Avoiding polarisation - building healthy relationships at school by developing approaches to school discipline which build a culture of learning and teaching

Paper presented at the National Union of Educators Conference, 2005, by Sherri Le Mottee, EISA

1 Introduction

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen, colleagues, fellow educators, comrades.

I have no doubt there have been numerous reflections here today on the venue and its relationship to the issues at hand - so let me start with sharing with you some thoughts from the book of Peter Senge, Recognising the Dichotomy [1]:

My first public school teaching assignment was in a large junior high school, part of a bureaucratic, affluent school district. Many of the administrators were former military men who had entered teaching under the GI Bill following World War II and the Korean War. Possibly because of this, they often used discipline with a quasimilitary feel, especially for boys who misbehaved frequently. It was not physically cruel punishment, but it was very unfamiliar to me. I felt that it bordered on mental mistreatment. For example, a boy who frequently misbehaved was ordered by the school dean to stand with his nose inches away from a wall and not to move for an entire class period. That bothered me; I had never witnessed anything like it.
The teaching style was also unfamiliar. Drills and rote memorization had become popular forms of teaching after the Soviet Union beat the United States into space with Sputnik, the first human made satellite. Politicians and media pundits blamed our nation's schools for not keeping up with the Soviets in Maths and Science - and by the way, they said, Johnny can't read or write very well either. The John Dewey inspired principles for meeting individual learning needs, under which I had been schooled (or educated rather) and where I had developed my love of learning were denounced as "progressive education" and blamed for the student's failure.

I don't mean to imply that the public junior high was an intentionally mean place. As I got to know the teachers and some of the administrators, I learned to respect them and to understand, though not fully accept the mental model they were working under. The world had given them a tough job to do: preparing students for an equally tough working world. The traditional teach and test, rote learning model was the only way they knew to bring so many students along so far - no matter how much alienation and resistance it created.

To me, we were caught up in a false dichotomy. I saw the value of high achievement and of making sure that all students had the opportunity to reach those standards. I saw that this would require hard work, not just by students, but by teachers as well. But there was no reason why schools couldn't prepare students for achievement and nurture them at the same time. In fact, the more nurturing they got, the more rigor they could draw on from within themselves, instead of having it imposed on them - the more tangible achievements they could produce...

What is Senge saying to us? Is he saying that there are other ways of looking at discipline and its relationship to achievement and excellence, that schools are places for human beings and should be humane institutions?

So what then, is the difference between discipline and punishment?
Discipline is different from punishment:

• Discipline is intrinsic; punishment is external;
• Discipline is educative; punishment is punitive;
• Discipline is about self control for the sake of self actualization; punishment is the exercise of control over people for the sake of compliance;

Effective discipline at school is about the management of effective relationships between individuals and groups based on the common values of human dignity, respect and equality. When we use punitive measures to manage the learning environment we end up disrupting these relationships. Power is used and abused. A polarisation takes place often, with learners on one side and educators on the other, heads of school and management on one side and educators on the other, prefects on one side and learners on the other.

2 Democracy, human rights and discipline

Christian National Education was designed to support and perpetuate authoritarianism, discrimination and inequality by schooling children to be passive citizens who would accept authority without question. Teachers were encouraged to use the cane as a way of keeping control, maintaining order and dealing with anybody who stepped out of line. Beating children to punish them (in the name of discipline) was simply taken for granted in a society familiar with using violence as a way of maintaining order and control. But during the 1970s when resistance to apartheid swelled, student organisations began to demand an end to abuse in the classroom and in the 1980s learners, educators and parents formed Education Without Fear and actively campaigned for an end to corporal punishment in schools.

At the same time, international thinking about corporal punishment began to change. Increasingly, research showed a direct link between corporal punishment and the high levels of violence in society. Communities around the world began to see the scrapping of corporal punishment as an important step towards creating more peaceful, tolerant societies in which human dignity and respect were upheld. Across the globe, corporal punishment was being banned.

In 1994, when South Africa became part of the global society and adopted a new democratic constitution guaranteeing the right to dignity, equality, freedom and security for all citizens, it followed the path of most other democracies by passing legislation to outlaw corporal punishment.

Conventions, declarations and, of course, our own policies supporting this move included:

• The Convention on the Rights of the Child, which compels us to pass laws and take social, educational and administrative measures to "protect the child from all forms of physical and mental violence, injury or abuse, neglect or negligent treatment, maltreatment or exploitation including sexual abuse".
• The African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child which commits its member countries to the same measures and adds that they must take steps to ensure that a child "who is subjected to school or parental discipline shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the child".
• Section 12 of the South African Constitution which makes our commitment as a nation clear stating that "Everyone has the right not to be treated or punished in a cruel, inhuman or degrading way".
• Furthermore, the National Education Policy Act (1996) says, "No person shall administer corporal punishment or subject a student to psychological abuse at any educational institution".
• And the South African Schools Act (1996) which states that "(1) No person shall administer corporal punishment at a school to a learner; (2) Any person who contravenes subsection (1) is guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a sentence which could be imposed for assault".

