Plan A is where we usually go. It's the easiest one to turn to because most likely, it was how we were taught to solve problems. It's imposing our will on children and it challenges challenging behavior in challenging kids. We see this often in different behavioral and redirection methods--time out, loss of privilege, and even threats. Again, I believe this goes back to a power imbalance. I have done this by telling students (in a library setting) that should they continue a behavior, I will write a referral. There is no room for a student to come up with better solutions.
Jumping to Plan C, this is where we drop the expectation at least for now. It does not mean giving in; it's the mentality of knowing the skills the student is lacking and where the problem is too great, it's not viable to continue with it. Maybe we do this because the fighting is too great, or our energy has gone past its limits, or its just not worth the fight. With Plan C, nothing really gets done. The problem still exists and there's no room to know what is acceptable or not. This has been done in my classroom with turning a blind eye to behaviors I don't have the energy to address in the moment, hoping to return to it later.
Then there's the hot spot: Plan B which is collaborative problem solving: what is the behavior? What can we do to fix this? In what areas do we not meet the expectations and what do we need next time to ensure that we meet it next time? As Dr. Greene said, this isn't a technique, it's a way of operating. I feel this gets students into a spot of power and control. This has been done by giving students different choices: what do they think is a better way of handling a situation or even, how does their behaviors affect others.
Jumping to Plan C, this is where we drop the expectation at least for now. It does not mean giving in; it's the mentality of knowing the skills the student is lacking and where the problem is too great, it's not viable to continue with it. Maybe we do this because the fighting is too great, or our energy has gone past its limits, or its just not worth the fight. With Plan C, nothing really gets done. The problem still exists and there's no room to know what is acceptable or not. This has been done in my classroom with turning a blind eye to behaviors I don't have the energy to address in the moment, hoping to return to it later.
Then there's the hot spot: Plan B which is collaborative problem solving: what is the behavior? What can we do to fix this? In what areas do we not meet the expectations and what do we need next time to ensure that we meet it next time? As Dr. Greene said, this isn't a technique, it's a way of operating. I feel this gets students into a spot of power and control. This has been done by giving students different choices: what do they think is a better way of handling a situation or even, how does their behaviors affect others.