"To know what to do for a kid without a knowledge of that kid’s intimate variables is often little more than a hopeful shot in the dark."
— Teaching with Love and Logic, pg 117.
"Students who have a strong level of caring for their teachers usually become more cooperative when invited to do so."
—
Love and Logic, pg 52
This is the number one reason why I have been successful with students identified with emotional/behavior disorders.
When I had my first full time teaching position (for students with Autism, ADD, and labeled as ED), I taught next door to the projects the county with the highest prison population out of the entire state. I taught the youngest kids in the school, but I volunteered and tutored the oldest. Some of these kids, frankly, scared me initially because of known family members’ associations with gangs and the possibility that they were on their way to joining one as well. It was the consistency I provided, noticing and asking about their interests, and being concerned about things they needed that allowed me to get anything done with them. It wasn’t until that relationship was there that I could be the least bit effective. Once that relationship was there, those kids really surprised me in very inspiring ways. I wish I could give concrete examples, but I feel the need to be protective of their privacy.
“Sending students in the emotional state to a new location gives them the underlying message that they are capable of handling their situation on their own.”—Love and Logic, pg 41.
Do you agree or disagree? -PPT
geofaultline liked this
sofitheteacup said: Tentatively disagree, as an elementary teacher. Think a lot of the suggestions/strategies in the book are not developmentally appropriate for my level or maybe for my specific kids. I don’t think they’d make that connection.
Responding to sofitheteacup -
I don’t think that the kid needs be able to think “Oh my teacher thinks I can handle this on my own.” In pre-k, we have safe spots. I send my students there when they are upset or acting out. I let them determine how long they stay; they are welcome to join us when they feel like they can be respectful / follow the rules. One of the developmental milestones I’m require to keep track of is whether or not a child is able to self-soothe. Giving them the opportunity and space away from the group is important.
When a child is misbehaving to an extreme, I talk to them when they come out and ask if they know what they did wrong, and what they can do in those situations. Usually (not always), the child is able to do so after being given some time to calm down. I think that this skill would only improve as the child got older — being able to calm down, think about what they did and the consequences of their actions.
"We require perfection, so we lose the opportunity to develop experience and wisdom and learn from our mistakes."
— Love and Logic, pg 62 Discussing the effects of technology
"Sending students in the emotional state to a new location gives them the underlying message that they are capable of handling their situation on their own."
—
Love and Logic, pg 41.
Do you agree or disagree? -PPT
Near the beginning of the book (pg 16 in my copy), the author describes a teacher telling a student not to worry about the consequence, they will let them know at a later time. The teacher continues to push it back, and push it back.
At what age level do you think this technique is appropriate?
Do you think it would be effective in your classroom?
Would this help you focus on instruction rather than classroom management?
This strategy would not work, and would not be appropriate in Pre-k, or the younger elementary grades in my opinion. However, asking a disruptive child to take a break in the cool down area (or safe spot as we call it) until they are ready to join the group appropriately or you are able to address the issue without interrupting instruction would work.
I could certainly see this strategy working in middle school and high school. Some commenters said they would not put it off for several days, but I don’t think that was the intent of the strategy. It was to put it off to give the child time to think about what happened, attitudes to cool down, and put the responsibilty on the child while not having to deal with the issue immediately, thus taking away from instructional time.
I was very interested in what teachers of older grades thought, and imagined there’d be a variety of opinions.
