenter

    Blimey!! I opened a can of worms here didn't I!!!
    Thank you for all the suggestions and comments.
    We have tried all singing and dancing lessons and the few students who myoringinal post was about have no interest either way! We have also tried the "open the book and copy" lessons (with no brainpower involved at all!). Neither have any effect on these particular students who just point blank do not want to be in any lessons full stop!
  14. RaymondSoltysek

    RaymondSoltysek New commenter

    Nothing to do with you, taitie, if there are certain posters who like rooting around in the wormery for their own amusement!
    And you're very welcome.
  15. I think this dismissal of your critics is wide of the mark. I feel compelled to reply to your posts because I think most of your advice is simply too simplistic to work. If you actually defended your suggestions by responding to the criticism instead of dodging it I'd be more inclined to take you seriously.

  16. garyconyers

    garyconyers New commenter

    Fancy realising the difference between some books with ideas that have worked for some people and thorough, peer-reviewed research (which is rare in education).
    If we're talking about books and articles, etc:
    Some books teachers may find interesting include:
    It's your time you're wasting (Frank Chalk).
    On the Edge (Charlie Carroll).

    Or the article in in Private Eye a few years ago 'The Secret Diary of a Maths Teacher'.
    Or the documentary, 'Classroom Chaos' - where Angela Mason secretly filmed what working conditions were like for a supply teacher. She wsa abused and did nothing to deserve it.

    Doesn't the above 'prove' how bad some schools are, that there's nothing a teacher can do in these situations?
  17. RaymondSoltysek

    RaymondSoltysek New commenter

    Gary, I was asked for references to research. All the books I mentioned are academic volumes which cite research from a wide array of sources. What I don't have time to do is reproduce the bibliography for you to prove something that you would dismiss anyway. However, they are one-stop shops for the latest research in education - and a quick google scholar search for "peer-reviewed academic journals in education" will show you that they are far from being "rare". I can think of 20 off the top of my head - and no, I'm not going to prove it to you by citing them...
    You may rarely access them and you may not be aware of their existence - that does not mean they are "rare."
    As I say, all the books are by academics. At least one is by a professor of education, and another by a university reader. Now, books by people like that which don't utilise research are rar
    And they are a very different genre from books of advice from serving teachers - many of which are excellent - and certainly different from articles in "Private Eye". If that's where you get your source of evidence-based research on education, I think you should at least try elsewhere.
    Thanks you for a polite response.
  18. garyconyers

    garyconyers New commenter

    A good, reasoned reply. Thank you Ray.
    I do believe that many of the authors you cite have years of experience of education. Some of them may have real experience of difficult classrooms. Fair enough.
    So can we politely agree that, based on experience, there are two sides to the story here about what can work in schools?

    This is untrue, mot nice and impolite. Can you try and be less rude and dishonest when addressing me in future please?
  19. It is misleading to use the term 'clear research' when you are really talking about a book (academic or not).
    I think you stop to stop referring to 'clear research' unless you are prepared to provide the reference the research you are talking about so we can form an opinion on it's validity.
  20. RaymondSoltysek

    RaymondSoltysek New commenter

    Merely a statement of fact. You have already said you believe peer-reviewed research to be rare. You showed no inclination to look at the books which contain the relevant research, and appeared to concur with those who suggested these were simply "opinion" books despite never having read them. Why, then, would you pay any attention to a lengthy and time-consumingly put together bibliography culled from these books? And , indeed, why should you look at these books, since you are no longer employed in education: I used to work in a bar, but never read books on customer service then or now.
    However, if you find something impolite in my message, I withdraw any implication and trust that this explanation clarifies matters.
    I'm not sure what "two sides" you suggest there are here, unless you wish to see the matter confrontationally: the OP asked for advice, various people gave that advice and it's up to the OP to choose what works best for them.


Share This Page