ECER 2006
Why Teachers Have to be Social Workers: Adlerian Individual Psychology and
Positive Approaches to Behaviour Management: A Lost Legacy in the UK
Mike Blamires, Canterbury Christ Church University College, England
Email M.Blamires@canterbury.ac.uk
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Geneva,
13-15 September 2006
Abstract: This paper considers the current guidance and discourse underpinning positive
approaches to behaviour management in England and compares this to the clinical and
conceptual framework articulated and developed by Adler(1930a, 1930b 1963,) and his
followers including Driekurs (1972,1998) and Dinkmeyer (2000). The paper will argue that
much of what is presented as the folk wisdom of classroom behaviour or as popular
catchphrases in TV behaviour management have their origins in the work of Adler and his
colleagues. Furthermore, the paper will outline what can be gained by a re-examination of
this work in the current climate to provide a conceptual framework and a consequent
research agenda.
Methodology: This takes the form of a qualitative analysis of current guidance, popular
publication on behaviour management and English Teachers' TV programmes. Concepts and
strategies are related to the conceptual framework advanced by Adler and his followers in
order to identify gaps, inconsistencies and the attribution or otherwise of key ideas. Material
includes best selling guidance on behaviour management and UK Government guidance
documents.
Conclusions: The study has found that much that is presented on behaviour management in
the UK owes an unacknowledged debt to Adler and his followers. Furthermore, the guidance
that is presented as good practice is an impoverished and technical rational model that lacks
many of the insights of Adler's conceptual framework which itself has much potential utility in
multi agency and parent involved work for children at risk.
Introduction: Should Teachers be social workers?
The English press has echoed concerns expresses by some teachers and teaching unions
about the demands placed upon teachers that go beyond the purely academic. For example
Frank Ferudi (2003), an academic dealing with social policy has articulated this argument by
stating that ‘teacher’s should not be social workers’. He asks why English education and social
policy appears to give parents the role of educators whilst teachers are encouraged to be
carers and that ‘professionalising the management of children's relationships, parenting and
community attitudes weakens the ability of people to conduct their own affairs.’
The English government’s two current initiatives in this area Every Child Matters (DfES, 2005)
which emphasises the centrality of schools in the delivery of services from health and social
agencies and ‘Extended Schools’ which extends the school day at the beginning and end by
providing child care activities and breakfast clubs could be seen as the only area of social
policy where nationalisation has been seen as a solution and we see an attempt at
nationalising parenthood.
This paper argues that issues of behaviour management in school, that are held to be central
to academic achievement, can only be addressed if the social dimension of education is
acknowledged. Teaching is not ‘Social Work’ which is a profession that has its own concerns
and ways of operating that may or may not impinge on education. Teachers, however, work
in the social domain due their interactions with parents, children and the community and, to
Page 1
ECER 2006
that extent, they can be seen as ‘social workers’ and should be equipped with understandings
that help them in this area.
I will further argue that the current catchphrases that underlie the guidance and suggested
strategies are partial applications of the work of Adler and followers that impoverish rather
than inform the understanding of behaviour development in schools.
Best Selling Guidance: The unacknowledged debt
A key influence on UK policy and practice in behaviour management has been Australian Bill
Rogers (e.g. 2000 a, 2000b, 2000c) who has published highly regarded books and videos on
his approaches to difficult behaviour. For many they provide a set of strategies and concepts
that aid them in dealing with difficult teaching settings.
Rogers has been influenced by Adler and his followers who, have worked in the United
States, so, it could be argued that these ideas have circumnavigated the globe during the last
century from Austria to the UK via the pacific. However some ideas of importance may have
been lost in transit.
Adlerian ideas harnessed by Rogers and then by the English Department of Education and
Skills include a critique of rewards, sanctions and the appropriate use of praise, natural and
logical consequences as applied to classroom rules, the use of Time Out from peers and a
democratic teaching style. These approaches have been then demonstrated and modelled in
government guidance and on English Teachers’ Television but they have lacked a conceptual
framework that can help in understanding why and how well behaviour is developed.
