Behaviour Management Programs are Out-Dated and Ableist
Reward charts, point systems, and other behaviour management programs touted as “positive” are actually out-dated, harmful, and ableist AF.
I Am Grateful for Teachers and School Staff
First off, I want to express my gratitude to all teachers and school staff everywhere. You have supported our children and students through some very challenging times, and have rarely, if ever, been given due respect for your work.
Teachers are under-appreciated, underpaid, and under-resourced. I have worked in schools in various roles, and I have met some amazing teachers and school staff. There are many who go way above and beyond to provide the best possible education and support to their students.
My criticisms here are not of teachers themselves, but of some classroom management strategies teachers are taught. Our knowledge about children’s cognitive, social, and emotional development has grown exponentially over the past 10–15 years, yet our education system lags well behind.
While some school divisions have made efforts to catch up to what current research clearly outlines as best practices, and offer their staff professional development in line with this framework, many schools continue to operate in the dark ages.
Even when particular teachers or school staff are seeking to evaluate and improve their pedagogy, some administrators are not very supportive, and professional development opportunities — or funding — may be scarce.
With that said, I am going to spout off about something that has been very clearly established to do more harm than good, yet continues to be present in almost every elementary classroom in North America and beyond.
Those bloody behaviour charts.
Teachers: I appreciate and respect you, but if you have a “behaviour” chart or any kind of reward system in your classroom, please get rid of it now. I’ll explain why.
Behaviour Management Charts are Ableist
“Traditional discipline works best with the children who need it the least, and works least with the children who need it the most.”— Dr. Lori Desautels
Behaviour charts are often touted as positive behavioural intervention, because they are said to encourage children to make “good” choices, and then be rewarded for desired behaviour. Some even consider them necessary to manage and to “incentivize appropriate classroom behaviour”.
In order for that to work, the child needs to be thinking about the potential outcome of their behaviour prior to, or at the moment of, performing an action. Depending on the child’s age, they may not even be developmentally capable of doing so in all contexts.
Even if most children of that age group are, or may be, capable of such forethought, there are many children who lag behind in certain areas of their neurological development.
For example, children with ADHD are said to be approximately 30% behind their neurotypical peers in terms of their Prefrontal Cortex (PFC) development.
“Kids with ADHD have immature impulse control and frequently act in ways they regret and, as a result, lack confidence that they’ll handle things well. Things get worse if they’re corrected or told to stop repeatedly, as if they could simply behave through their own willpower.” — Stixrud & Johnson
Children with ADHD aren’t the only ones who may experience this delay, however. Children with frontal lobe seizures, acquired brain injury, trauma or adverse childhood experiences (ACEs), PTSD, sleep disorders, among others may also experience similar executive functioning challenges.
The PFC is largely responsible for impulse control, forethought, motivation, judgement, decision-making, planning, and the ability to delay gratification.
Well, that list covers just about anything that would be listed on a behaviour chart: raising your hand before speaking, sitting still, waiting in line, sharing, using an inside voice, and many more.
A great many neurological differences can change how children perceive, process, behave, learn, and develop. Some others include learning disabilities, depression, anxiety, and Autism.
So the children who already have the ability to follow the classroom rules the majority of the time continue to be rewarded for doing something they already know how to do.
Meanwhile, children who lack the neurological maturity, or for other reasons beyond their control are not always able to follow the classroom rules, are then punished for their inability to do so.
“But we’re not issuing punishments, this is a positive behaviour plan,” you say? I know you believe that, but I’ll explain why that position is misguided.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Neurodiversity MB to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.