First I would like
to define self-regulation as a system of conscious personal
management guiding thoughts, behaviors and feelings to reach goals.
Second. I wish to stipulate to there being two types of
self-regulation: autonomous self-regulation and controlled
self-regulation. Autonomous self-regulation is the feeling that the
behavior, the emotion, or the cognition being regulated is being
affected for reasons a person values, finds meaningful, and wholly
endorses. Controlled self-regulation, by contrast, is the feeling of
internal or external pressure conflicting with what one would
otherwise choose (e.g., avoiding shame or guilt, interpersonal
rejection, or physical or verbal punishment). Conventional
schooling and a good deal of unconventional schooling, I'd argue,
relies almost exclusively on controlled self-regulation in students.
As an educator I have had trouble being the controller, the
disciplinarian who pressures students for behaviors convenient to the
order of the customary classroom.
I was born to teach.
Well, I was born to teachers, a father who taught high school
English and a mother who taught high school Home Nursing, Nutrition
and Biology after a career as a nurse. Both were in the New York
City public school system. From them I inherited the deep seated
impulse to help others to learn. However, while my parents somehow
managed the deportment of their students so their classes were
orderly. I, having no truck with ordering anyone around, found
myself at odds with this part of classroom management: Discipline,
as we use to say in the Sixties, was just not my bag.
Indeed, I can
remember from sixth grade and all through high school really hating
“playing sheriff”, that is making sure a balance was struck
between every one of my friends having a good time in my family’s
finished basement while it, they and me remained in an all-together
fine condition. I would plead, beg, cajole but it was only the
anticipated and sure visits from my mother which actually kept the
friends in check and the basement in good repair. Still, I felt an
obligation to monitor and manage my friends behavior. I carried the
dreaded sheriff into the classroom.
However, I found a congenial
environment in college classrooms as I started my teaching life in
the fall of 1980. Here, I could concentrate on “real teaching and
learning” as student conduct toward each other, the school
property, the material under consideration and the learning goals I
set was well self-regulated. However, as I discovered as I learned
more about teaching and learning, these students as well as the
others to come, mostly were controlled self-regulating. But in the
early stage of my career I was happy enough not to have to be a
sheriff.
Adjunct work wasn't
paying bills. So, in mid-decade I looked to parochial school
teaching and was appointed to instruct seventh grade science and
social studies in a parish school close to where I was then living.
These youngsters were well mannered, but holee, they just kept on
talking! I would ask them for quiet and they would be silent, but
for only a brief moment, then whispers followed by louder whispers
followed by and followed by and followed by my getting angry. At one
point I felt I needed to discipline the whole class and I piled on
the homework thinking homework as a good punishment (which to each
and every student it is so thought even at the best of times). But
that didn’t dissuade them from talking so I gave them even more
homework. That didn't work either. Now, it became clear to me that
I had lost control of the class and having lost control I yelled at
them using the most learned language a college professor could
muster. Needless to say the principal wasn’t pleased and suggested
I go back to college teaching, which I did. And I was happy to
return to the college classroom even though it was still adjunct and
student self-regulation was still from the internalization of external
expectations.
However, adjunct
still wasn’t paying bills. So, eventually in the very early
1990's, I followed my parents into the City public high schools first
as a substitute teacher than as a fully appointed high school teacher
of Social Studies. I mean, talking about playing sheriff! Still,
my sub classes turned out just fine as I struck bargains with
students: They didn’t bother each other or the school property and
I wouldn’t insist they do any school work. I said they could talk
at a loud whisper but if the volume of the talk got beyond a certain
point I would ask them to lower their voices and I would expect that
they would, which they did every time. I also said they could get up
from their seats to visit friends but when visiting they needed to be
seated. Additionally, I suggested they read, write, or even draw, if
they wished. The bargain held strong with only a few minor
exceptions.
Everything
changed when I was appointed to a Brooklyn high school in 1992 and
tasked to instruct! At the time behavioral contracts were a thing.
These were behavioral stipulations students had, I repeat, had to agree to
follow during all class periods. It included a graduated list of
“consequences” for violations. No one, including this teacher,
took it seriously. Still, I referred to it several times, but it
didn’t matter a single bit. It took me three weeks of insistence
to get my four ninth grader classes in an order acceptable for direct instruction. My fifth class was of super seniors and they fell in line from the first day. But then in
one of the ninth grade classes was dropped a young man with definite
emotional challenges, more than the rest. He so disrupted the class
he destroyed the order I so deftly built. It took me another three
weeks to get this class to an acceptable order. Then on the heels of
this came report cards where all in the ninth grade classes were
shown they were failing three or more of their subject classes and
not a few were failing all of them! To say there was pandemonium in
each class is an understatement. Somehow I had to calm them down to
get on with instructing the syllabus I was given by my supervisor
who, by the way, said I had to follow it to the letter. Obviously,
the disruptions, eruptions and out-right verbal abuse coming close to
blows among students and between students and this teacher continued
until I just could not stand it. I resigned and began a search for a
school where self-regulation was autonomous.