The Agenda of the Teaching Unions
Recent English media coverage aided by Teacher Unions’ press releases and surveys may
also have militated against the take up of Adlerian approaches because it has focused upon
authoritarian demands rather than the Adlerian concept of encouragement.
“The NUT is concerned that there exists in the minds of some pupils and parents a belief that
a teacher has little or no authority at present to discipline children. Some teachers too lack
confidence in imposing reasonable sanctions on children who breach what is considered
acceptable behaviour in schools. This contributes to the persistence of low level disruption
and sometimes defiance.”
National Union of Teachers, (September 2005)
Dreikurs (a key follower of Adler) describes the ‘Autocratic tradition’:
“”Our methods of dealing with children, as has been pointed out, are based on tradition. And
our tradition was autocratic. Every deficiency, every failure was traditionally considered a
violation of demands and obligations not to be tolerated by the authorities who established
them….
It is the autocratic tradition that prevents even the most liberal and democratic educator from
realising that reward and punishment are outdated, Herbert Spencer suggested a hundred
years ago and many have done since. Many still believe that we have to exert force to
influence children; when they misbehave. We have to ‘show’ them, ‘teach them a lesson’.
Repeatedly “explain and advise” but at any rate not “let them get by with it” without
punishment or retaliation. Many sincerely believe that these methods have educational value,
nay, are essential in bringing up children and teaching them”.
Dinkmeyer and Dreikurs (200)P 118
Page 2
ECER 2006
Just in case I am being biased in my quotations from English Teacher Unions, let us consider
what another English union the Association of Teachers and Lecturers have to say:
“…an NQT from a secondary school in West Sussex, said: ‘As a new teacher I was well aware
that students were going to test the boundaries with regards to behaviour, and they did!
They pushed me and on occasions, some of them still do. There are times when a student
will flair up – being told you’re a bad teacher (add appalling language and a very loud voice
to that image) on the first day of an Ofsted inspection is a recent incident that springs to
mind!’”
ATL Union report on behaviour 2006
Dinkemeyer and Dreikurs (1963) state that “traditional methods of influencing children come
from an autocratic past where reward and punishment were the effective means of
influencing and stimulating subordinates and promoting conformity to the demands of
authorities like parents and teachers” (p.2)
From discussions with ITE tutor colleagues, there is anecdotal evidence that some trainees do
see the issue of discipline in classrooms initially in traditional autocratic terms which they can
move on from if they are mentored and supported in developing appropriate longer term
strategies.
‘NQT (name removed), who teaches in a secondary school in London, said: “As an NQT I
found the most difficult thing was trying to take an authoritative approach while being female
and blond. I know it sounds weird, but when you’re tackling behaviour issues with 15-yearold-boys who are physically much bigger than you it can be very intimidating. Often you have
a male department head, and this doesn’t really help as you’re asking a man to help you
reinforce a discipline matter - making you look inferior again.”’
ATL report on behaviour 2006
Dinkemeyer and Dreikurs suggest a move from autocratic methods to democratic methods of
child guidance. Indeed the term ‘child guidance’ will ring bells with some readers in terms of
the child guidance centres of the past that were a development from Adler’s original work.
Democratic methods encourage choice and responsibility in order to foster democratic
relationships that are at the heart of effective behaviour training. This is, in turn, based on
encouragement, a respect for order through clear expectations, the experience of natural
consequences for misbehaviour, and the avoidance of conflict.
I am not denying the validity or importance of the concerns expressed by teachers who are
dealing with challenging teaching environments but suggest that they could be better served
by theory and understandings that can guide what they do.
