Assertive Discipline: More than Names on the Board and Marbles in a Jar
Author(s): Lee Canter
Reviewed work(s):
Source: The Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 71, No. 1 (Sep., 1989), pp. 57-61
Published by: Phi Delta Kappa International
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20404058 .
Accessed: 02/01/2012 13:10
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Phi Delta Kappa International is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Phi
Delta Kappan.
http://www.jstor.org
Assertive
More
Board
Discipline
Than
and
Names
on
Marbles
in
the
a
Jar
Mr. Canter explains the
background of theprogram
and addresses some of the
issues that are frequently
raised about Assertive
Discipline.
F
.~~~~~~~~
. . . . . . . .
BY LEE CANTER
A
BOUT A YEAR ago Iwas
on an airline flight, seated
next to a university profes
sor. When
he found out
that I had developed
the
Assertive Discipline
program, he said,
"Oh, that's where all you do is write the
kids' names on the board when they're
bad and drop marbles
in the jar when
they'regood."
The university professor's
response
disturbed me. For some time rye been
concerned about a small percentage of
educators - this professor apparently
among them - who have interpreted my
program in a way that makes behavior
sound simplistic. More im
management
portant, rm concernedwith theirmisguidedemphasison providingonly negative consequenceswhen studentsmisbe-
:
;:.
;-X
;
S
0
:
;
;
!t,.
LEE CANTER is president of Lee Canter .,-::
& Associates, Santa Monica, Calif He is the ei
e..
author of many books on behavior management and is the developer of theAssertive Dis-t.,.".
cipline program.
Illustrationby RobColvvnn
.
,i0.
~
E
P
T
E
M
BE
R
1989
57
The
key
to
Assertive Discipline
is catching
students being
good -
and
letting
them know that
you like it.
have. The key to dealing effectively with
student behavior is not negative - but
positive - consequences. To clarify my
views for Kappan readers, I would like
to explain the background of the program
and address some of the issues that are
often raisedaboutAssertive Discipline.
I developed the program about 14 years
I first became aware that
ago, when
teachers were not trained to deal with stu
dent behavior. Teachers were taught such
concepts as "Don't smile until Christmas"
or "If your curriculum is good enough,
you will have no behavior problems."
Those concepts were out of step with the
reality of student behavior in the 1970s.
When I discovered
this lack of train
ing, I began to study how effective teach
ers dealt with student behavior. I found
that, above all, the master teachers were
assertive; that is, they taught students
how to behave. They established clear
rules for the classroom,
they commu
nicated those rules to the students, and
they taught the students how to follow
them. These effective teachers had also
mastered skills inpositive reinforcement,
and they praised every student at least
once a day. Finally, when students chose
to break the rules, these teachers used
firmandconsistentnegativeconsequences
-
but only as a last resort.
It troubles me to find my work inter
preted as suggesting that teachers need
only provide negative consequences
check marks or demerits - when stu
dents misbehave.
That interpretation is
wrong. The key to Assertive Discipline
is catching students being good: recog
nizing and supporting them when they
behave appropriately and letting them
know you like it, day in and day out.
THE DISCIPLINE PLAN
It is vital for classroom teachers to have
a systematic discipline plan that explains
exactly what will happen when students
choose to misbehave. By telling the stu
dents at the beginning of the school year
what the consequences will be, teachers
insure that all students know what to ex
pect in the classroom. Without a plan,
teachers must choose an appropriate con
sequence at the moment when a student
misbehaves.
They must stop the lesson,
talk to the misbehaving
student, and
do whatever else the situation requires,
while 25 to 30 students look on. That is
not an effective way to teach - or to deal
with misbehavior.
"You're here to teach, Mr. Gooch. You must stop telling your students,
'That's for me to know and for you to find out.'"
58
PHI DELTA KAPPAN
Most important, without a plan teach
ers tend to be inconsistent. One day they
may ignore students who are talking,
yelling, or disrupting the class. The next
day they may severely discipline students
In addition,
for the same behaviors.
teachers may respond differently to stu
eth
dents from different socioeconomic,
nic, or racial backgrounds.
An effective discipline plan is applied
fairly to all students. Every student who
willfully disrupts the classroom and stops
the teacher from teaching suffers the
same consequence. And a written plan
can be sent home to parents, who then
know beforehand what the teacher's stan
dards are and what will be done when
students choose to misbehave. When a
teacher calls a parent, there should be no
surprises.
MISBEHAVIOR AND CONSEQUENCES
I suggest that a discipline plan include
amaximum of five consequences for mis
behavior, but teachers must choose con
sequences with which they are comfort
able. For example, the first time a stu
dent breaks a rule, the student iswarned.
The second infraction brings a 10-minute
timeout; the third infraction, a 15-minute
timeout. The fourth time a student breaks
a rule, the teacher calls the parents; the
fifth time, the student goes to the prin
cipal.