3 Before and after - a glimpse

Corporal punishment is included in the United Nations definition of torture and is seen to include excessive chastisement as an educational or disciplinary measure. For many, the definition ends with the physical; it is however important to recognise that psychological discomfort as a means of punishment can be equally damaging (some would say even more so) and is included in most definitions of corporal punishment.

Put succinctly, corporal punishment is "any deliberate act against a child that inflicts physical or psychological discomfort to punish or contain him/her. This includes, but is not limited to, spanking, slapping, pinching, paddling or hitting a child with a hand or with an object; denying or restricting a child's use of the toilet; denying meals, drink, heat and shelter, pushing or pulling a child with force, forcing the child to do exercise..." [2]

In addition to the legislation and declarations, research indicates that corporal punishment does not work. Rather than achieve the desired culture of learning there are strong indicators that violence begets violence. In fact, corporal punishment:

• Does not contribute to a culture of tolerance, dignity and respect;
• Does not stop bad behaviour or difficult children; instead it has the potential to become part of a cycle of self-fulfilling prophesy - the same children get punished over and over for the same offences;
• Does not nurture intrinsic self control, self discipline or responsibility; instead it sets learners up to worry about who will catch them out, provokes aggression and feelings of revenge and leads to further aggression or anti-social behaviour;
• Shifts the focus of the child from what they did, to the beating they are receiving - for some this becomes a badge of honour;
• Undermines relationships built on mutual respect, dignity and care between learners and educators and can block effective communication;
• Undermines the self-esteem, self-worth and self-confidence of children who may have special needs and contributes to feelings of negativity about school, themselves and adults;
• Fails to address the real needs of learners and the reasons for their behavioural problems e.g. problems at home, abuse, hunger, basic needs not being met and so on;
• Has the potential to become an excuse for bad or lazy teaching practice and can be seen as a quick and easy response;
• Has the potential to perpetuate discrimination and abuse: those who are usually beaten tend to be older than their peers, from poor homes, black rather than white, boys rather than girls;
• Has the potential to contribute to truancy, high drop out rates and to accelerate the rebellious learner down a path of violence and gangsterism.

However, we cannot ignore the real feelings and the voices of educators, many of whom feel:

• Disempowered by the removal of the cane - "…we have no recourse or action we can take to handle bad behaviour - children are getting away with murder";
• Supportive of the policy change and the end to physical abuse but a total ban is inappropriate at this stage as there are no alternate strategies;
• That they have no rights and that they are at the mercy of everybody else who is part of the school community;
• That since the introduction of human rights, the system has become unmanageable;
• That parents want corporal punishment - they feel their children need a good hiding; and
• It is against their religion to spare the rod.

4 Corporal punishment versus discipline

Whilst the feelings expressed by educators (and parents) have to be recognised, acknowledged and regarded with empathy, we are bound by law to find alternatives. We are hopefully also be bound by our own desire for education to make a difference to society, to break the cycle of violence and to build a culture of dignity, equality and respect in our country. Those who refuse to change and to seek alternatives face legal consequences (although we know that for many this has not been a deterrent). I recently heard of a case on the radio where an educator challenged the department regarding his right as a Christian to use corporal punishment at school. This so-called right conflicts with a host of other rights and of course was ruled unconstitutional. So what to do, how to ensure a culture of learning and teaching at school without the good old stick or the sarcastic tongue lashing?

I have five suggestions to share with you this afternoon:

1 To rethink what we mean by discipline and to establish what the role of punishment is within that understanding

Discipline - the practice of care and respect towards others and towards oneself, there to create the emotional and social safety each person in the social system needs to self-actualise.

Discipline is not about controlling others - it is not your job as educator to control the children in your class - rather it is to help children to learn to control themselves.

Discipline is not just about what happens between people - it is also about what happens within people.

Discipline has nothing to do with controlling disruptive or other unacceptable bad behaviours, whether on the part of children or adults. It has everything to do with ensuring a safe and valuing environment so that the rights and needs of people are respected, vindicated and safeguarded … every child has the right to be loved, valued, see for self, communicated with in open, respectful and equalizing ways and allowed to pursue legitimate work, leisure, spiritual and other goals in life. [3]

2 To consider discipline as part of a whole school strategy supported by policy (from outside and upheld through policy within the school) - discipline is part of the culture of the school

The school is an organisation in which different elements or parts make up the whole. When all of these elements work well, the school functions as a healthy organisation in which the all of the parts fit and hold together.

A functioning school in which the bell goes on time, teachers arrive at class prepared, learners are kept occupied both within the class time and during extra curricula programmes is a school where encounter serious behavioural problems are less likely to at school.

