CPD


Quarrelsome and argumentative students


Dr Bill Rogers, author of two new books on student behaviour


and teacher stress, discusses techniques for managing argumentative students


encourage, support...) I noticed one of the students had shuffled her seat away from the group to chat rather overtly (so I thought) to another group. I moved across to quickly remind her to rejoin us: “Harmony...” She turned (to face me) – visibly


M


annoyed: “I’m on the phone.” She then continued her “chat”. I hadn’t seen her white iPhone under her platinum blonde hair. A few minutes later, she turned back to face our


group, plonked her seat down and must have read the inquisitive look in my eye: “Yes, what?” I simply reminded her of our school rule: “We’ve got a school rule for mobile phones Harmony.” She raised her eyes to the ceiling, sighing: “It’s a


job placement call. Anyway Lindsay doesn’t care.” She pointed to my NQT colleague (her regular ICT teacher – it is a first name school). She leaned back, arms folded, frowning. I didn’t want to make any reference to my colleague’s


“special rules” or his laxity about phones in class time. I gave Harmony a directed choice: “Harmony, I want you to turn your phone off and put it in your bag or leave it on Lindsay’s table until the end of class.” I turned away to rejoin the small group and to give


the student some “take-up time”. She continued to try to “force the issue”. Sighing


loudly, she said, behind my back: “Come on – it’s no big deal. I told you...” (she repeated the mantra about Lindsay). I chose to tactically ignore the drawn out sigh, the


deepening frown, the raised eyes. I turned and quietly repeated the directed choice. As I turned my eyes back to the small group (giving Harmony take-up time), some grinned, some raised their eyes as if to say: “It’s okay Bill, we know Harmony – what you said was okay.” Harmony dramatically grabbed her bag, turned off


her phone, loudly remonstrating (to my unreturned eye) – “I’ll put it away if it makes you happy.”


SecEd • April 19 2012


y colleague and I had just finished a class discussion with a particularly boisterous group of year 11s. We were now moving around the classroom (during on-task learning time) to work with the small groups.


As I sat down with one of the groups (to chat,


Again – I chose to tactically ignore the outburst and


keep my focus directed to the small group. A little later she hobbled her seat over to rejoin us, still sulking. I am always conscious when working with groups


of students that some will vie overtly (and dramatically) for attention. They know what’s fair and right yet seek to gain their social place by drawing significant attention to themselves through their behaviour (“notice ME!”).


Primary and secondary behaviours


In any behaviour exchange between a teacher and student/s it is not only the “primary” behaviour that is distracting/disruptive and annoying (in Harmony’s case the use of phone), it is also the “secondary” behaviours – the sighing or pouting, the raised eyes, the tut-tutting, the overdone frown, the avoidance, and (at times) the obfuscating language – “Lindsay doesn’t care”, “It’s a job placement call!”. It is easy (oh so easy) for a teacher to get drawn in


to (and by!) these secondary behaviours and to start arguing about “what’s fair” or “what other teachers let us do”. The one I often get (as a visiting teacher) is “you’re


not as nice as our normal teacher!” I find partial agreement can be helpful here: “There aren’t any normal teachers.” The student/s do not always get the self-protective


humour – some smile bravely and tolerantly. Quiet and respectful redirection can often help: “I’m still the teacher who is working with you today, how can I help you with your work?” For example, when a student tells me they “hate this


work!” (when I draw alongside to help them), a brief tuning-in/partial agreement and refocusing can help: “It must be annoying to do work you hate. What do you have to do and how can I help?” We avoid over- focusing on the secondary behaviours (the sulky look, the whinge, the complaint...) and refocus to the primary issue or behaviour. Let’s go back to the phone (or iPod, or toy, or other


objet d’art...). A teacher approaches a student already annoyed: Teacher: Puts out their hand (no greeting to the


student...). “Right, come on give me the phone.” Student: “What?” Teacher: “The phone – come on. You know the rule.” Student: “No way – it’s an iPhone! Anyway other


teachers let us use them as long as we keep it brief!” Teacher: “Don’t you talk to me like that!” Student: “Like what?!” Teacher: “Look (teacher points a finger at the student


