Like 'Social Inclusion Corner' on Facebook
Connecting to Facebook
 Social Inclusion Corner ~ February 1 2012 |
||
February Theme - Soul of Discipline, History of Discipline – Part OneThis month we are focusing on the “Soul Of Discipline” as presented by Kim John Payne in his CD of the same name. (Available to borrow during the month of February outside of the SI office.) The following discussion was written by JillGoldman-Callahan for the Lexington Waldorf School. Part One: Disciplinary methods have changed dramatically in the past 50 years, said Mr. Payne, and not always for the better. Our parents may have been raised under one disciplinary style and raised us under a completely different style, while we may be bringing up our own children under an eclectic amalgamation of several styles. In fact, the current array of disciplinary methods can produce parental paralysis in the face of rude behavior. Obedience-focused discipline was the main method used through the early 1960s. This militaristic system demanded unstinting respect for authority and utilized punishments for consequences. Children were expected to be subservient to adults and immediate compliance was demanded through fear induction. Any disagreement was seen as talking back. At its best this system created immediate compliance; at its worst it produced submissive or rebellious behavior. The permissive parenting movement of the early 1970s was a backlash against what had come before. Now children's anger and defiance was applauded as healthy self-expression, limits were seen as “uncool,” and saying “no” was considered damaging to a child’s self-esteem. Parents unconditionally gave way to children, expecting little in the way of chores or family obligations. Children were the center of the universe and equal to adults in terms of respect. This created a strong sense of self-awareness among this generation of children, but also a sense of entitlement and a need for instant gratification that later manifested in addiction and relationship problems. In the 1980s, scientific behavior management concepts became integrated into our parenting culture. This model focused on using rewards to reinforce desired behaviors. The slightly different behavior modification movement used the same concept but instead of rewards it recommended the use of negative consequences to control behavior. Both movements advocated the use of charts to show links between behaviors and consequences. These techniques effectively created compliance, but taught kids to respond to external forces rather than develop an internal sense of responsibility. “If we bargain for compliance now, we may beg for it later,” Mr. Payne quoted from The Twelve Keys to Discipline by Roanld Morish.. Children raised under either of these systems tend to be expert negotiators, he said. They do cost/benefit analysis on the risk/reward ratios of their actions. Unfortunately, this system sets up parents as jailers and makes interactions with children more Pavlovian than human. Children may buck the system with outrageous behaviors or wear down their parents through relentless negotiation—neither of which is a desirable outcome. Join us next week for part two of this discussion
*These articles have been written by parents and come from the archives of the Social Inclusion Coorodinating Group. We welcome your reflections and are always enriched by current writings. If you feel inspired to write an article on any Social Inclusion topic, please speak with Danny Finley, our SI Coordinator. Thank you!
|
||
|
||
| You are receiving this email because you are a parent or employee at the Nelson Waldorf School. To ensure that you continue to receive our emails, please add us to your address book or safe list. Copyright (C) 2012 Nelson Waldorf School All rights reserved. |
|