3 To explore human relationships at school and to recognise human dignity, equality, diversity and respect for all

Discipline is part of human relationships, it is vital to see it within the dynamic social process. Unconditional love, acceptance, affirmation of potential, dignity, respect, no-discrimination: these are some of our fundamental needs as human beings. They should be enshrined in our discipline system as the cornerstone of a values manifesto.

Addressing 'bad behaviour' at school is imperative but within this framework, it should be done in such a way that does not dehumanise anybody. The rights of victims must be restored but this should not be done at the expense of the self esteem of anybody. Maintain respect for the victim's and perpetrator's persons, maintain the relationship, take firm and corrective action on the specific behaviour.

Do not forget that discipline systems are there to safeguard all members of the school community - this includes educators! As much as children should be safeguarded from abusive and out of control behaviour from educators, so do educators have the right to be protected from the under-controlled behaviour of children. The discipline system is not working when educators spend more time trying to control learners than actually teaching them.

The creation and endorsement of a just and caring discipline system is the backbone of an effective system. This involves clear communication about the system, fine tuning it as problems arise, strong support and commitment from educators, parents, and other members of the school community supported by frequent meetings to support educators in their implementation.

Many students, teachers and parents carry the emotional baggage of their own poor sense of lovability and capability into their respective roles. Unless there is a great emphasis on caring for people and there are structures that can be availed for healing inner hurts, discipline systems will fail. [4]

Remember - a system is only a system - it cannot function without the people who use and implement it.

4 To define who does what - it is a culture of learning and teaching which implies that while learners are learning, teachers are teaching. Both have a role to play, both have the right to expect something from the other: be disciplined yourself

A common misconception is that discipline applies to children - adults do something else. It is not uncommon to see educators or parents using uncontrolled responses to children, for example, shouting, using put-down remarks and so on and yet we know that children tend to take their cues for much of their behaviour from adults. These double standards ("do as I say not as I do"; "one law for children and another for adults") don't work. Losing control of yourself with children does not put you in a position to expect or demand self-control from children.

For effective discipline at school, learners and educators (and parents) need to learn self control.

5 To be clear about consequences and recourse for bad behaviour, put in place codes of conduct, disciplinary procedures and so on. Do this in such a way that the whole school community participates

Recognise there cannot be a "one size fits all" approach. Different learner needs, identities and experiences will require different responses on the part of the educator. At the same time, educators are different and will not respond to the same situations in the same way. Educators should recognise who they are, reflect on their practice, and identify strategies for dealing with learners which are in keeping with the expectations underpinning the banning of corporal punishment but at the same time fit with "who they are". Authenticity is critical to real, healthy relationships.

Within this orientation, however, there remains the need for absolute consistency and certainty. All members of the school community should know what is expected of them. They should also be clear about the consequences of not meeting these expectations. In terms of the South African Schools Act, schools are required to establish a code of conduct. Although there are criteria guiding the establishment of these codes, schools are also able to add their own particular "flavour based on their community and its needs".

Develop a code of conduct as a school exercise. Putting in place a strategy for review and renewal together with a pledge will also assist in ensuring this policy becomes part of the practice of the school. This policy should be upheld by all learners and educators; it should commit the whole school community to building a culture of learning and teaching within a framework of rights and responsibility. Learners need to know what is expected of them and at the same time to know what they can expect of their educators and parents.

Conclusion

When discipline is seen as a way of controlling others, it is unlikely to be successful. It may for a time achieve quietness but it will not heal or change aggressive or passive behaviours that lead to the blocking of the needs of others. It certainly will not promote the ultimate goal of discipline i.e. mutual respect and caring between members of a social system. When adults employ methods of control that are aggressive, dominating, cynical, sarcastic or manipulative, they are attempting to fight fire with fire and are being "abusive" in ways similar to those of the children they are trying to control. Often these strategies produce only more ill-discipline and have the potential to reinforce a vicious cycle.

We want a different world, where problems are addressed peacefully and holistically, where we are able to share so that everybody has enough, where war is always the last resort, if an option at all.

Perhaps there is no greater consensus among clinical observations and research literature anywhere than relating to the finding that aggression breeds aggression and that violence is a learned response ... the roots of much family violence, even international violence is traceable to violent child rearing and punitive pedagogies.

Sherri Le Mottee, 2005
Programme Manager and Specialist
Conflict Management, Democracy and Electoral Education, EISA

Footnotes

1 Senge, Peter (2000), Schools That Learn, Nicholas Brealey Publishing, London, pp148-9
2 http://www.childadvocate.org.htm
3 Humphreys, Tony (1998), A different kind of discipline, 1998, Newleaf, Dublin, p9
4 Humphreys, Tony (1998), A different kind of discipline, 1998, Newleaf, Dublin, p8