As promised -Assignment One:
1.0 Write a ‘Code of Conduct’ for parents and caregivers who wish to create a positive family environment for their children. (250 Words)
Parents and caregivers wishing to create a positive family environment for their children may consider writing a Code of Conduct, which commonly outlines the rights and responsibilities of individuals within a group. It seems clear that codes of conduct can be as numerous and diverse as the families that create them. In his 1991 article ‘Relativism’, philosopher Michael Wong makes a similar assertion concerning moral systems in general and he discusses an associated problem wherein morality begins to appear simply as historically contingent justifications for culturally based value systems. For example, in a Code of Conduct, a child may want to include the rule ‘Mum should put an endless supply of coke in the fridge and not whine about it’. To encounter the type of problem wherein traditions or whims masquerade as moral edicts, Wong posits a threshold style of ethical relativism. Upon this view, any morality requires certain features (such an equitable allocation of rights etc.) if it is to call itself a morality at all[1].
Following Wong, I refrain from composing the particulars of a code of conduct for a family, but instead pursue the underlying rights and responsibilities that any code of conduct must exhibit if it is to be in truth a code of conduct at all
Everyone has the right to his/her own viewpoint or opinion. In this, any code of conduct must recognise that diverse viewpoints will and do exist.
Everyone deserves to be heard and have the right to voice his/her needs and wants. In this, any code of conduct must recognise that an effective family group does not suppress individual difference and expression.
Everyone has the responsibility to address the fact that everyone else has needs and wants in a way commensurate to one’s own. In this, any code of conduct must recognise other group members in an equitable manner.
Everyone has the responsibility to ensure the space for formal and informal communication times where each member may share his/her own perspective concerning specific issues or indeed address the nature of the code of conduct itself. In this, any code of conduct must recognise its’ own arbitrary creation.
1.2 What are the essential elements of an adequate discipline model? (250 words)
An adequate discipline model recognises that the notion of discipline is best conceived not as a system of rules exterior to the person, but as a system of moral reasoning developed individually and over a lifetime of experience. Discipline models that consider discipline as fundamentally a matter of self-discipline not only ensure sound social skills and moral development, but also best prepare the individual for ethical dilemmas not yet encountered. In this fashion, an adequate discipline model includes the individual at every point of the discipline process. Considering the individual as a moral being in their own right, it will favour open discussion of the infraction in a climate that recognises why people may choose to do bad things.
For example, a fellow teacher had to respond to an outbreak of ‘sneaker slashing’ amongst one form of the school. The attacks were seemingly random and committed by the same individual(s) in each case. One teacher wanted to call a form assembly and root out the evildoer(s), using a series of threats concerning the terrible nature of the crime and the escalating features of the punishment should the individual(s) responsible not come forth and confess. I argued that the nature of the acts seemed rooted in an emotional upset and suggested the teacher call a form assembly and discuss:
- That only a person very upset with something would go about randomly slashing sneakers.
- The person responsible may not even know why they did it.
- Because the slashing appeared to be emotional in motive, the teacher wanted the individual(s) to come forward, not to be punished, but to discuss whatever might have upset them.
The teacher used the latter approach and after the assembly, crossed the yard at lunch when the person responsible approached her and they discussed what had happened. The latter approach not only proved to resolve the issue expeditiously, but also provided help for the person responsible and perhaps allayed some of the anger of the persons who found their sneakers slashed. Theorists such as William Glasser (1998) consider humans to be characteristically social creatures and so to ensure the social ends of morality, an adequate discipline model would emphasise reparation or making amends over policies of exclusion or punishment.
1.3 Reflect critically on the theories of at least two psychologists and apply their theories to techniques for improving student motivation. (500 words)
In discussing successful classroom teaching, William Glasser offers a discipline model that emphasises the psychology of students as human beings. He suggests that all student behaviour in the classroom has the purpose of attaining a set and psychologically and biologically derived system of needs[2]. Upon Glasser’s model, the role of the teacher consists in helping the student to attain his or her needs in a manner conducive to maintaining good working relationships with the teacher and other students As they are applied to the classroom, Glasser’s techniques have two benefits for improving student motivation. In the first place, the model creates a space for the developing self-awareness of the individual student. In the second place, the model creates a stable and safe environment for learning.
Inadequate models of discipline fail in one or more areas to include the individual student in the discipline process. L. and M. Canter’s model of Assertive Discipline suggests that an autocratic teacher dispensing wads of syllabus-derived learning and rigid punishments for infractions will ensure sound classroom management. I suggest that when applied variously in individual teaching practice, Assertive Discipline may cease to treat the individual as an individual, consider the person as a moral imbecile or savage, permit a closed system of punishment and favour policies of exclusion that effectively isolate and undermine the person as an individual. Being fundamentally undemocratic in nature, Assertive Discipline is too trusting in the moral capacity of the teacher. It creates a climate of blame and responsibility shifting and a cringing fear of punishment. At worst, such a system will inculcate hatred and isolation amongst the students and at best will ensure only the vacuous adherence of the unthinking person.
[1] Upon this measure, the rule ‘Mum should put an endless supply of coke in the fridge and not whine about it’, fails the test of moral structure in as far as it ignores an equitable allocation of rights ( Mum), and may serve to undermine greater ends, such as the continued health of the family.
