Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
In most classes, the bottom 2-3 simply didn't try. They showed up without their work done, without their book, didn't read instructions and were absent a lot. I did have a couple of classes where the bottom students were just struggling. Interestingly, I had two students, in different classes, who were comparable. One student had one of the A students take him under his wing (voluntarily) and managed to pull into the not so struggling range while the other just floundered no matter what I did (It just happened there wasn't a single really strong student in his class).
I've dealt with kids who try to derail instruction. Fortunately, I only had a couple this year and, surprisingly, they weren't the worst students. In my previous school, the lower performing students would make it their goal to derail the lesson with the logic being if I don't cover it, they don't have to learn it. In this school, I had a couple of brighter students out to prove they're brighter than me and a group of ok students who just wanted to slow down the pace. In time, the brighter group figured out I know my stuff and stopped and the group was split up at the semester break by schedule changes so I didn't have this issue second semester.
What is a PBIS conduct system?
See, I think it's unfair to the majority of the students to teach to the level of the ones who clearly don't care. It's different if they are trying and struggling. I can work with that, and most of the students passed who started trying soon enough, or who had enough talent to learn quickly when push came to shove. A few students didn't begin working soon enough (before April), and when they began their effort, it wasn't enough to ensure minimum mastery by the end of the school year. If they repeat my class, and try from the very beginning, they should get an A or a B.
The PBIS (see Carrie's post) is supposed to motivate students by providing them with tangible and intangible incentives to behave appropriately. All the research that I have ever studied on reinforcement makes me believe that if they students link incentives to behaviors, they will externalize, rather than internalize the motivation for good conduct. I also have seen mixed results when looking for the implementation at schools like mine, where the majority of the students aren't looking to be productive citizens after high school. I'm not dooming the plan to failure, but on this one, I'm from Missouri--you gotta show me.
See, I think it's unfair to the majority of the students to teach to the level of the ones who clearly don't care. It's different if they are trying and struggling. I can work with that, and most of the students passed who started trying soon enough, or who had enough talent to learn quickly when push came to shove. A few students didn't begin working soon enough (before April), and when they began their effort, it wasn't enough to ensure minimum mastery by the end of the school year. If they repeat my class, and try from the very beginning, they should get an A or a B.
The PBIS (see Carrie's post) is supposed to motivate students by providing them with tangible and intangible incentives to behave appropriately. All the research that I have ever studied on reinforcement makes me believe that if they students link incentives to behaviors, they will externalize, rather than internalize the motivation for good conduct. I also have seen mixed results when looking for the implementation at schools like mine, where the majority of the students aren't looking to be productive citizens after high school. I'm not dooming the plan to failure, but on this one, I'm from Missouri--you gotta show me.
I agree. As far as I'm concerned, the bottom few can learn a lesson and not repeat their lack of effort next year in my class...... but that is not PC to say. I'm supposed to do everything in my power to get them to pass. The problem is, I think they'd learn more by failing. Making it MY job to get them to pass rather than their job to pass does them a disservice, IMO. I really struggle with this one. Plus the more I do for them, the less they do for themselves so it's pointless for me to try and figure out how to get them to pass. It just reinforces that it's not their job to learn and they get even lazier. It becomes a vicious spiral downward.
I guess externalizing correct behaviors is better than not seeing correct behaviors at all but I agree that rewards don't internalize the behaviors.
You've got your work cut out for you if most of your students don't plan on being productive after high school. Most of my kids are motivated by grades because they're motivated to get into a good college. I just have a few stragglers who don't put in the effort and I wish I could just let them fail. I don't fail students who try. I see no justice in making you repeat my class if you gave it an honest effort and just couldn't do it. You won't be any better equipped to do it next year. I will fail you if you just don't try. A student who isn't trying just might learn something repeating my class.
It's basically an overhaul of the system - reinforcing positive behaviors to encourage kids to repeat them, instead of punishing bad behaviors. I was on the team at our school this year and we focused on starting a student of the week program and recognizing the teachers - all to create a more positive environment.
PBIS is also supposed to fix problem areas. This year we focused on ways to alleviate the tardy problem. Other schools in our district focused on how to restructure discipline. We also came up with "non-negotiables" - things that would get an automatic referral, period, to create consistency within the school. This was stuff like refusing to turn over a cell phone that was being used, cursing out a teacher, etc. It was supposed to cut down on the number of referrals for stupid things like chewing gum.
I'm going to be honest, I do think the system - when used correctly - has amazing potential. However, it has to be consistently enforced and have complete buy-in from all ther personnel. If it doesn't, it is difficult to keep it going. Towards the end of the semester peopel weren't helping with tardy sweeps and kids realized it so our numbers started going up.
Basically it is all about being proactive instead of reactive.
I wonder how many levels we'd need to have to appease everyone? There are only two levels of chemistry in my school and, it seems, every parent wants their child in the higher one until they're failing the higher one and then they insist the school made a mistake and should have put them in the lower one.
I'd like to see three levels of chemistry. One designed for exposure to the topic, one at an average level and an honors version (AP is done on line so we don't need to worry about that one). I feel like I need to slow down my regular chem classes for the bottom 80% and I bore the top 20% when I do that. Put that top 20% in an honors class and take the bottom 10% and put them in the lower chem class and I'd be all set.