No teacher should have a plan that is
not appropriate for his or her needs and
that is not in the best interests of the stu
dents. Most important, the consequences
or phys
should never be psychologically
ically harmful to the students. Students
should never be made to stand in front
of the class as objects of ridicule or be
degraded in any other way. Nor should
that are in
they be given consequences
appropriate for their grade levels. I also
feel strongly that corporal punishment
should never be administered. There are
more effective ways of dealing with stu
dents than hitting them.
Names and checks on the board are
sometimes said to be essential to an As
sertive Discipline program, but they are
not. I originally suggested this particu
lar practice because I had seen teachers
interrupt their lessons tomake such nega
students
tive comments to misbehaving
as, "You talked out again. I've had it.
You're impossible. That's 20 minutes af
ter school." Iwanted to eliminate the need
to stop the lesson and issue reprimands.
Writing
a student's name on the board
would warn
the student in a calm, non
degradingmanner. Itwould also provide
a record-keepingsystem for the teacher.
Unfortunately,someparentshavemis
interpretedtheuse of names and checks
on the board as a way of humiliating
stu
dents. I now suggest thatteachersinstead
write an offending student'sname on a
clipboard or in the roll book and say to
the student,'You talkedout, you disrupt
ed the class, you broke a rule. That's a
warning. That's a check."
In addition to parents, some teachers
havemisinterpreted elements of theAs
sertiveDiscipline program.The vastma
jority of teachers - my staff and I have
probably trainedclose to750,000 teach
ers -
have used the program
Xhenever
teachers want
students to
follow certain
directions, they
must teach the
specific
behaviors.
to dramat
ically increase their relianceon positive
reinforcementand verbal praise. But a
small percentageof teachershave inter
First,whenever teacherswant students
preted theprogramina negativemanner.
There are several reasons for this. to follow certain directions, theymust
First, Assertive Discipline has become a teachthe specificbehaviors.Teachers too
generic term, likeXerox or Kleenex. A often assume that students know how
numberof educatorsare now conducting they are expected to behave. Teachers
firstneed to establish specific directions
training in what they call Assertive Dis
ciplinewithout teachingall thecompeten for each activity during the day - lec
cies essential tomy program. For exam
tures, small-groupwork, transitionsbe
ple, I have heard reportsof teacherswho
tween activities, and so forth. For each
were taught that they had only to stand
situation,teachersmust determinethe ex
act behaviors they expect from the stu
in front of their students, tell them that
therewere rules and consequences, dis
dents.
For example, teachersmay want stu
play a chart listing those rules and con
sequences,
and write
the names of mis
behaving studentson theboard.Thatwas
it.Those teacherswere never introduced
to theconcept thatpositive reinforcement
is thekey to dealingwith students.Such
programsare not in thebest interestsof
students.
Negative interpretations
have also come
fromburned-out,overwhelmed teachers
who feel they do not get the support
that they need from parents or adminis
trators and who take out their frustrations
on students.Assertive Discipline is not
a negative program, but it can be misused
by negative teachers. The answer is not
to change the program, but to change the
teachers. We need to train administra
tors,mentor teachers, and staff devel
opers to coach negative teachers in the
use of positive reinforcement. If these
teacherscannot become more positive,
they should not be teaching.
POSITIVE DISCIPLINE
I recommend
a three-step cycle of be
haviormanagement to establish a posi
tive discipline system.
wrong with you?Get back towork.") In
stead, teachersshould focuson those stu
dentswho do follow the directions, re
phrasing theoriginaldirectionsas a posi
tive comment.For example, "Jasonwent
back to his seat and got right to work."
Third, if a studentis stillmisbehaving
after a teacherhas taughtspecific direc
tions and has used positive repetition,
only thenshouldthe teacheruse thenega
tive consequencesoutlined in his or her
Assertive Discipline plan. As a general
rule, a teachershouldn'tadministera dis
ciplinary consequence to a studentuntil
the teacher has reinforced at least two stu
dents for the appropriatebehavior. Ef
fective teachersare alwayspositive first.
Focusing on negative behavior teaches
students thatnegative behavior gets at
tention, that the teacher is a negative per
son, and that the classroom is a negative
place.
An effectivebehaviormanagementpro
grammust be built on choice. Students
must know beforehandwhat is expected
of them in the classroom, what will hap
pen if they choose to behave, and what
will happen if they choose not to be
have. Students learn self-discipline and
responsiblebehaviorby beinggiven clear,
consistent choices. They learn that their
actions
have
an impact and that they
themselves control the consequences.
I wish
teachers did not need
to use
negative consequences at all. I wish all
ture, focusing theireyes on the lecturer, students came to school motivated to
learn. Iwish all parents supportedteach
clearing theirdesks of all materials ex
ceptpaperandpencil, raisingtheirhands ers and administrators. But that's not the
when theyhave questions or comments, realitytoday.Many childrendo not come
and waiting to be called on before speak
to school intrinsicallymotivated to be
ing.Once teachershave determined the have. Their parentshave never takenthe
specificbehaviorsfor each situation,they timeor don'thave theknowledgeor sklfls
must teach the studentshow to follow the to teachthemhow tobehave.Given these
directions.Theymust firststatethedirec circumstances, teachersneed to set firm
tions and, with younger students,write and consistent limits in theirclassrooms.
the behaviors on the board or on a flip
However, those limitsmust be fair, and
chart. Then theymust model the be
the consequences must be seen as out
haviors, ask the students to restate the comes of behaviors that students have
directions, question the studentstomake chosen.
sure theyunderstandthedirections, and
Studentsneed teacherswho can create
immediatelyengage the students in the classroom environmentsinwhich teach
dents to stay in their seats during a lec
activity tomake sure that they understand
the directions.
