Fostering Positive School Climate: Developing Supportive Relationships and Self-Discipline George Bear, PhD University o

1. Fostering Positive School Climate: Developing Supportive Relationships and Self-Discipline George Bear, PhD University of Delaware gbear@udel.edu February 25, 2011 NASP Session FS05, Bear

2. 3 Primary Goals • Overview of self-discipline and school climate • What they are and why they are important • Extent to which they are, and are not, addressed in popular approaches to school discipline • Review best practices for fostering both self-discipline and school climate, with an emphasis on teacher-student relationships and how students think, feel, and act. • Briefly discuss several chosen issues related to system change and school discipline. NASP Session FS05, Bear

3. The most important issue confronting educators and educational theorists is the choice of ends of the educational process. Without clear and rational educational goals, it becomes impossible to decide which educational programs achieve objectives of general import and which teach incidental facts and attitudes of dubious worth. Although there has been a vast amount of research comparing the effects of various educational methods and programs on various outcome measures, there has been very little empirical research designed to clarify the worth of these outcome measures themselves. —Kohlberg (1981, p. 49) NASP Session FS05, Bear

4. Past and present approaches to comprehensive school discipline: 15 to 30 years ago: • Assertive Discipline/Behavior modification • Values clarification • Moral reasoning approach • Social problem solving approach • Self-esteem approach Each one was shown to be effective and ineffective, depending on one’s aim, measured outcomes, and interpretations. NASP Session FS05, Bear

5. Most Popular Approaches Now: • Zero tolerance • SchoolWide Positive Behavior Supports (SWPBS) • Social and Emotional Learning (SEL, including character education) Each approach works, or doesn’t work, depending on one’s aim, measured outcomes, and interpretations. Conclusion: Everything works, but nothing works really well. NASP Session FS05, Bear

6. Two Traditional Aims to Discipline “teaching”that “develops self-control” and “character” “treatment” that “corrects” or ”punishes” NASP Session FS05, Bear

7. First Aim: To help create and maintain a safe and orderly learning environment. • To govern or manage behavior • More teacher-centered • Goal is more short-term Given sufficient resources, this isn’t very difficult NASP Session FS05, Bear

8. Two sides to achieving the aim of managing student behavior: • Punitive • Positive NASP Session FS05, Bear

9. Punitive Side Pervasive zero tolerance approach (versus reasonable policies) for correcting misbehavior, consisting of • Removal from school or the classroom: • Each year, about 3 million students are suspended. • There are now over 12,000 alternative schools for children with behavior problems. • In DE, 12.8 suspension rate versus 7.1 nationally. NASP Session FS05, Bear

10. Although controversial, each of those techniques “works” – depending on one’s aim, measured outcome, and interpretation. NASP Session FS05, Bear

11. Multiple Limitations to Punishment Among them: • Effective in the short-term but not the long-term. • Punishment elicits short-term compliance but does not develop long-term self-discipline. • Teaches students not to get caught. • Punishment fails to address the multiple factors that typically contribute to a student’s misbehavior. • Used as a simple, short-term solution to a complex, long-term problem. NASP Session FS05, Bear

12. Clearly, punishment has many disadvantages, but punishment is effective (Landrum & Kauffman, 2006) and is used by the best teachers (Brophy, 1996). It would be utopian to think teachers shouldn’t use it (not corporal punishment, however). The most effective teachers (and parents) use it, although only when necessary and in combination with positive techniques. NASP Session FS05, Bear

13. Second Side USE POSITIVE BEHAVIORAL TECHNIQUES (with the Goal of Managing Student Behavior and Gaining Compliance) Too often this IS a primary goal, as reflected in both the behavioral techniques emphasized and the outcome measured (e.g., reduced suspensions or office disciplinary referrals) NASP Session FS05, Bear

14. Consistent School-wide Expectations, Direct Social Skills Training, and Positive Consequences 14 NASP Session FS05, Bear Bear, Oct. 11, 2007, TASP