The Views of Head Teachers
The recent Steer Report (2005) entitled ‘Learning Behaviour’ made a range of
recommendations mainly from the view point of the Head Teachers who made up the
committee. It recognised the importance of the interplay between behaviour and learning and
supported the various related English Government initiatives. One of the key
recommendations, however, had an authoritarian emphasis that largely ignores the
complexity of the debate as noted by Elton that has since grown to encompass fast food,
label consumerism, today’s technology and diminishing public space.
Recommendation 3.10.1: following consultation with the main professional associations,
as a matter of urgency, the Government should introduce a single, new piece of legislation to
make clear the overall right to discipline pupils. This should be framed in such a way as not to
diminish existing, wide legal rights; provide a clear read across to the duties and
Page 3
ECER 2006
responsibilities of parents and carers; and reaffirm teachers’ right to restrain pupils using
reasonable force.
Steer 2005
The recommendation is made despite the fact that Nerf (2005) has noted a number of gaps
in the research on student behaviour. These included the need for improved understanding of
home-school relationships in the promotion of good behaviour and the lack of the student
perspective on indiscipline and exclusion.
The Conceptual Framework of Adler And His Followers
Education practice might benefit from revisiting Adler’s theoretical standpoint as it could
provide a theoretical model to inform the emerging English agendas of extended schools,
every child matters and workforce remodelling where non qualified staff have a larger role in
classrooms. Furthermore, reconsidering Adler can also emphasise a positive long term view of
emotional and behavioural development that counters the short term authoritarianism of
current public debate.
To some, Adler might be dismissed as a revisionist of the Freud’s psychoanalysis whose main
contribution was to explain Hitler’s rise to power in terms of sibling rivalry and the ‘inferiority
complex’. This would, however, do him somewhat of a disservice as it ignores a successful
career of pioneering work on the education of children encountering difficulty. (Adler, 1930a,
1930b). Alfred Alder developed Individual Psychology and also later known as Adlerian
Psychology in 1911 after his split with Freud. Its tenets are optimistic in that people are
unique, social decision making beings whose thoughts and actions have purpose and goals.
Each person is part of a social setting with a capacity to decide and choose.
The term ‘Individual Psychology’ stems from Adler’s stress on the uniqueness of the individual
and his creation of his own ‘life style’ as opposed to Freud’s stress on general instincts or
drives common to all individuals and the applicability of general symbolisms. Adler
emphasised that his psychology was one of use and not possession, that is to say, it is more
important to understand what an individual makes of his abilities and potentialities, than what
abilities and potentialities he may possess.
Kurt Adler in the forward to Alfred Adler’s The Problem Child page iv
For Adler, the ‘life style’ determined how the child perceived the world and was pretty much
fixed by the age of four. This may chime with theories of critical periods but may stand at
odds with the current principles of life long education, in that, change can occur throughout
life. The validity of the concept of life style and its rigidity are open to question. In this
article, I am not arguing for a whole sale uncritical acceptance of Adler’s Individual
Psychology but that his ideas are worth re-examination and perhaps re-purposing in the
context of present day policy and practice.
On rewards
“Rewards usually are given by someone in a superior role to someone in an inferior position
which is not a mutually respectful stance. They are often used as bribes which in the end
teach that nothing worthwhile is given freely. Rewards given by parents often come back to
haunt them when children refuse to do anything unless they receive a tangible reward. The
focus is removed from internal controls to external one. (Dreikurs, 1971) cited in Chew P 53
This links to notions of intrinsic versus extrinsic rewards and the guidance and evidence from
the ERIC Digest (Kohn, 1994) on the use of rewards. Extrinsic rewards do appear to play an
important role in social organisations including schools where they reinforce whole school
policy on behaviour. Chew (1998) questions this process “if children are taught that every
Page 4
ECER 2006
thing worth doing must be compensated, when are they to learn and feel the value of giving
and helping?” (p 53)
On Punishment
The current guidance refers to sanctions rather than punishment although the need for
punishment has an enduring appeal in the media for pupils at risk of exclusion. E.g. Parsons
(2004) Chew states that “Venting anger and making children “pay” for their misbehaviour is
short sighted, selfish way to handle problem situations. When punished, children learn to go
underground with their behaviour, if not choosing to directly challenge the authority figure.” P
53
Building Responsibility
As alternative, followers of Adler suggest that good discipline “builds within the child the
courage to function effectively” (Dinkmeyer, 1965) using natural and logical consequences
which enable the child to see her responsibilities to her family and social group.