[2] Glasser identifies five classes of humanly experienced drivers or needs (Class notes – Alan Coman):
- Love, belonging and acceptance,
- Personal power, competency and achievement,
- Survival, safety and security,
- Freedom, independence and autonomy,
- Fun and learning,
1.0 Write a ‘Code of Conduct’ for parents and caregivers who wish to create a positive family environment for their children. (250 Words)
Parents and caregivers wishing to create a positive family environment for their children may consider writing a Code of Conduct, which commonly outlines the rights and responsibilities of individuals within a group. It seems clear that codes of conduct can be as numerous and diverse as the families that create them. In his 1991 article ‘Relativism’, philosopher Michael Wong makes a similar assertion concerning moral systems in general and he discusses an associated problem wherein morality begins to appear simply as historically contingent justifications for culturally based value systems. For example, in a Code of Conduct, a child may want to include the rule ‘Mum should put an endless supply of coke in the fridge and not whine about it’. To encounter the type of problem wherein traditions or whims masquerade as moral edicts, Wong posits a threshold style of ethical relativism. Upon this view, any morality requires certain features (such an equitable allocation of rights etc.) if it is to call itself a morality at all[1].
Following Wong, I refrain from composing the particulars of a code of conduct for a family, but instead pursue the underlying rights and responsibilities that any code of conduct must exhibit if it is to be in truth a code of conduct at all
Everyone has the right to his/her own viewpoint or opinion. In this, any code of conduct must recognise that diverse viewpoints will and do exist.
Everyone deserves to be heard and have the right to voice his/her needs and wants. In this, any code of conduct must recognise that an effective family group does not suppress individual difference and expression.
Everyone has the responsibility to address the fact that everyone else has needs and wants in a way commensurate to one’s own. In this, any code of conduct must recognise other group members in an equitable manner.
Everyone has the responsibility to ensure the space for formal and informal communication times where each member may share his/her own perspective concerning specific issues or indeed address the nature of the code of conduct itself. In this, any code of conduct must recognise its’ own arbitrary creation.
1.2 What are the essential elements of an adequate discipline model? (250 words)
An adequate discipline model recognises that the notion of discipline is best conceived not as a system of rules exterior to the person, but as a system of moral reasoning developed individually and over a lifetime of experience. Discipline models that consider discipline as fundamentally a matter of self-discipline not only ensure sound social skills and moral development, but also best prepare the individual for ethical dilemmas not yet encountered. In this fashion, an adequate discipline model includes the individual at every point of the discipline process. Considering the individual as a moral being in their own right, it will favour open discussion of the infraction in a climate that recognises why people may choose to do bad things.
For example, a fellow teacher had to respond to an outbreak of ‘sneaker slashing’ amongst one form of the school. The attacks were seemingly random and committed by the same individual(s) in each case. One teacher wanted to call a form assembly and root out the evildoer(s), using a series of threats concerning the terrible nature of the crime and the escalating features of the punishment should the individual(s) responsible not come forth and confess. I argued that the nature of the acts seemed rooted in an emotional upset and suggested the teacher call a form assembly and discuss:
- That only a person very upset with something would go about randomly slashing sneakers.
- The person responsible may not even know why they did it.
- Because the slashing appeared to be emotional in motive, the teacher wanted the individual(s) to come forward, not to be punished, but to discuss whatever might have upset them.
The teacher used the latter approach and after the assembly, crossed the yard at lunch when the person responsible approached her and they discussed what had happened. The latter approach not only proved to resolve the issue expeditiously, but also provided help for the person responsible and perhaps allayed some of the anger of the persons who found their sneakers slashed. Theorists such as William Glasser (1998) consider humans to be characteristically social creatures and so to ensure the social ends of morality, an adequate discipline model would emphasise reparation or making amends over policies of exclusion or punishment.
1.3 Reflect critically on the theories of at least two psychologists and apply their theories to techniques for improving student motivation. (500 words)
In discussing successful classroom teaching, William Glasser offers a discipline model that emphasises the psychology of students as human beings. He suggests that all student behaviour in the classroom has the purpose of attaining a set and psychologically and biologically derived system of needs[2]. Upon Glasser’s model, the role of the teacher consists in helping the student to attain his or her needs in a manner conducive to maintaining good working relationships with the teacher and other students As they are applied to the classroom, Glasser’s techniques have two benefits for improving student motivation. In the first place, the model creates a space for the developing self-awareness of the individual student. In the second place, the model creates a stable and safe environment for learning.
Inadequate models of discipline fail in one or more areas to include the individual student in the discipline process. L. and M. Canter’s model of Assertive Discipline suggests that an autocratic teacher dispensing wads of syllabus-derived learning and rigid punishments for infractions will ensure sound classroom management. I suggest that when applied variously in individual teaching practice, Assertive Discipline may cease to treat the individual as an individual, consider the person as a moral imbecile or savage, permit a closed system of punishment and favour policies of exclusion that effectively isolate and undermine the person as an individual. Being fundamentally undemocratic in nature, Assertive Discipline is too trusting in the moral capacity of the teacher. It creates a climate of blame and responsibility shifting and a cringing fear of punishment. At worst, such a system will inculcate hatred and isolation amongst the students and at best will ensure only the vacuous adherence of the unthinking person.
[1] Upon this measure, the rule ‘Mum should put an endless supply of coke in the fridge and not whine about it’, fails the test of moral structure in as far as it ignores an equitable allocation of rights ( Mum), and may serve to undermine greater ends, such as the continued health of the family.
[2] Glasser identifies five classes of humanly experienced drivers or needs (Class notes – Alan Coman):
- Love, belonging and acceptance,
- Personal power, competency and achievement,
- Survival, safety and security,
- Freedom, independence and autonomy,
- Fun and learning,
posted by tonka at 7:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home