Sometimes in life it is a combination of skill and luck that makes you successful. In the case of moving from a classroom of students from dissatisfaction to satisfaction while I was a substitute teacher, I must give credit to both. What had changed leading up to this point was my desire to increase class discipline and learning through more of the carrot and less of the stick. The other thing was continuing to use a logical tool that showed the students the purpose and method of school, so they could be more motivated and more successful.
If you were a student growing up, then you know how bad it sometimes went for substitutes as students tried to test their worth. When I was a student my classmates sometimes ate them for lunch. While I lived in California I needed some more income, so I added this to my mix for making more money whenever my other jobs were not producing adequately. I decided from the start, I was not going to be a sub who was eaten alive by the class.
I developed a great "stick" approach to class discipline. I was never really eaten alive, though it certainly was tough some times. I wasn't satisfied though it was a good starting point from which to begin. As time passed, I became more aware of a desire to "use the carrot more than the stick". Sometime in the early 2000s, I finally wanted to try something new. It likely was in 2004 and following. For some time I had been using a tool that showed students the logic behind school, both in terms of the how and the why. This clearly made things better, but I still wasn't fully satisfied.
So finally, when I was substituting in downtown St. Paul, MN, I put up on the board two diagrams. One had to do with the carrot or the stick. The carrot in this case was pleasure. The stick in this case was pain. Next to that, I placed a pie chart with 4 words for each slice of the logical pie and one name for the whole pie.
I also wrote my name on the board, since I knew knowing my name was significant in creating ease in the class. Then I would introduce myself as the teacher who wanted to keep things on the positive side of pleasure in education, but that they also had a responsibility to keep it from going to education becoming a pain. Next, I would ask them why they were in school and wrote down on the board their answers.
It was the same nearly everywhere I went. No one really knew the how and the why. I usually say 95% didn't know, but that is being very generous. Answers would range from because I have to and my mom made me come to having a better chance at a better paying job. These answers may not have been on the mark, but they were real reasons students were in class. Then I would ask them, if they could tell me from my chart, the core reason behind why they were in school and how the set up of school fostered that. On my multiple choice chart, they got even closer to the answer, but usually the one that was the main one was the last one they chose.
It was then that I would explain that the why of school was to teach us mainly about things and the words associated with them. If they would realize that the strength of school was there, but also that its strengths were not in the others, then they were better equipped to be successful in school. But if they asked school to be something it wasn't like focused on action, then they would likely find it hard to be successsful. The key was to learn its strengths and then supplement from other areas to build an overall strong person.
[School already does try to supplement itself in the other areas. It has physical education (PE) to go along side mental education (ME). It also offers extra-curricular options to supplement the student and classroom emphases. You have sports to strengthen the body alongside the mind. You have clubs to strengthen the soul alongside the mind. It is a time to strictly work on building relationships and friendships. There were leagues or bowl events for larger scale opportunities to build our heart for competition to be the best at something a person can be. These things I likely did not mention the day I was at the St. Paul high school. But I sure wish I had.]
The best part of this new approach was that the students became model students that day. It was the best classroom behavior I had ever experienced. But that was just the icing on the cake. It was not the writing on the cake. That came at the end of the school day. I was walking down the hall when a student from one of my classes that day said, "I wish I was you". At first, I was in a bit of shock. I just had a student say this to me "a substitute". But that student made my day. He put the writing on the cake.
All these years later I can now see how I addressed emotions in a very general way through the carrot of pleasure and the stick of pain. I also addressed their logic. They wanted to know "how" does this thing called school work and "why" am I here in school, when I could be home watching TV or playing video games. I let them see the whole picture and then picked out the part that school handles the best. There was no reason to be jealous of others, when for the first time you have the satisfaction of knowing why you are in school.
What I thought was the more important part then, addressing the IQ for who and whole (the whole picture and the part school filled in that picture), wasn't the main reason for this students' enthusiasm. It was firs, the EQ (Emotional Intelligence) for school and the sense of emulation over jealousy. Why be jealous of others when you feel satisfaction? Not so obviously that day produced emulation as a pleasure and diminished jealousy as a pain for those students.
I can't wait now to get back into a teaching role wherever it might be. Because now I can expand the picture to include not only the carrot over the stick, but the basic emotions that line up with each of the basic logics. The emotional center and the logical center will now be better able to talk to each other and to make the mind a better functioning tool for handling this thing called life. Ah, the sweet enjoyment of emulation of mind.
Sincerely,
Jon
Monday, July 28, 2014
Communication Basics: You Can Get Satisfaction
The basics for the mind and/or the organ of seeing is this set:
ready
willing
satisfying
able
seeing
The question remains of what makes us ready, wiling, satisfactory, able and seeing. I believe it consists of two lists that together not alone create a mind that is satisfied. The first list is our basic emotions. They are:
acceptance
joy
emulation (I want to be like you)
confidence
peace
The second list is basic logic thing categories. They are:
amounts
relationship
whole
action
thing
When these sets are preent the mind is satisfied. When they are not present the mind is not satisfied, but restless until they are found. That is the core of my approach to ,mental health.
There absence is what I believe produced mental illness. You must avoid these in terms of what should be the stronger in your life. Take care of your mental health and satisfaction.
Sincerely,
Jon
Communication Basics: Finding What Satisfies
It is not only important to want something. It is also important to get satisfaction for what you need or want.
Let me illustrate from a time-honored part of contract law. It was considered important in law to consider whether a person is ready, willing, and able to keep a contract. If it was discovered that they were not ready, not willing, and not able to keep a contract that could change a court's ruling.
Please note that the list of ready, willing, and able is not about what someone wants, but about their satisfying the criteria. The unready, etc. is about what is wanted or needed being not met as criteria. Wanting here means you don't have it.
Ready, willing, able, [and seeing] means satisfying a want. I might make a statement that I am satisfied that I am ready, willing, able, and seeing. But I don't think I would make a statement of satisfaction if I am not ready, not willing, not able, and/or not seeing. Then I can't get satisfaction.
So seek what satisfies when it comes to learning. Find something that can meet all the criteria that in the end adds up to satisfying. Take care.
Sincerely,
Jon
first noted 4/4/2014
Let me illustrate from a time-honored part of contract law. It was considered important in law to consider whether a person is ready, willing, and able to keep a contract. If it was discovered that they were not ready, not willing, and not able to keep a contract that could change a court's ruling.
Please note that the list of ready, willing, and able is not about what someone wants, but about their satisfying the criteria. The unready, etc. is about what is wanted or needed being not met as criteria. Wanting here means you don't have it.
Ready, willing, able, [and seeing] means satisfying a want. I might make a statement that I am satisfied that I am ready, willing, able, and seeing. But I don't think I would make a statement of satisfaction if I am not ready, not willing, not able, and/or not seeing. Then I can't get satisfaction.
So seek what satisfies when it comes to learning. Find something that can meet all the criteria that in the end adds up to satisfying. Take care.
Sincerely,
Jon
first noted 4/4/2014
Communication Basics: Starting rather than Waiting
Double-blind studies are great, but there are problems with them as well. First, they are in short supply compared to the wealth of all knowledge. Second, double-blind studies change their minds a lot. So while the goals are admirable: 1) we need to raise the quantity of things studied this way, and 2) we need to raise the quality of studies; we can't entrust all of knowledge to them. I say this tongue in cheek, but if we relied only on them for our physical health, we might starve while waiting.
I have people every day come into a nutritional store where I work and they are confused and befuddled by the latest double-blind or not so double-blind studies. Peer-reviewed is also an admirable goal, but still that leaves a lot that we know that is unstudied. So what should we do? Should we wait? Should we ignore their impact and race ahead? Should we through all the studies into the Boston Harbor since they can't agree?
Double-blind is good to eliminate the placebo-effect. But that doesn't mean that all previous results in tests were wrong due to a placebo effect. It means some of them were.
Likewise, peer-reviewed is an excellent quality, but peers can mess up. That is why we have jury trials. Because the peers of law professionals sometimes mess up. So what should a person do?
There is good evidence to show that a lot of knowledge has been tested and tested and tested over generations and is still holding up pretty well. For me, the past yields a lot tests as well. You just can't turn a blind eye to the failures along the way. You need to re-test those.
But also whey look for problems where there are none? Are we going to throw aside the insights of a successful coach like John Wooden, because he didn't double-blind study all his ideas and peer review after every game? Sports psychology is a great branch of further study, but it is in no place as a Johnny Come Lately to replace everything. It is though in a place to look at the cracks or fault lines with due humility.
When I first met John Wooden, he first gave me a copy of his success pyramid. He also gave me his personal phone number and said he would be swilling to talk with me as a younger coach.
He taught me two great things. Start at the beginning and don't run from the calling you have been given.
The lesson here for us is that even double-blind studies and peer-reviewed studies have a starting point. You have to begin from somewhere.at sometime. We don't have all day for all decisions. That is why we add clocks at sporting events and at work and at school. The thing to do during a time block is to determine what puts you at the best starting point of all your options. I would choose Wooden's base over sports psychology's base at the moment.
The point is to both start closer and to start faster. To have no starting point is to start further from the starting point. That is the danger of studies. It is that no one finds a closer place to begin. Remember, somewhere is always better than nowhere and now is always better than later, when it comes to starting. That same advice does not necessarily apply to finishing.
Sports psychology has already begun to study Wooden's insights. I just hope his being rated as the number one coach by ESPN and be other polls will still count for something. His teaching and his coaching were tested over and over many times. Let's remember that a double-blind study and a peer-review paper a full test does not make.every one a teacher or a coach.
What do think the sports psychology people could help with is studying his leadership idea "The Emotions Are Your Enemy". My SWOT analysis says that is a possible weakness in his approach alongside his strengths. But before that study is done, I think a person has to do their own trial and error in life to some degree and get started. To start with Wooden's base in his success pyramid seems to be a safe place to start. Take care.
Sincerely,
Jon
I have people every day come into a nutritional store where I work and they are confused and befuddled by the latest double-blind or not so double-blind studies. Peer-reviewed is also an admirable goal, but still that leaves a lot that we know that is unstudied. So what should we do? Should we wait? Should we ignore their impact and race ahead? Should we through all the studies into the Boston Harbor since they can't agree?
Double-blind is good to eliminate the placebo-effect. But that doesn't mean that all previous results in tests were wrong due to a placebo effect. It means some of them were.
Likewise, peer-reviewed is an excellent quality, but peers can mess up. That is why we have jury trials. Because the peers of law professionals sometimes mess up. So what should a person do?
There is good evidence to show that a lot of knowledge has been tested and tested and tested over generations and is still holding up pretty well. For me, the past yields a lot tests as well. You just can't turn a blind eye to the failures along the way. You need to re-test those.
But also whey look for problems where there are none? Are we going to throw aside the insights of a successful coach like John Wooden, because he didn't double-blind study all his ideas and peer review after every game? Sports psychology is a great branch of further study, but it is in no place as a Johnny Come Lately to replace everything. It is though in a place to look at the cracks or fault lines with due humility.
When I first met John Wooden, he first gave me a copy of his success pyramid. He also gave me his personal phone number and said he would be swilling to talk with me as a younger coach.
He taught me two great things. Start at the beginning and don't run from the calling you have been given.
The lesson here for us is that even double-blind studies and peer-reviewed studies have a starting point. You have to begin from somewhere.at sometime. We don't have all day for all decisions. That is why we add clocks at sporting events and at work and at school. The thing to do during a time block is to determine what puts you at the best starting point of all your options. I would choose Wooden's base over sports psychology's base at the moment.
The point is to both start closer and to start faster. To have no starting point is to start further from the starting point. That is the danger of studies. It is that no one finds a closer place to begin. Remember, somewhere is always better than nowhere and now is always better than later, when it comes to starting. That same advice does not necessarily apply to finishing.
Sports psychology has already begun to study Wooden's insights. I just hope his being rated as the number one coach by ESPN and be other polls will still count for something. His teaching and his coaching were tested over and over many times. Let's remember that a double-blind study and a peer-review paper a full test does not make.every one a teacher or a coach.
What do think the sports psychology people could help with is studying his leadership idea "The Emotions Are Your Enemy". My SWOT analysis says that is a possible weakness in his approach alongside his strengths. But before that study is done, I think a person has to do their own trial and error in life to some degree and get started. To start with Wooden's base in his success pyramid seems to be a safe place to start. Take care.