Encouragement and discouragement are key concepts for Adlerian Psychology as they have
an impact of the child’s courage to take responsibility for aspects of their life and this will be
discussed later in this paper.
He should learn to expect not only the advantages offered to him by civilisation, but also the
inconveniences, seeing them as some thing belonging to him and accepting them as such.
Kurt Adler in the forward to Alfred Adler’s The Problem Child page iv
Natural and Logical Consequences
Natural consequences represent reality for the child with no interference from adults. This
would include a child getting cold because they did not put on a coat when they went out to
play. Logical consequences are those that follow a violation of a social order or tacit rules for
co-operation within society. This could include the child forgetting to take lunch money or
losing a fellow pupil’s possession. Logical consequences are concerned with the child locating
the choices to be made instead of relying on adults around them to come up with the
solutions (Dinkemeyer, 1989). Adler suggests that, where adults dominate this issue
however, children rarely learn the power of their own choices. If the “logical” consequence is
contrived by the adult and not related to the misbehaviour, then the aims of the adult may
become suspect so that power and control are the issue rather than the correction of the
problem. This has echoes of solution base approaches currently favoured by the English
Behaviour and Attendance strands of the primary and secondary strategies.
Dreikurs (1972) states that a child must come to understand why he behaves as he does,
how this behaviour affects others, how it is “successful” behaviour from the child’s point of
view and how appropriate behaviour can gain him more acceptance.. The selection of
logical consequence also depends a great deal upon the goal of the child as well as his
method of obtaining it. Again Comic Strip Conversations and Social Stories, (Gray, 1994,
1999) are current approaches that address these issues.
In Discipline and Dignity (1988), Curwin and Mendler suggest that consequences work best in
the classroom when they are clear, specific and spelled out ahead of time because
predictability is important in helping students choose behaviour. Dinkmeyer’s (1987)
guidelines for the effective use of consequences will be familiar to readers of Bill Roger’s work





Identify the goal of the behaviour
Recognise who owns the problem
Give logical choices and follow through
Negotiate consequences if appropriate
Choose words carefully; be brief
Page 5
ECER 2006
 Avoid hidden motives
 Look for good behaviour to comment upon
 Follow through in the future
Chew suggests that having a range of alternative consequences gives the teacher discretion
in matching consequences to situations. This may lead to the accusation of being unfair in
applying different consequences for the same misbehaviour which Chew addresses with the
“Fair is not always equal” principle. He illustrates this using an example of the Doctor who
enters his waiting room and says, “ I’m going to dispense equal treatment today by giving all
of you an aspirin.” “We always treat children all the same” has been used as an apologetic
mantra in defence of inflexibility in response to inclusion and some trainees are very vexed by
notions of what is equitable practice in relation to classroom behaviour. This principle does
acknowledge that different people have different needs so that fair, not equal treatment can
be appropriate. This is an important issue for inclusion and diversity.
Encouragement versus Praise
This distinction is closely related to natural and logical consequences. Encouragement helps
to build the self confidence of the child so that he or she can handle difficulty. The aim is to
develop internal rather than external motivation by focussing on effort and improvement
towards a goal rather than the achievement of the goal per se. From an Adlerian perspective,
praise teaches a child to conform, to please others and to feel worthwhile only when moving
ahead of others.
