vwalker:

teamteachers:

In chapter 9 David Funk admits to hitting a student and then a few years later doing it again. I had not read the book prior to this summer, and I doubt we would have chosen it by votes if we had all know ahead of the time. None of us endorse hitting a child.

A big chunk of the book was written by Fay, and Funk describes how the Love and Logic approach transformed his teaching (meaning he did not develop it).

I was the person who wrote “vaguely” about the book, and did so because I wanted to give people a chance to read the book on their own.

I do believe that a teacher hitting a child is inexcusable. In the province in which I teach, the teacher would most likely have their license revoked. Yes, I realize that he gave it as his “before” example, but some things should not even occur. I also realize that all teachers get frustrated. But giving an extra strict consequence is not on the same level as physically striking a child in anger.

There are so many wonderful teaching resources out there, and limited time in which to read them and reflect. No one has to agree, but I do question the credibility of the authors. The incident he recounts is not the only issue I had with the book, but it was the tipping point for me.

I’ve noticed that there have not been many posts about this book in the past few weeks. I’m going out on a limb here, but I read the book, and frankly was not impressed. To me the whole premise of Love and Logic is just common sense and treating people respectfully. I also was put off by the packaging of the program, and the capitalization.

However, I would have ignored all of that, until I read something that made me lose all respect for the author. He talked about an incident in which he did something that, in my opinion, is unforgiveable as a teacher. And then he admitted he did it again.

I am being deliberately vague, in case not everyone has read the whole book yet, but will post in more specific terms if others wish to have the conversation. I will just title the post appropriately, so others can avoid the spoiler.

Near the beginning of the book, 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?

I rarely have the opportunity to hand out a consequence right away, unless it’s a short term solution, like asking a student to move to a new desk, or redirecting attention. For situations that require a consequence, those usually come out of discussions with the students involved. I don’t like to push it back, because I find 11 year olds need a shorter time connection between issue and resolution. But I do ask “how do you think you can make this right?”

How would you describe your current classroom management strategies/philosophies?  

I’m just catching up now, so went back to read the questions and discussions. I base my classroom management philosophy on community building. At the beginning of the year, we spend a great deal of time creating an identity of respect and support. All of my responses to misbehaviour are then based on that.

For any issue, I start with a conversation. I put the responsibility for behaviour and self-control back onto the student.

So if a student is being disruptive, talking during a lesson, I will address it with them privately, reminding them that they are showing disrepect to me and the other students. If the behaviour continues, I will ask the student to sit outside the door - that person can still hear the lesson, but the rest of us can work - and they come back in when they are ready to show respect.

Just dropping  in to say that my book in on it’s way. My school is in session until the 29th, so I might be a bit behind, but I’ll jump in as soon as I get the book and catch up. I’m enjoying the comments so far.