15. Commonly taught social skills are those of compliance, as seen in the following examples of the teaching of responsibility recommended by Horner et al. (2005, p. 369): • In the classroom: Bring books and pencils to class. Do homework. • In gym: Participate. Wear appropriate shoes. • In the hallway: Keep books, belongings, litter off floor. • On the playground: Stay within the recess area. • In the bus area: Keep your books and belongings with you. NASP Session FS05, Bear

16. Compliance also is seen in the components of the Schoolwide Evaluation Tool (SET; Sugai, Lewis-Palmer, Todd, & Horner, 2001): 1. Expectations defined. 2. Behavioral expectations taught. 3. System of rewards, consisting of an “on-going system of rewarding behavioral expectations 4. System for correcting behavior. 5. System for office disciplinary referrals. Although this four-item section is called “monitoring, evaluating, and decision making,” the only type of data addressed are office disciplinary referrals 6. System of management. 7. System of district-level support. NASP Session FS05, Bear

17. As noted by Horner (2000), “There is no difference in theory or science between positive behavior support and behavior modification. These are the same approach with different names” (p. 99). (Not all advocates of the SWPBS approach would agree with the above, and there is great variability across SWPBS schools.) NASP Session FS05, Bear

18. DIFFERENT MEANS but THE SAME AIM:TO MANAGE STUDENT BEHAVIOR? Code of Conduct Sentencing Manual NASP Session FS05, Bear

19. It works, if one’s aim is compliance (as seen in reduced ODRs)! Important Note: The problem is not the techniques used (i.e., punishment and positive reinforcement), but (a) their short-term and teacher-centered aim – compliance (b) the types of punishment (e.g., corporal punishment, suspension/expulsion) and positive reinforcement (e.g., tangible rewards in high school) used and how they are used. NASP Session FS05, Bear

20. As noted by the Center for Mental Health in Schools (2008), too often “behavioral support” consists of a form of “social control aimed directly at reducing disruptive behavior” (p. 6-4), while doing little to improve student motivation and engagement in learning or to develop intrinsic motivation.” • More recently (2011): “So: the irony is that overreliance on extrinsics to control behavior may exacerbate student problems.” (From: School Engagement, Disengagement, Learning Supports, & School Climate) NASP Session FS05, Bear

21. The greatest limitation of an over-reliance on the use of direct teaching of rules and expectations, punishment, and extrinsic rewards is not getting students to be compliant in your present, but in your absence! NASP Session FS05, Bear

22. Two Aims of School Discipline Second Aim: : To teach or develop student self-control, or self-discipline. • More student-centered • Goal is more long-term NASP Session FS05, Bear

23. Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL.org) NASP Session FS05, Bear

24. Core concepts of SEL (CASEL, 2005) • Responsible decision making at school, home, and in the community • Self-management of emotions and behavior • Relationship skills • Social awareness • Self-awareness Thoughts, emotions, and behavior are viewed as equally important. NASP Session FS05, Bear

25. Alternative vision of positive school climate – one that values safety and compliance, where appropriate, but emphasizes relationships and the long-term goal of developing self-discipline. NASP Session FS05, Bear

26. What is Self-Discipline? Consists of each of the 5 key SEL skills, but especially: • Responsible decision making at school, home, and in the community • Self-management of emotions and behavior, and doing so under one’s own volition. Connotes the critical notion of internalization, as seen in • Committed compliance orwilling compliance (versus situational or grudging compliance (Brophy, 1996; Kochanska, 2002) • Children internalize the values, standards, beliefs, and attitudes of their parents and others in society, and in the process of doing so they actively transform them and endorse them as their own. NASP Session FS05, Bear

27. Often used interchangeably with: • Autonomy • Self-determination • Responsibility • Self-regulation • Self-control Used to remind educators that there is more to school discipline than the use of discipline. LONG-TERM goal! NASP Session FS05, Bear