The essential ingredients of courage according to Dinkmeyer and Dreikurs seem to be
confidence in oneself and one’s ability to cope either with the particular situation at hand or
more importantly with what ever situation may arise. This echoes O’Brien’s (1998) critique of
the unitary concept of self-esteem which he suggested was more likely to vary across
situations. It also has links to self efficacy which is in turn suggested to be a component of
recent models of resilience that have found utility in guiding interventions with looked after
children (Jeyarajah Dent & Cameron, 2003). Courage could also be seen as a vital factor in
dealing with change and challenge, key elements of education. Indeed, self efficacy has been
found to be a significant factor in the success of Newly Qualified Teachers (NQTs) in dealing
with behaviour (Giallo & Little, 2003). An often noted feature of autism is anxiety and a
dislike of change. It would be easy to place a value judgement on this behaviour as a lack of
courage but recent successful intervention with learners with autism have focused on the
development of social skills and understanding that encourage participation. E.g. Gray
(1999) and Mesibov and Howley (2003)
Social Interest
‘Social Interest’ is the expression of our capacity to give and take, one’s feeling of belonging
to others and one’s concern for the common welfare. This has clear links to emerging
citizenship agendas and also the constituents of Theory of Mind as suggested in the work of
Wellman (1992) and Wild Astington (1993) but it maybe manifests itself in the English DfES
Social Emotional Aspects of Learning and Social Emotional Behavioural Skills(SEBS) initiatives.
Some might also make links to emotional intelligence and emotional literacy. The DfES
strands of the strategies are, however, preferred to the latter fashionable terms as the former
do not suggest fixed or unitary entities or additional curriculum areas.
The Lifestyle and Biased Apperception
Driekurs states that the child is not the passive object of external influences. Close
observation enables one to see that what appears to be reaction is purposeful activity within
a life plan. These purposes may not be conscious and the child will not necessarily be aware
of them. People make their experiences, not only do they register what fits into their scheme,
but very frequently actually provoke the experiences they anticipate or desire.
Page 6
ECER 2006
This interpretation of the world is termed ‘biased apperception’ and resembles more recent
concepts of ‘cognitive style’, ‘learned helplessness’ and ‘attribution theory’. Interventions are
aimed at enabling alternative perceptions leading to a more socially adapted lifestyle. The life
style also links to the muddied waters of self esteem in that it involves self concept, ideal self,
environmental evaluation and ethical attitudes of right and wrong.
Biased apperception can lead to difficulties in dealing with the challenges of the world . Four
common mistaken goals are suggested for a child’s misbehaviour in an attempt to replace the
typical negative attributions used by teachers. Adler suggests that children are not born with
a conscience or good manners so that learning what society and teachers expect is not easy
for all children. Dreikurs suggests that misbehaviour is the erroneous belief of a child that he
can gain acceptance through provocative behaviour by pursuing the mistaken goals of
behaviour. These may change and the child is not aware of them as they are part of his way
of interacting with the world. In adolescence these goals are directed towards peer group
acceptance.
The four mistaken goals are
1.
2.
3.
4.
to
to
to
to
gain undue attention
seek power
seek revenge or get even
display inadequacy (real or assumed)
Dreikurs suggests that these goals can be interpreted from our ‘gut reaction’ to behaviour
and the way that the child responds to an adult intervention. An investigation of the child’s
behaviour using this framework has been shown to provide many positive long term benefits
and perhaps deserves a refreshed application within the context of new educational practices
and partnerships. Such an endeavour is beyond the scope of this paper but it may be a useful
future challenge to further explore the social dimensions of education.
Conclusions:
As teachers have to operate in the social domain, they must be social workers. To ignore or
downplay this aspect of the teacher role may seriously hinder the professional efficacy of
teachers.
The study has found that much that is presented on behaviour management in the UK owes
an unacknowledged debt to Adler and his followers. Furthermore, the guidance that is
presented as good practice is an impoverished and technical rational model that lacks many
of the insights of Adler's conceptual framework which itself has much potential utility in multi
agency and parent involved work for children at risk.