– he’s getting very annoyed. He wants to win this). I don’t care if every bleedin’ teacher in the school lets you use phones in class…” This sort of scenario can easily end up in pointless


threats. Teacher: “Right; you’re on detention!” Student: “Don’t care!” (arms folded). Teacher: “You will care!!” Some students will simply storm out of the class


creating the “grand scene” and a messy follow-through with senior staff later that day. This is (of course) great entertainment for the other students. And while we can


understand the teacher’s annoyance he is defining this contretemps as a “battle” (I must win), he’s also getting drawn in by the student’s secondary behaviours. When we give a directed choice we avoid arguing


about “which teacher...”, “what’s fair”, and – importantly – we put the responsibility back on the student to own their behaviour. Teacher: “I want you to put the phone in your bag or...” Student: “It’s a job placement call!” Teacher: “Even if it’s a job placement call (partial


agreement) the school rule is clear.” Here the teacher redirects to the choice without


arguing or over-focusing on the sulky tone of voice, the frown, the eyes...


Deferred consequences


If a student chooses (refuses) to put their phone, iPod (or objet d’art) away we will need to make the consequences of their behaviour clear. Having given the student some take-up time, we


notice they are still fiddling (texting) with the phone. The teacher walks over: “Harmony, I asked you to turn the phone off and put it away. If you choose not to, I’ll need to follow this up with you in your own time.” The teacher has been respectful and clear. At this point the teacher walks away leaving the


student with the deferred consequential outcome. As the teacher walks away (giving take-up time) some students will still try to “argue the toss”. We don’t argue back (tempting as it may be), we have made their responsibility clear. Of course it will be crucial to follow-up with the


student later that day (one-to-one) if they refuse to co-operate regarding the fair rules. When we do carry through with any consequence it is not how severe we are but the fair, respectful certainty that we will carry it through.


Assertion


When a student is particularly disrespectful or in any way verbally abusive (as distinct from the sulks, whines and tut-tutting) it will be important to briefly, calmly and decisively address such behaviour. A clear, firm “I” statement – “I’m not speaking to


you disrespectfully, I don’t expect you to speak to me that way.” At this point in any emotional exchange it is important to then refocus to the issue or behaviour at hand (the primary issue or behaviour, or rule or right affected by their behaviour). If the student continues to be disrespectful, or


abusive, we need to clarify the necessary consequences. Whenever we need to direct a student away from our classroom we need to be assured that: • We have a clear time-out support plan (whole- school).


• We will receive senior teacher support. • We direct the student calmly, clearly, decisively (without shouting or threats).


• We follow-up with that student – later – to initiate some repairing and rebuilding (beyond the consequence of time-out itself). If we suspect that such follow-up might be particularly difficult we should ask a senior colleague to


support us in that process. It is crucial, though, that the teacher who has initiated the time-out also carry through with the repairing/rebuilding. Of course none of this is easy. We do get frustrated by


a student’s secondary behaviours – by the argumentation. We will work more effectively (and less stressfully) with such students when we: • Keep the discipline transactions least intrusive where possible (partial agreement; tactical ignoring; directed choices), only moving to more intrusive as circumstance necessitates.


• Avoid unnecessary confrontation (or embarrassment, or sarcasm – grant you it’s tempting on occasion).


• Keep the focus of our communication exchange directed to the primary behaviour (or issue) and avoid getting drawn by secondary behaviours. Whenever we discipline a student we are seeking to


enable the student to own their behaviour in a way that respects the right of others (including the teacher). No mean feat. We do this lesson after lesson, day after day. Teachers who discipline with a conscious eye to how


they communicate (both what and how we say) enable the likelihood of workable co-operation and mutual respect. And, most of all, enable a workable relationship with their students without which no effective teaching and learning can take place. And Harmony? I got on well with her. It took time. She wants to be a hairdresser.


SecEd


• Dr Bill Rogers conducts seminars in schools across Australia, the UK and Europe. He also works as a mentor/coach in challenging schools in Australia and has worked with a number of schools in the UK in special measures.


SecEd Book Discount Offer


The mentorship approach used by Bill (and colleagues) is one developed in elective, professional, supportive choice. Most of all it provides colleagues in struggling schools with non-judgemental colleague feedback from working with them directly in their classes. It can often enable that essential goodwill we need when working with challenging students and classes. The sorts of practices and skills


recounted here are developed in detail in his two new books You Know the Fair Rule (a major third edition) and The Essential Guide to Managing Teacher Stress both recently published by Pearson Education: London. SecEd readers can use


the following link to claim a 20 per cent discount off the price of these titles. Visit www.pearson-books. com/Rogers


13


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16