This article was downloaded by: [Pennsylvania State University]On: 24 November 2014, At: 07:11Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

The Clearing House: A Journal of EducationalStrategies, Issues and IdeasPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/vtch20

Discipline without Stress,1 Punishments, or RewardsMarvin MarshallPublished online: 07 Aug 2010.

To cite this article: Marvin Marshall (2005) Discipline without Stress,1 Punishments, or Rewards, The Clearing House: AJournal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 79:1, 51-54

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.3200/TCHS.79.1.51-54

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

he subject of discipline is often confused withclassroom management.

“I appreciated your differentiation between classroommanagement and discipline. After 35 years in the class-room, I can see how so many times discipline problemsare exacerbated by poor management.” (Baiotto 2003)

Although related, classroom management and disci-pline are distinctly different topics.

Classroom ManagementClassroom management deals with how things are

done. It entails structure, procedures, and routines, tothe point of becoming rituals. When procedures areexplained to and practiced by students, and, when nec-essary, periodically reinforced by practicing again, class-room management is enhanced. When procedures arelearned, practiced, and reinforced, instruction becomesefficient. This is the foundation of classroom manage-ment and is a prime responsibility of the teacher.

Chances are that when you walk into a room, you donot pay much attention to the floor, but if it were miss-ing, that would be obvious. This analogy describes thedifference between effective and ineffective classroommanagement. You do not notice it when it is good, butwithout it, its lack is readily apparent.

DisciplineIn contrast to classroom management, discipline is

the responsibility of the student. Discipline has to dowith appropriate behavior. Although it is incumbentupon the teacher to maintain a classroom conducive tolearning, a person is responsible for his or her behavior.

When teachers take on the role of disciplining stu-dents, they deprive young people of the opportunity

to become more responsible. A far more effectiveapproach is for students to develop procedures tohelp redirect irresponsible impulses. In addition, theusual approach is for the adult to impose some formof consequence or punishment. When this occurs,students have no ownership in the decisions, take ona victimhood mentality, and have negative feelingstoward the imposers. Since the use of coercion engen-ders negative feelings, such external approaches arecounterproductive to good relationships and areeffective only temporarily.

Three Principles to Practice

Superior teachers are aware of three practices thatenhance classroom management and promote respon-sible behavior. Following is a brief description of each.

Positivity

The first principle to practice is to be positive. Peopledo better when they feel better, and that which peopleperceive affects the way they feel. For example, if youreceive a compliment, then a positive feeling emerges.On the other hand, if you are criticized, a negative feel-ing erupts. Effective teachers communicate in a way thatpromotes what is desired, rather than what is notdesired. For example, “Stop talking” becomes “This isquiet time” and “No running” becomes “We walk inour hallways.” The first practice to promote appropriatebehavior is to be proactive by presenting expectationsthat are positive.

Choice

The second principle to practice is to offer choices inany situation or activity. Choice empowers. Since peo-

Discipline without Stress,1

Punishments, or Rewards

MARVIN MARSHALL

Marvin Marshall is an international staff developer and author. For a graphic summaryof his complete teaching model, visit http://www.MarvinMarshall.com/inhousedetails.html. The author holds the copyright to this material.

51

T

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Penn

sylv

ania

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

11 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

ple do not argue with their own choices, this approachengenders ownership (a necessary requirement for last-ing changes) while, simultaneously, reduces resistance.Many behavior problems erupt when the student per-ceives—especially in front of peers—that no option isavailable. The student feels cornered. The lack ofoptions often prompts feelings that lead to resistanceand even defiance. Having options reduces these nega-tive feelings that coercion fosters.

Giving three options reduces any sense of coercion.When options are presented, a student feels empow-ered as opposed to overpowered. Offering choices dif-fuses the emotional charge of a tense situationprompted by feelings of coercion. The misbehavingstudent is prompted to think, rather than impulsivelyreact, because the student is required to make a choice.For example, if, after continual disruptions, a studentwere given a form that asked, “Would you rather com-plete the form (1) in your seat, (2) in the back of theroom, or (3) in the office?”, resistance to the taskwould diminish.

Reflection

The third principle superior teachers practice has todo with understanding the differences between con-trolling someone else and attempting to change some-one else. Although we can control a person, the controlis only physical. No one can control how another per-son thinks or what the other person wants to do. Inaddition, control is only temporary.

Answering the following question explains a funda-mental concept of the approach: Think of one personin your life and ask yourself whether you have everchanged that person. You will quickly conclude thatyou might have influenced the person to change, but inthe final analysis the person did the actual changing.As mentioned, we can control another person tem-porarily, but no one can actually change another per-son. People change themselves, and the least effectiveapproach to actuate another person to change isthrough the use of coercion, be it telling or throughimposed punishments or manipulation by bribery(http://www.AboutDiscipline.com).

Reflect for a moment: Do you enjoy being told whatto do? Telling is coercive because the inference is thatwhat you are doing is not good enough and that youneed to change. No one likes to hear this message.