References:
Adler, A. (1930) The Education of the Child
New York Greenburg Publisher Inc
Adler, A. Ed (1930) Guiding the Child: On the Principles of Individual Psychology
New York Greenburg Publisher Inc
Adler, A. (1963) The Problem Child
New York: Capricorn Books
Association of Teachers and Lecturers (2006) Pupil discipline is key issue for students and
NQTs – ATL survey 10th April
ATL London
www.askatl.org.uk/atl_en/media/releases/Discipline.asp
Page 7
ECER 2006
Chew, A.L. (1998) A Primer on Adlerian Psychology: Behaviour Management Techniques for
young children
Atlanta Humanics Trade USA
Curwin, R. and Mendler A. (1988) Discipline with Dignity
Alexandria VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Dinkmeyer, D (1987) Teaching Responsibility in Shiff. (Ed) Experts Advise Parents
New York Delacorte Press
Dinkmeyer, D. & Dreikurs, R. (2000) Encouraging Children to Learn
New York: Brunner Routledge
Driekurs, R. (1972) Coping with Children’s Misbehaviour
New York Hawthorne
Dreikurs, R., Casell, P. & Dreikurs-Ferguson, E. (2004) Discipline Without Tears : How To
Reduce Conflict And Establish Co-Operation In The Classroom
New York: Wiley
Dreikurs, R., Grunwald, B.B., & Pepper, F.C. (1998) Maintaining Sanity in the Classroom:
Classroom Management Techniques 2nd Edition
Florence KY: Accelerated Development: London Taylor and Francis
Elton Report (1989) Discipline in Schools: report of the Committee of Enquiry chaired by Lord
Elton
London HMSO
Ferudi, F, (2003) Teachers are not social workers
The Daily Telegraph 08/11/2003
Giallo, R & Little, E. (2003) Classroom Behaviour Problems : The Relationship Between
Preparedness, Classroom Experiences, and Self-efficacy in Graduate and Student Teachers
Australian Journal of Educational & Developmental Psychology Vol. 3 pp 21-34
Newcastle Aus.
Gray, C, (1994). Comic Strip Conversations Arlington, TX: Future Horizons USA
Gray, C, (1999). The new social story book. Arlington, TX: Future Horizons USA
Kohn, A (1994)The Risk of Rewards
ERIC USA
ERIC Digests http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/pdf/The%20Risks%20of%20Rewards.pdf
Logan. P. & Richardson,(2006) Report of the Working Group on Student Behaviour
London National Education Research Forum (NERF)
Mesibov, G, Howley, M (2003). Accessing the Curriculum for Pupils with Autistic
Spectrum Disorders. London: David Fulton Publishers
National Union of Teachers (2005) Learning to Behave: A charter for Schools
London NUT
O’Brien, T. (1998) Promoting Positive Behaviour
Page 8
ECER 2006
London David Fulton
Rogers. B. (2000a) Cracking The Hard Class: Strategies for Managing the Harder than
Average Class
London Paul Chapman Publishing: Sage
Rogers. B. (2000b) Cracking The Hard Class: Strategies for Managing the Harder than
Average Class
London Paul Chapman Publishing: Sage
Rogers. B. (2000c) Classroom Behaviour
London Paul Chapman Publishing: Sage
Spencer. H (1861) Education :Intellectual, Moral and Physical
London, Williams & Norgate
Steer. A (2005) Learning Behaviour: The Steer Report of the Practitioners Group on School
Behaviour and Discipline
London DfES
www.dfes.gov.uk/behaviourandattendance/uploads/learning%20Behaviour.pdf
Wellman, H.J. (1992) The Child's Theory of Mind
Mass. USA MIT Press
Wild Astingon, J. (1993) The Child’s Discovery of Mind
Harvard USA Harvard University Press
Page 9