My high school had two: honors and AP. Period. OTOH, it was hardly a typical high school; I'd submit you'd need, at least for required courses, two more: general (for the vocational and otherwise not-strongly-academic-but-not-a-hot-mess-either kids) and "sweathog". For most electives, two or three might be more reasonable, assuming your school doesn't randomly put the sweathog kids into physics classes "to challenge them".
As long as those AP classes are taught on line and self paced, no problem. If it's a class, there's a problem. I can see the AP teacher being told what I was told at my end of year PR. "Identify the lowest 2-3 students and teach to them.".
It's in a classroom, and it's a huge problem, from what I hear. I imagine they are told to teach to the lowest, which may explain the abysmal AP pass rates.
It's basically an overhaul of the system - reinforcing positive behaviors to encourage kids to repeat them, instead of punishing bad behaviors. I was on the team at our school this year and we focused on starting a student of the week program and recognizing the teachers - all to create a more positive environment.
PBIS is also supposed to fix problem areas. This year we focused on ways to alleviate the tardy problem. Other schools in our district focused on how to restructure discipline. We also came up with "non-negotiables" - things that would get an automatic referral, period, to create consistency within the school. This was stuff like refusing to turn over a cell phone that was being used, cursing out a teacher, etc. It was supposed to cut down on the number of referrals for stupid things like chewing gum.
I'm going to be honest, I do think the system - when used correctly - has amazing potential. However, it has to be consistently enforced and have complete buy-in from all ther personnel. If it doesn't, it is difficult to keep it going. Towards the end of the semester peopel weren't helping with tardy sweeps and kids realized it so our numbers started going up.
Basically it is all about being proactive instead of reactive.
What kind of demographics are you working with? Do you have a significant percentage of children in the juvenile justice system? Has your school gotten much support from parents?
Those are two of our main obstacles when dealing with discipline. We also have quite a few parents in the corrections system as well. Sometimes all is well until the parent comes home from prison, then all hell breaks loose.
A number of teachers are concerned that the students are going to see this as a green light for committing x number of offenses before any real consequences come down on them. We don't need any more assaults on teachers. We had too many of those last year.
The PBIS (see Carrie's post) is supposed to motivate students by providing them with tangible and intangible incentives to behave appropriately. All the research that I have ever studied on reinforcement makes me believe that if they students link incentives to behaviors, they will externalize, rather than internalize the motivation for good conduct. I also have seen mixed results when looking for the implementation at schools like mine, where the majority of the students aren't looking to be productive citizens after high school. I'm not dooming the plan to failure, but on this one, I'm from Missouri--you gotta show me.
PBIS only works if you have a student who responds to external motivation. My daughter is not a bad or disruptive student when she's in classes-- she's actually extremely motivated and a quick study. But heaven help us if she were one of the bad kids, because she's extremely self-actualized and behavior mod just bounces off her.
In third grade, her teacher was unfamiliar with autistic kids, and didn't grasp that she didn't have to be making eye contact to be listening to him. That in fact, she learned math better while drawing, because making eye contact was so exhausting for her. He initiated a whole intervention plan, and an RTI, and a number of other behavioral heavy guns, in order to decrease the behavior of doodling hedgehogs on her math papers. Didn't work very well at first. About a week in I took her aside and told her it really ticks Mr. XXXX off when you doodle, could you please stop, and do something else?-- and she stopped. Took up staring at the potted plant behind his desk, and he thought it was eye contact. He and the behavior specialist were thrilled the behavior plan "worked", even though her grades dropped a bit. (And she still hates math, because it became such a power struggle that year.)
Comes a point-- especially, I think, with brighter kids-- that traditional behavior theory is a very limited prospect.
I agree. As far as I'm concerned, the bottom few can learn a lesson and not repeat their lack of effort next year in my class...... but that is not PC to say. I'm supposed to do everything in my power to get them to pass. The problem is, I think they'd learn more by failing. Making it MY job to get them to pass rather than their job to pass does them a disservice, IMO. I really struggle with this one. Plus the more I do for them, the less they do for themselves so it's pointless for me to try and figure out how to get them to pass. It just reinforces that it's not their job to learn and they get even lazier. It becomes a vicious spiral downward.
I think the problem I see is that the PTB don't like to distinguish between cannot and will not. They see kids who are not passing (be it that one class or the FCAT) as one group, not a mixture of reasons. And they believe-- or are forced to assume by outside pressure groups-- that if we just work hard enough and sprinkle enough pixie dust, every kid in the class can get an A in chemistry.
Well, no. Some can't do the work, either because of inadequate preparation in lower level maths and sciences, or because their brains just won't grasp it, or because of outside stressors that make learning difficult. And some simply won't do the work. You can't treat all those kids the same way and expect it to bear results, but they try anyway.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
... but that is not PC to say. I'm supposed to do everything in my power to get them to pass. The problem is, I think they'd learn more by failing. Making it MY job to get them to pass rather than their job to pass does them a disservice, IMO. I really struggle with this one. Plus the more I do for them, the less they do for themselves so it's pointless for me to try and figure out how to get them to pass. It just reinforces that it's not their job to learn and they get even lazier. It becomes a vicious spiral downward. 
There are only two levels of chemistry in my school and, it seems, every parent wants their child in the higher one until they're failing the higher one and then they insist the school made a mistake and should have put them in the lower one.