Actually, I had been
in one since 1985, although it was not exactly a school but it was a
learning organization: Scouting. When Scouting is done right it
requires both youth and adults to engage an individual autonomous
self-regulation. You see, a foundation of autonomous self-regulation
is the compatible resonance in an individual among innate
predispositions of nature and socialization, self-selected goals,
available means of goal achievement and pleasing participation in the
means of goal achievement. And Scouting from the youngest to the
oldest when done right is premised on the presence of these elements
and its compatible resonance in individuals. However, too often
Scouting is not done right and when not done right it tends to
replicate the environment comparable to conventional schooling
inducing a controlled self-regulation. But it was my experience with
the cub pack and the scout troop through which both my son and I
coursed in our Brooklyn neighborhood, him as a scout and me as a
scouter, as well as some of the other troops of my acquaintance and
participation later in Queens that while the match between scout or
adult and Scouting was not always compatible, those who voluntarily
stayed the longest with a program as close to being done right as possible
demonstrated the necessary compatible resonance among the present
elements comprising an autonomous self-regulation setting and,
indeed, at least within the context of the Scouting experience both
youth and adults demonstrated what I could interpret as autonomous
self-regulated behavior. It occurred to me on more than a few
occasions that a school based on Scouting done right may just be the
type of school for which I was searching. (The next blog post will
explore characteristics of Scouting done right marking it a learning
organization encouraging autonomous self-regulation and a possible
template for the type of school for which I continue to search.)
Towards the end of
my Scouting experience I joined another learning organization: scuba
schools. I worked out of two shops one in Brooklyn and the other in
Staten Island, both of which have been out of business for quite some
time, as I too have hung up my fins for some time. The adults I was
finding first as a student instructor and then as a full open water
instructor had mellowed their regular education controlled
self-regulation into a deeply internalized cooperation and voluntary
agreement with the instructor on the goals and the paths toward skill
development and eventual Open Water Certification. It is unclear to
me, even in retrospect, that these adults were exhibiting an
autonomous self-regulation. I lectured, explained, tested in class;
they listened, read and studied the required material and passed the
tests in class. I explained, demonstrated, guided, and supervised in
the water; they listened, observed, tried, and practiced in the
water. They accepted the conditions of instruction knowing what
they were. They accepted the conditions of in class and open water
testing/demonstration knowing what they were. They followed
instruction increasing knowledge, acquiring skills, demonstrating
both, becoming certified. The mere acceptance of direct instruction
is not of itself an indicator of one type of self-regulation, I'd
argue. But, the acceptance of the need for changed behavior and of
its actual change might be. And, believe me, one needs to change all
sorts of behavior to live without harm underwater. Just overcoming
the survival impulse to hold ones breath underwater and to breath on
scuba is one heck of a change. So, on balance in retrospect I am
somewhat inclined to think the mellowing of the conventional
schooling induced controlled self-regulation is toward an autonomous
self-regulation with these adults. If my surmise is accurate to any
degree, then it would follow that to move toward an autonomous
self-regulation from a position of conventional school induced
controlled self-regulation, if movement is possible, requires a
certain maturity even undergraduates have yet to achieve. And it
appears to require an honest voluntary, freely chosen acceptance of
the conditions of instruction and with instruction some very basic
behavioral change, a second order change in fact, which is largely
unavailable to students within conventional schooling, possibly all
the way through to professional graduation. Which ever way
self-regulation breaks in scuba schools, though, it is Scouting done right
which appears to me the better template for autonomous self-regulated
schooling.
Eventually I
returned to college teaching. It was adjunct, but that was all there
was in the mid-oughts. The students I found in my courses were very
well behaved and compliant in class as, they, I discovered, were
soundly controlled self-regulated. But it would appear that
thoroughly controlled self-regulated students become mightily
confused when the external pressure is taken off and the internal
pressure of external expectations is unconfirmed. Indeed, I found
the students before me consistently incapable of adapting to my
switching the locus of control for their self-regulation from me, the
teacher, to them, the students, as to spark student complaints to
others. Since this was the way of course after course and since I
did not see this condition abating, I resumed my search for
autonomous self-regulated schooling wondering if I had to actually
start a school developing autonomous self-regulated students for me
to find such a school.
No comments:
Post a Comment