The Hard way is usually the Correct way

Today's class picked up a little momentum, with us discussing punishment and bullying with some extremely lively examples that involved some pretend fist fights and loud, intentional singing that Michael explained how to 'subdue'. The main topic of contention today was similar to that of last class, but we tried to deconstruct it in a much more structured manner, having arrived to class after reading each other's posts. While most of us were skeptical about totally ignoring bullying or disruptions in a classroom setting, don't you all think that this skepticism arises from the notion that we've all been brought up being punished for our wrongdoings, and watching how others get sent to a corner, get asked to leave class, or get yelled at profusely if they did something questionable. Coming from a Catholic school, corporal punishment was pretty regular in my school setting. While this made me a little afraid of my teachers (especially my P.E. teachers who were extremely strict about haircuts and would snip students' hair off if it was long or shaggy) and made me think twice before doing anything 'wrong', did it make me respect them any more or learn better? Not really. I thought they were a bit extra, and did well in my tests only because I studied by myself and had good home tutors.

Skinner said that one shouldn't put fugitives in prison because it creates an atmosphere where their questionable acts are supported by other people who've done similar things. This is definitely a very bold statement, as the converse may just lead to them running amok. However, when we take this notion and apply it to a rogue student within a classroom, it might just be the way to deal with their questionable behavior. However, the flaw in behaviorism and operant learning lies in the fact that it is extremely hard to plan out and implement successfully. However, does anything easy really yield the best results? The hard thing is almost always the right thing to do. 

Take for instance an example from my work at the Ohio State University Childcare Center. 

We've been instructed as teaching assistants not to raise our voices or scold the pre-schoolers when they act up. What they want is our attention. We've observed that whenever there is a conflict, and a teacher is about to say something about the situation through confrontation, the kids pick up on these vibrations and immediately start to bawl uncontrollably and become totally unresponsive because they think they're in trouble and are going to get yelled at. They lose the sense of trust they have in us. However, if we distract them from what they are doing or say 'I think it's a good idea for you to move your body away from here', they take the cue right away. Mind you, this is an example involving mere 3 year olds. A college student is probably more likely to understand this better.

I really enjoyed listening to Kim and Arianna's stories from their own lives, and it reminded me of the times that my cousins and I would negotiate our strict nan's behavior through manipulation. We totally shamu'd her, and it worked. My grandma has always had an extremely strong personality, and she's from the 1920's. This made her extremely set in her ways, and totally critical and choleric about the post-modern era. She was a lovely lady, but she'd often lose her temper over really trivial things. We decided that we should brush it aside and be distant whenever this happened. If we reacted, she would yell back at us because, like Michael said there are some people who enjoy a good shout-fest, and she was one of them. I do miss my nana, but some of her idiosyncrasies were best dealt with by subtle avoidance.

I really think that we're getting somewhere with our class discussions in terms of having some shared purpose. I hope you guys do too. I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts!