The main focus for intervention in this thesis is school related intervention. The program, whilst being off-site from the students’ home schools, is still within a school environment and staffed by teachers who are supported by weekly consultation with a psychologist. The setting and the professional training of the staff dictate the range of methods and interventions which are available. This means that clinical counselling and chemical intervention (unless the student is independently under the care of a psychologist, paediatrician or psychiatrist) are not part of the repertoire.
As UNESCO (2000b) states “teachers obviously play a key role in the delivery of education, and the quality of instruction is to a large extent a function of whether classrooms are staffed with competent, well-trained teachers” (p. 20). This statement is a reasonable starting point, however the role of teachers today goes beyond an instructional role - competence and training alone are insufficient. In discussion about proactive learning environments in the previous chapter teachers and their skills were identified as having a key role in success for students. In this
discussion about intervention, the influence of teachers beyond the instructional tasks and how they affect students’ learning is examined further.
Knowledge is not a static body of work. Students cannot be taught more aspects about what there is to know as new knowledge is being discovered daily. Access to knowledge via electronic sources expands the capacity to be informed in wider fields than can be taught in schools. Carl Rogers (1983) advocated for teachers to be “facilitators of learning”. This concept exceeds a purely instructional model of teaching. Teachers as facilitators of learning ensure that students develop the tools which enable them to live effectively in their world and continually develop their capacity for lifelong learning.
Gaining knowledge alone does not allow participation in the world. All students need to develop social competencies and an understanding of social mores so they can successfully live in their communities. The new Victorian Essential Learning Standards (VELS) (Victorian Curriculum and Assessment Authority, 2004) rearranged the focus of Victorian Education Curriculum from a discipline based curriculum to broader domains of physical, personal and social learning; discipline based learning; and interdisciplinary learning. This acknowledges the value of, and need for, broader skills especially in interpersonal development and participation as a citizen of a democracy.
In teaching, engaging the students is the first task, which is closely followed by maintaining their interest. In addition to engaging the students with interesting subject matter and presentations students’ relationships with teachers assist them
to learn and achieve the best outcomes they can. Inter-personal relationships between teachers and students have significant effects on the school engagement and learning outcomes in classrooms (Taylor & Nelms, 2006). Decker, Dona and Christenson (2007) reported on a study of African American students in the USA where students were as risk of being referred elsewhere because of their behaviour. They determined that as the “student –teacher relationship quality increased, there were also increases in positive social, behavioral, and engagement outcomes for students” (Decker, et al., 2007, p. 1)
The foregoing paragraph illustrated positive gains from improved student-teacher relationships. Davis and Dupper (2004) take a more critical perspective when they suggest that school factors such as zero tolerance discipline policies and teachers’ low expectations of students are strong contributors to students being pushed out of school rather than simply dropping out. Stereotypical attitudes that socially disadvantage minority culture students cannot succeed, leading to self-fulfilling outcomes. Rubie-Davies, Hattie & Hamilton (2006) discuss teacher expectations having both positive and negative effects on student performance. They use the term “sustaining expectation effects” as an alternative to self-fulfilling prophecies. In this case, teachers do not respond to the evidence of change within a student and continue to perceive the student as exhibiting the same level of performance whether it is true or not. Negative teacher expectations are a major hurdle for students who could have a positive and changing experience in an intervention program.
Students often have to deal with the prejudice of “he hasn’t changed” when returning to their mainstream school or classes after a withdrawal period and need the support of intervention teachers to assist in illustrating the positive changes made. This lack of recognition of change does not assist in the development of positive relationships between students and teachers. Dupper and Davis (2004) consider that trust relationships between teachers and students are necessary for positive student learning. They consider “teachers who express confidence in their students …set the foundation for building positive relationships and learning experiences” (p. 183).
One of the underlying principles of behavioural change is that in order to change the behaviour of another person, the teacher needs to change their own behaviour (Molnar & Lindquist, 1989). For example, a teacher who chooses to praise or reward a specific behaviour such as a student putting up his hand to gain attention, maybe a change for them. However, such an action is likely to elicit positive responses from other students who are not using the behaviour (Reinke, Lewis- Palmer, & Merrell, 2008). Teachers need to recognise their role in developing positive relationships and modeling appropriate behaviours.
In a school setting, teachers are intervening to change currently observed inappropriate and unacceptable behaviour to behaviour that is socially acceptable, generalising this to other contexts in a sustained way. To do this the students need to develop a new repertoire of responses that will achieve the desired outcomes without impinging on the rights of others or embarrassing themselves and their self-esteem. Cohen et al. (2005) suggest that “in order for behavioural change to
occur … the client needs to demonstrate some level of readiness for change” (p. 45). The task of the intervention teacher/s is to assist the student in developing readiness for change through finding a reason to change.
Cohen et al. (2005) discuss five stages of change – pre-contemplation, contemplation, preparation, action and maintenance of change which are mainly used for deliberate behavioural change such as adults choosing to stop smoking. This provides a template for understanding change in students and reinforcing the post change stage of maintenance to support continuation of the improved behaviours. Support for students to maintaining changes made is vital for the student.
Marlowe and Disney (2006) discussed Fritz Redl’s five strategies for teachers to handle behaviour problems namely (a) changing the students’ values, beliefs, and expectations; (b) managing the situation to minimise the likelihood of a student producing difficult behaviour; (c) tolerating some level of behaviours that are uncontrollable by the student; (d) preventing students from harming themselves of others; and (e) accommodating the unchangeable aspects of a student’s behaviour by providing appropriate routines, and expectations to support them. These strategies add to the strategies of structure, tolerance and minimisation of opportunities for aberrant behaviours.
Behavioural learning theories “focus on the ways pleasurable or painful consequences of behaviour change individuals’ behaviour over time and ways in which individuals model their behaviour on that of others” (Slavin, 1997, p. 150).
Some behavioural programs have more benefits than others depending on the principles under which they are established. An example of behavioural programs is the development of “Boot Camps” mainly used to reduce recidivism for young offenders but later extended to a broader population with social and behavioural difficulties. Boot camps, which were introduced around 1983, “imitate the structure and military-style discipline of basic training. They emphasize vigorous physical activity, drill exercises and ceremony, manual labor – and other activities that drastically reduce a participant’s free time” (Wells, 2003, p. 142). However, these programs have had limited success in reducing recidivism for a range of reasons some of which include: short term nature of the intervention; limited targeted intervention for specific individuals; limited goals for re-integration into the community; and lack of follow-up re-enforcement of skills (Bottcher & Ezell, 2005; Parent, 2003; Peterson, 1996). Some of these programs were considered to do more harm than good (Associated Press 1998).
Cognitive behaviour modification is the “incorporation of various cognitive processes (i.e. thoughts, perceptions, expectancies, self-statements) within the behavioral framework. The theory is … that children … have deficient cognitive processes that guide or control their behavior. If the cognitions that direct or control behavior can be altered, behavioral change will follow” (Dembo, 1994, p. 62).
Carl Rogers (1983) described teachers as facilitators of learning. He believes that when “a teacher is real, understanding, and caring, students learn more of the “basics” and in addition exhibit more creativity and problem-solving qualities” (p.
3). Humanists consider that “(1) the behaviour of individuals is primarily determined by how they perceive themselves and the world around them; and (2) individuals are not solely the products of their environment, … but are internally directed, having free choice, motivated by the desire to “self-actualise” or fulfil their unique potential as human beings” (Dembo, 1994, p. 200). Teachers who are consciously aware of the various theories may choose what they consider to be their most appropriate response style, depending on the circumstances.