Asking reflective questions is significantly moreeffective and longer lasting than telling someone whatto do. Learning to ask reflective questions is a skill thatanyone can learn. “What would an extraordinary per-son do in this situation?” and “If you could not fail,what would you do?” are reflective and empoweringcommunications. Here is a reflective and powerful oneI use in my seminars: “If I were a student, would I wantme as a teacher?”

The Raise Responsibility System

Communicating in positive terms, offering choices,and honing the skill of asking reflective questions arethree principles to practice. They provide a foundationfor the Raise Responsibility system, which is a disciplineand learning system composed of three parts: (1) teach-ing a hierarchy of social development (teaching), (2)checking for understanding (asking), and (3) guidedchoices (eliciting).

Teaching the Hierarchy (Teaching)

Promoting responsible behavior starts with teachinga hierarchy of four developmental levels. As with JeanPiaget’s hierarchy of cognitive development, AbrahamMaslow’s hierarchy of needs, and Lawrence Kohlberg’shierarchy of moral development, the nature of a hier-archical structure positions the highest level as themost desirable one. Exposure to the levels encouragesresponsible behavior if for no other reason than themotivating principle of challenge.

The approach is proactive in that concepts are taughtat the outset. It is also positive, offers choices, andprompts reflection. This is in contrast to the more tra-ditional approach of reacting after irresponsible behav-ior with a negative approach that is usually coerciveand adversarial.

The concepts comprise four levels of social develop-ment that are made meaningful by the examples stu-dents create for their own classroom. The levels are:

(D) Democracy (Highest level)Develops self-disciplineDemonstrates initiativeDisplays responsibilityDemocracy and responsibility are inseparableInternal motivation

(C) Cooperation/ConformityConsiderateCompliesConforms to peer pressureExternal motivation

(B) Bossing/Bullying Bothers othersBullies othersBreaks laws and standardsMust be bossed to behave

(A) Anarchy (Lowest level)Absence of orderAimless and chaotic

Levels A and B are not acceptable levels of behavior.Because schools are organized institutions, level A is

52 The Clearing House September/October 2005

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Penn

sylv

ania

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

11 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

introduced only to understand the hierarchy of socialdevelopment. Notice that only level B uses a verbal orgerund form. This prevents referring to anyone as abully. The verbal form also emphasizes that an irre-sponsible behavioral level is chosen. People at thislevel make their own rules and standards, rather thanfollowing appropriate expectations. Level B behaviornaturally prompts the use of authority. However,authority can be used without punishment or coercion,as will be seen in the third phase of the system.

Level C refers to expected behaviors, a requirementfor a civil society. It includes following the proceduresthat the teacher establishes for classroom manage-ment. “Cooperation” is emphasized at the elementarylevels, but in middle and high schools this level takeson an additional dimension. Discussions include thepowerful influence of peer pressure and situationswhere such conformity would not be in the best inter-ests of either the individual or society. Motivation atthis level is external; its intent is to please or influencesomeone else.

Level D is the goal. It represents the ideal of taking theinitiative to act responsibly because it is the right thingto do. A hierarchy is also used to promote effort in learn-ing (http://www.MarvinMarshall.com/hierarchy.htm).

Both levels C and D are acceptable. The difference is inthe motivation. Level C aims at obedience, but obedi-ence does not create desire. Ask a student to pick up achair that is on its side and the student will do so. How-ever, if the student picks up the chair without beingasked, a positive feeling is engendered. Taking the initia-tive to do the right thing feels good. Obeying a directivesimply lacks this positive emotional component.

The usual terms employed when discussing motiva-tion are “extrinsic” and “intrinsic.” When referring tomotivation with the Raise Responsibility system, theterms “external” and “internal” are used because respon-sibility is not a characteristic that we associate withintrinsic motivation. The motivation to be responsible ismore cognitive and rooted in ethics and values, in con-trast to the emotion or feeling that is associated with theword “intrinsic.” (Technically, however, whether anymotivation can be extrinsic or external is another subjectbeyond the discussion of this article.)

The levels can be illustrated by using a traffic signal.Levels A and B have a very clear meaning: stop. Theseare unacceptable levels of behavior. The yellow refers tolevel C and indicates caution. This signal communi-cates a situation that can go in one of two directions:up to level D (doing the right thing because it is theright thing to do) or down to level B (doing somethinginappropriate or unacceptable). At level C, it is impor-tant to think carefully and cautiously about the resultsof one’s choices. It engenders reflecting on questionssuch as, “Is this really where I want to go?” and “Will itbring results that are going to be positive for me and

others?” The green of the signal at level D indicates thatit is safe to go with the responsible choice.

