8
Teachers must learn to decipher the student’s real message and feelings when he speaks or behaves in a certain way. In attempting to interpret what the student is communicating, the teacher should use the least amount of control possible. If the teacher solves a problem for a student that he can solve for himself, the teacher is not helping the student.
Using a T.E.T. model, the teacher first looks at a student who is misbehaving in a way that says, “I know what you are doing, I trust your capability to come up with your own solution to your misbehavior, and I am here to help you find that solution.” If a student cannot solve the problem immediately, the teacher encourages (not forces) the student to verbalize the problem. During this en- couragement period, the teacher provides time for the student to think about the problem, carefully avoiding judgmental verbal or nonverbal communication.
Gordon believes that open communication is often blocked by directive statements that teachers use, thus cutting off the very communication the teacher is trying to attain. These “roadblocks” include, among others: com- manding, threatening, warning, preaching, offering logical arguments, con- soling, criticizing, agreeing, ridiculing, diagnosing, praising, interrogating, and humoring. All of these roadblocks, according to Gordon, even those that on the surface seem positive, prevent the student from coming up with his or her own solution.
Implementation
In order to implement the T.E.T. strategy for solving a problem, the teacher must first determine who owns the problem; depending on ownership, the method of dealing with the problem will be different. There are three owner- ship choices: the student, the teacher, or both.
If the student owns the problem, she or he will be the only one affected by it.
Examples of Student Problem Ownership She wasn’t selected to be in the marching band.
Other students pick on him on the school bus.
Someone keeps taking her lunch, money, pens, or other possessions.
When handling a student-owned problem, Gordon suggests that the teacher use the following: critical listening, door openers, or active listening.
• Critical listening. The teacher can remain silent, communicating acknowledgment-type listening through eye contact, gestures, and posture.
Noncommittal remarks such as “Uh-huh,” “I see,” and “Oh, gee,” can also tell the student that the teacher is listening and particularly aware of the student’s feelings.
• Door openers. If the student seems willing, the teacher communicates the readiness to listen to the student’s problem. “Do you want to discuss it?”
and “Tell me more” are the types of statements that advise the student that when he is ready, right then or in the future, the teacher is available to listen.
• Active listening. The teacher reflects the message and feelings associated with it by paraphrasing what the student says. “What you are telling me is that you feel disappointed that you didn’t do as well as you expected on the test” is a reflective statement made by a teacher to a student’s frustrated statement such as, “I thought I should’ve gotten at least an 80 on that exam.”
Note how different critical listening, door openers, and active listening are from the previously mentioned “roadblocks” teachers tend to use.
If the teacher owns the problem, it is one that tangibly and concretely af- fects him or her.
Examples of Teacher Problem Ownership
A student constantly calls out, interrupting the teacher’s train of thought.
A student mixes up materials, making it difficult for the teacher to distrib- ute them in a timely way.
In both examples the student is essentially unaffected by the misbehavior.
When dealing with teacher-owned problems, Gordon recommends that the teacher send the misbehaving student an “I” message. You were already introduced to different types of “I” messages in chapter 3. As a reminder, Gordon’s “I” message has three component parts:
1. The student’s misbehavior
2. How the misbehavior concretely and tangibly affects the teacher 3. How the misbehavior makes the teacher feel
Examples
“When you constantly call out the answers (statement of the student’s misbehavior), it interrupts my train of thought (description of how the misbehavior concretely affects the teacher), and I feel frustrated” (de- scription of how the misbehavior makes the teacher feel.
Coaching Rubric for Teacher Effectiveness Training (T [time] depends on who owns the problem)
Criteria (Descriptors) Performance Indicators (Examples) The teacher . . .
determined who owned the problem—the teacher, the student, or both.
If the STUDENT owned the problem, the teacher encouraged (not forced) the student to put the problem in his or her own words
listened critically during the student’s verbalizing used door openers
listened actively.
If the TEACHER owned the problem, the teacher sent an “I” message that . . .
stated WHAT the student was doing or has done to affect the teacher
indicated HOW that student’s behavior tangibly affected the teacher
expressed how that behavior made the teacher FEEL.
If BOTH THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT owned the problem, the teacher . . . implemented the “no lose” method defined the problem
generated with student possible problem solutions
encouraged solutions from student without evaluating them at this point.
When enough solutions were generated, the teacher . . .
evaluated with student each solution individually
made a decision with student regarding which solution(s) to employ
implemented the solution(s)
evaluated the implemented solution(s).
If necessary, the teacher . . . repeated the “no lose” method.
“If you constantly mix up these materials (statement of the misbehavior), it makes it difficult for me to sort out what my students need (description of how the misbehavior concretely affects the teacher), and I feel angry (description of teacher’s feeling).
Gordon believes that teachers often hide their feelings, and that it is impor- tant to communicate with students on the feelings level. Students often are unaware how their behavior affects the teacher’s feelings, and once the stu- dents are alerted, they tend to act in a way that avoids upsetting the teacher.
Besides, as shared leaders in classroom management, it is legitimate for teach- ers as well as for students to also show their feelings.
When both the student and teacher own the problem, Gordon offers the
“no lose” method for problem resolution, where both the teacher and stu- dent win. An example of a problem owned by both student and teacher is the following: The student is constantly misplacing her pens and becomes frus- trated. When she needs a pen, she removes it from the teacher’s desk. When the teacher needs a pen, he is constantly fishing for one.
The “no lose” method, a variation of the scientific method, has six steps.
1. Problem definition. The teacher employs active listening and “I” mes- sages to focus on a problem for the purpose of communicating his needs and having the student communicate her needs.
2. Tentative solution generation. The teacher encourages the student to brainstorm in order to come up with as many possible solutions to re- solving the problem. The teacher should be careful not to evaluate any solutions offered at this point, just to record them.
3. Solution evaluation. The teacher and student evaluate which tentative solutions will meet both their needs.
4. Solution selection. Based on the solution evaluation, teacher and stu- dent arrive at a consensus regarding which solution has the best chance for success in meeting both their needs.
5. Solution implementation. Teacher and student decide how to put the solution into effect and when to begin.
6. Solution evaluation. Periodically, both parties meet to decide how well the solution is working; whether or not it needs modifications; and, if necessary, whether both should begin the entire process again to come up with a new solution.