28. Recent meta-analysis of 213 studies of universal-level SEL programs, which included 270,034 students (Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schellinger, 2011): Examined student outcomes in six areas: • social and emotional skills • attitudes toward self and others • positive social behavior • conduct problems • emotional distress • academic performance NASP Session FS05, Bear

29. Students in SEL programs had more favorable outcomes in all six areas, with effect sizes ranging from .22 to .57 for the total sample. NASP Session FS05, Bear

30. BOTH AIMS ARE IMPORTANT!But, has there been a shift in balance? Developing Self-Discipline Governing & Correcting Behavior NASP Session FS05, Bear

31. Instead of one approach or the other, it makes sense to integrate features of the two predominant approaches (Osher, Bear, Sprague, & Doyle, 2010) 1. Provides a comprehensive approach 2. Is consistent with a wealth of research on effective classroom management, as well as childrearing 3. More likely to improve school climate (and what’s most important in school climate). • For these three reasons, other valued social-emotional, academic, and behavioral outcomes are more likely to be achieved. NASP Session FS05, Bear

32. 1. Provides a comprehensive approach4 Components of Comprehensive Schoolwide Discipline (Bear, 2005, 2010) NASP Session FS05, Bear

33. NASP Session FS05, Bear

34. Don’t confuse prevention with developing self-discipline. Prevention is much easier!  NASP Session FS05, Bear

35. Second Reason for Combining techniques commonly found in SWPBS with those in SEL: • It is consistent with research on effective classroom management, as well as childrearing NASP Session FS05, Bear

36. General Authoritative Approach to Discipline • Supported by research on childrearing (e.g., Baumrind, 1971, 1996; Lamborn, Mounts, Steinberg, & Dornbush, 1991) • Supported by research on school discipline and school climate (Brophy, 1996; Gregory, Cornell, Fan, Sheras, Shih, & Huang, 2010) Key = Authoritative (not authoritarian or permissive), which consists of a healthy blend of demandingness and responsiveness NASP Session FS05, Bear

37. Demandingness refers to the extent to which adults: • Provide close monitoring and supervision. • Present clear and consistent rules, expectations, and responsibilities. • Have clear procedures and routines. • Use discipline (including punishment) in a firm, fair, and consistent manner. • Intervene early • Provide structure Adults high in demandingness are successful in eliciting compliance (and authoritative adults do so with less use of correction!) NASP Session FS05, Bear

38. Authoritative teachers are aware of the limitations of punishment, as well as an emphasis on social skills training and clear behavioral expectations. NASP Session FS05, Bear

39. Questionable effectiveness of direct method of instruction: • Law education (“preaching” or “lecturing” rules)? • Social skills training (telling and showing)? NASP Session FS05, Bear

40. From: Bullis, Walker, & Sprague (2001) A Promise Unfulfilled: Social Skills Training With At-Risk and Antisocial Children and Youth,Exceptionality, 9, 67-90. “We strongly endorse this approach and believe that SST interventions should be an integral part of school and social service programs at every age level for both at-risk and antisocial children and youth. At the same time, we must acknowledge that (a) it is a gross oversimplification to assume that all at-risk and antisocial children and youth are socially inept, and (b) at-risk and antisocial youth present extreme challenges that often are resistant to even the most intense interventions.” (p. 68) NASP Session FS05, Bear

41. Hmm, then why is it too often assumed (in approaches of social control) that all children who are NOT at-risk and antisocial are socially inept and need social skills training and direct instruction? NASP Session FS05, Bear

42. Responsiveness refers to the extent adults demonstrate: • Warmth • Caring • Respect • Acceptance • Support Helps motivate students to comply with teachers out of respect for the teachers rather than simply out of fear or the desire to earn tangible rewards. Critical to developing self-discipline and to school climate! NASP Session FS05, Bear