Checking for Understanding (Asking)

Disruptions are handled by checking for under-standing. The purpose is for the disrupting student toacknowledge the chosen behavioral level. Acknowledg-ing the level is necessary in order to accept responsibil-ity. The vast majority of situations are handled by sim-ply using this basic learning theory of teaching (theconcepts) and then checking for understanding (askingto recognize the level chosen). The self-evaluatingquestioning strategy encourages students to reflect ontheir level of self-chosen behavior. The effect of thisprocedure is, to quote one teacher,

“They (students) know almost instantly when they needto make a better choice. This takes less time away frominstruction and keeps the classroom climate stress-freeand positive.” (Capell 1999)

This very important part of the system involves ask-ing young people to reflect on their own chosen levelof behavior. This simple prompt to reflect immediatelystops the vast majority of inappropriate behaviors. Incontrast to asking the student, if the adult identifies thelevel of behavior, the student has been deprived of theopportunity to reflect and become more responsible.

A number of factors are engaged using these twofoundational steps of teaching and then asking. Per-haps the most important is that the approach separatesthe person from the behavior, the act from the actor,the deed from the doer. This is a critical concept tounderstand. Everyone has a natural tendency to defendone’s own actions. Oftentimes, this leads to a con-frontation between teacher and student. By referring toa level outside of oneself, the tendency for defensive-ness is eliminated. Other beneficial factors include anunderstanding between internal and external motiva-tion; empowerment to address level B, bully-typebehavior; and the fostering of character education.

Guided Choices (Eliciting)

Continued or repeated disruptions are handled byguided choices. Authority is used but without beingpunitive. The purpose is to stop the disruption and givethe student a responsibility-producing activity and/orto develop a procedure to redirect future impulses.

As with Checking for Understanding, in GuidedChoices the teacher asks rather then tells. Askingbypasses emotions prompted by the brain’s amygdalaand prompts the brain to reflect. Since the student ismaking a decision and is not being coerced, dignity ispreserved and confrontation is avoided.

A major reason for the effectiveness of the system isthat students know and feel that they will not beharmed. Students understand that the teacher’s inten-

Vol. 79, No. 1 Discipline without Stress 53

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Penn

sylv

ania

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

11 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

tion is for student growth, not punishment. Studentsclearly understand that the teacher wants to help stu-dents to help themselves, rather than being victims oftheir inappropriate behavioral impulses.

Suppose that Michael sticks his foot out into theaisle in an attempt to trip Jimmy. The teacher’s conver-sation to Michael sounds like the following: “Michael,every time you stick your foot out to trip Jimmy, youare a victim of your impulses. Do you want to gothrough life being a victim? If not, let’s think of someprocedure you can rely on so that when you get thatimpulse you will be able to redirect it. Without havingsome procedure, you will continue to be a victim ofyour impulses.”

Although essays and self-diagnostic referrals areavailable for future disruptions, the most effectiveapproach is to elicit a consequence or procedure toredirect future inappropriate behaviors. Since peoplegenerally do not argue with their own decisions, anelicited decision does not engender the usual negative,adversarial, and victimhood reaction aroused when adecision is imposed. Incidentally, because the decisionis the student’s, rather than the teacher’s, this approachgains parental support.

ConclusionThe key to effective classroom management is teaching

and practicing procedures. This is the teacher’s responsi-bility. Discipline, on the other hand, has to do withbehavior and is the student’s responsibility. Superiorteachers practice the three principles of being positivewith students, offering choices, and prompting reflec-

tion. The Raise Responsibility system employs a proac-tive approach that establishes expectations by first teach-ing a hierarchy of social development. During inappro-priate behavior, the teacher asks or suggests that thedisruptive student reflect on the level of chosen behavior.If disruptions continue, a consequence or procedure iselicited—in contrast to the usual approach of beingimposed—to redirect inappropriate impulses. Employ-ing the three principles to practice and the Raise Respon-sibility system is a significantly more effective approachto promoting responsible behavior than are traditionaladversarial and negative approaches.

SUGGESTED READINGS

Marshall, M. 1998. Fostering social responsibility. Bloomington, IN: PhiDelta Kappa Educational Foundation.

———. 2001. Discipline without stress® punishments or rewards: How teachers and parents promote responsibility and learning. Los Alami-tos, CA: Piper.

———. 2005. Promoting positivity, choice, and reflection. Leadership(Association of California School Administrators), 34 (5): 28–30.

Marshall, M., and K. Weisner. 2004. Using a discipline system to pro-mote learning. Phi Delta Kappan 85 (7): 498–507.

Key words: discipline, positivity, choice, reflection

NOTE

1. “Discipline without Stress” is a registered trademark.

REFERENCES

Baiotto, K. March 23, 2003. Personal communication.Capell, D. January 7, 1999. Personal communication.Marshall, M. http://www.AboutDiscipline.com/ (accessed April 2000).———. http://www.MarvinMarshall.com/hierarchy.htm (accessed

February 2005).

54 The Clearing House September/October 2005

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Penn

sylv

ania

Sta

te U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

11 2

4 N

ovem

ber

2014