Sincerely,
Jon
Communication Basics:Doing Everything Through one Mind
Wouldn't it be cool to have one device that's common to all and through which everything can be done? The electronic's geeks are racing toward that one still. In many ways, the integrated circuit has already accomplished this goal. But what if you had a tool that helped your own brain function better?
What if you don't have to have a real estate device of a separate kind, you don't have to have an automotive device of a separate kind, you don't have have an exegetical device of a separate kind, and you don't have to have a [you put in your favorite] of a separate kind?
You don't have to have a linguistic device of a separate kind, you don't have to have contagious marketing of a separate kind, you don't have to have church planters devices of a separate kind, and you don't have to have purpose sketches of a separate kind? What if instead you have the greatest tool for your mind which brings both the common and the technical together, so that it becomes one as in an integrated device?
I think that should be popular. That is what I have designed for the mind. You can read about it more detail by scanning my other posts. Take care of your mind. It is a terrible thing to waste.
Sincerely,
Jon
first noted 4/5/2014
What if you don't have to have a real estate device of a separate kind, you don't have to have an automotive device of a separate kind, you don't have have an exegetical device of a separate kind, and you don't have to have a [you put in your favorite] of a separate kind?
You don't have to have a linguistic device of a separate kind, you don't have to have contagious marketing of a separate kind, you don't have to have church planters devices of a separate kind, and you don't have to have purpose sketches of a separate kind? What if instead you have the greatest tool for your mind which brings both the common and the technical together, so that it becomes one as in an integrated device?
I think that should be popular. That is what I have designed for the mind. You can read about it more detail by scanning my other posts. Take care of your mind. It is a terrible thing to waste.
Sincerely,
Jon
first noted 4/5/2014
Communication Basics: Use Your Voice
I have some really simply advice in the area of communication today. It is this: "Use your words, not your silence or your violence". There are a lot of people who can use that simple advice in communication.
There are many sounds in this world. Use the voice one. Here are some of them:
the sound of silence,
the sound of voice,
the sound of music, and
the sound of violence
Many people don't use their voice, because they are frustrated at their inability to use it. Then find a coach and learn to use it. Please take care to use your voice!
Sincerely,
Jon
first noted 4/15/2014
There are many sounds in this world. Use the voice one. Here are some of them:
the sound of silence,
the sound of voice,
the sound of music, and
the sound of violence
Many people don't use their voice, because they are frustrated at their inability to use it. Then find a coach and learn to use it. Please take care to use your voice!
Sincerely,
Jon
first noted 4/15/2014
Communication Basics: The Blind leading the Blind
The issues right now following my discussion with a fellow minister is that we've got the blind leading the blind. People are not seeing. People are associating emotions with relationships and not with all things and the nervous system as a whole.
They are also not seeing that what is foundational is only on a psychology 105 level and an eighth grader ought to be able to understand. That bottom level is what I am trying to provide and strengthen rather than trying to strengthen the top of the pyramid of learning.
The bottom line problem still remains a problem of seeing or rather a problem of not seeing. Good teachers help people see. Bad teachers conceal what should be visible. If you read my other posts you will see the basic 5 emotions, the basic 5 logics, and the 5 altogether combinations from the first two.
Keep searching and studying till you have those 15 down. When you do you will be smarter than a PhD. By the way, I still regard the goal of PhD education highly. They should have the opportunity to lead. But if they are blind about the basics, how can they lead?
My only criticism of the PhD level isthat many of them are not getting a foundationally strong first-rate basic education before they reach that level. Be smart and seeing and then you will take care.
Sincerely,
Jon
They are also not seeing that what is foundational is only on a psychology 105 level and an eighth grader ought to be able to understand. That bottom level is what I am trying to provide and strengthen rather than trying to strengthen the top of the pyramid of learning.
The bottom line problem still remains a problem of seeing or rather a problem of not seeing. Good teachers help people see. Bad teachers conceal what should be visible. If you read my other posts you will see the basic 5 emotions, the basic 5 logics, and the 5 altogether combinations from the first two.
Keep searching and studying till you have those 15 down. When you do you will be smarter than a PhD. By the way, I still regard the goal of PhD education highly. They should have the opportunity to lead. But if they are blind about the basics, how can they lead?
My only criticism of the PhD level isthat many of them are not getting a foundationally strong first-rate basic education before they reach that level. Be smart and seeing and then you will take care.
Sincerely,
Jon
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