43. Not only do students like teachers who are caring, respectful, and provide emotional support, but they also show: • Greater school completion (Croninger & Lee, 2001; Reschly & Christenson, 2006) • Greater on-task behavior (Battistich et al., 1997; Battistich & Hom, 1997) • Less cheating (Murdock, Hale, & Weber, 2001) • Greater academic achievement (Gregory & Weinstein, 2004; Hamre & Pianta, 2001) • Greater peer acceptance (Hughes et al., 2001) NASP Session FS05, Bear

44. Greater motivation to act responsibly and prosocially(Wentzel, 2006) • Less oppositional and antisocial behavior (Bru,Stephens, & Torsheim, 2002; Meehan, Hughes, & Cavell, 2003; Murdock, 1999; Ryan & Patrick, 2001) • Less bullying and victimization (Gregory et al., 2010) • Less use of weapons (Henrich, Brookmeyer, & Shahar, 2005) • Fewer conflicts with teachers, irrespective of degree of problem behavior (Hamre & Pianta, 2001; Hamre, Pianta, Downer, & Mashburn, 2008) Students also are more likely to internalize their teachers’ (and school’s) values (Wentzel, 1997, 2006). NASP Session FS05, Bear

45. Teacher-student relationships are particularly important for those at greatest risk for the foregoing negative outcomes, especially school disengagement and problem behaviors (Balfanz, Herzog, & MacIver, 2007; Hamre et al., 2008; Juvonen, 2007; Wentzel & Wigfield, 2007), and those lacking support from other sources, such as parents, peers, and close friends (Harter, 1999; Pianta, 1999). • Improvements in positive outcomes are mediated by improvements in teacher–student relationships and the school environment (Solomon, Battistich, Watson, Schaps, & Lewis, 2000). NASP Session FS05, Bear

46. Third reason to integrate techniques: More likely to foster school climate (and those aspects of school climate that are of greatest importance). • Both approaches have the goal of a positive school climate, and offer techniques for helping achieve it. • Different perspectives on school climate, however: • SWPBS has tended to emphasize safety and organizational structure in their measures of school climate • SEL has tended to emphasize relationships, sense of community and connectedness NASP Session FS05, Bear

47. School climate should include the dimensions of demandingness (structure) and responsiveness (support) Found in the Delaware School Climate Surveys See: Bear, Gaskins, Blank, & Chen, in press (Journal of School Psychology) ww.delawarepbs.org NASP Session FS05, Bear

48. Relationships with School Climate are RECIPROCAL Why is school climate important? Linked to a wide range of academic, behavioral, and socio-emotional outcomes: • Academic achievement (Battistich, Solomon, Kim, Watson, & Schaps, 1995; Brookover et al., 1978; Brand, Felner, Shim, Seitsinger, & Dumas, 2003; Griffith, 1999) • Student academic, social, and personal attitudes and motives (Battistich, et al., 1995) • Student Attendance and school avoidance (Brand, 2003; Welsh, 2000) • Delinquency (Gottfredson, 2005; Welsh, 2000, Way, 2007) • Bullying (Nansel et al., 2001) and Victimization (Gottfredson, 2005; Welsh, 2000) • Attitudes toward and use of illegal substances (Brand, 2003) • Depression and self-esteem (Brand et al., 2003; Way, Reddy & Rhodes, 2007) • Behavior problems (Battistich & Horn, 1997; Battistich, Solomon, Kim, Watson, & Schaps, 1995; Kuperminc, Leadbeater, & Blatt, 2001; Kuperminc et al., 1997; Loukas & Robinson, 2004; Shochet, Dadds, Ham, & Montague, 2006; Welsh, 2000; Wilson, 2004) NASP Session FS05, Bear

49. National Standards for School Climate (supported by NASP and multiple other organizations) See: www.schoolclimate.org (Center for Social and Emotional Education) NASP Session FS05, Bear