Second, after teaching the specific
directions, teachers- especially at the
elementary level - must use positive
repetitionto reinforce the studentswhen
they follow the directions. Typically,
teachersgive directions to the students
and thenfocusattentiononly on those stu
dents who do not obey. ("Bobby,you
didn'tgo back toyour seat.Teddy,what's
ing and learning can take place. Every
student has the right to a learning en
vironment that is free from disruption.
Students also need teacherswho help
them learnhow to behave appropriately
in school.Many studentswho are catego
rized as behaviorproblemswould not be
so labeled if their teachershad taught
themhow tobehave appropriatelyin the
classroom and had raised their self
esteem.
SEPTEMBER
1989
59
WHY ASSERTIVE DISCIPLINE?
The average teacher never receives
in-depth, competency-based training in
managing thebehaviorof 30 students.No
one teachesteachershow tokeep students
in their seats longenough for teachers to
make good use of the skills they learned
in their education classes. Inmost in
stances, behaviormanagement is taught
througha smorgasbordapproach- a lit
tle bit ofWilliam Glasser, a littlebit of
Thomas Gordon, a little bit of Rudolf
Dreikurs, a littlebit of Lee Canter. The
A
smorgasbord
approach to class
room management
forces teachers
to sink or swim.
Too many sink.
teachers are told to find an approach that
works for them.
Such an approach to trainingteachers
inbehaviormanagement is analogous to
a swimmingclass inwhich nonswimmers
arebriefly introduced- without practice
- to the crawl stroke, thebreast stroke,
theback stroke,and the side stroke; then
they are rowed to the middle
of a lake,
tossed overboard, and told to swim to
shore, using whatever strokeworks for
them. In effect, we're telling teachers to
sink or swim, and too many
teachers are
sinking.
The lack of ability tomanage student
behavior is one of the key reasonswhy
beginning teachersdrop out of teaching.
Teachersmust be trained thoroughly in
classroommanagement skills. It is not
for them to know how to teach
sufficient
content. They will never get to the con
tent unless
they know how
to create
a
positive environment inwhich students
know how
to behave.
Assertive Discipline is not a cure-all.
It is a startingpoint.Every teachershould
also know how to use counseling skills,
how to use group process
skills, and how
to help studentswith behavioraldeficits
learn appropriateclassroom behaviors.
Inaddition,classroommanagementmust
be part of an educator'scontinuingpro
fessionaldevelopment.Teachers routine
ly attendworkshops, enroll in college
courses, receive feedbackfrom adminis
classroommanagement.2Research con
ducted in school districts inCalifornia,
Oregon, Ohio, andArizona has shown
thatan overwhelmingmajority of teach
ers believe thatAssertiveDiscipline helps
to improve theclimate in the schools and
the behavior of students.3
No one should be surprised that re
search has verified the success of the
program when teachers use the skills
properly. Numerous research studies
have shown that teachersneed to teach
students the specific behaviors that they
expect from them.Research also shows
that student behavior improves when
teachersuse positive reinforcementeffec
tively and that thepairing of positive re
inforcementwith consistentdisciplinary
consequences effectively motivates stu
dents to behave appropriately.4
Any behavior management program
thatis taughtto teacherstodaymust have
a solid foundationin research.Many so
called "experts"advocate programs that
are based solely on their own opinions
regardingwhat constitutesa properclass
roomenvironment.
When pressed,many
of theseexpertshave no researchvalidat
ing their opinions or perceptions, and
many of theirprogramshave never been
validatedforeffectiveness inclassrooms.
supportfrom thebuilding administrator.
backinga teach
Without an administrator
er's efforts to improvebehaviormanage
ment, without an administratorto coach
and clinically supervise a teacher'sbe
haviormanagement skills, that teacher
is not going to receive the necessary
feedbackand assistance tomaster those
skills.
Parental supportfor teachers'discipli
nary efforts is equally important.Many
teachersbecome frustratedand give up
We
when theydon'treceive such support.
must trainteachersto guarantee the sup We can't afford to train educators in pro
port of parentsby teaching teachershow grams based only on whim or untested
to communicateeffectivelywith parents. theory. We have an obligation to insure
In teacherftainingprograms,participants that any trainingprogram in behavior
management be based solidly on tech
are led to believe that today's parents
will act as parents did in the past and give
absolute support to the school. That is
rarely the case. Today's teachers call par
ents and are told, "He's your problem at
school. You handle it. You're the profes
sional. You take care of him. I don't
know what to do. Leave me alone."
niques that have been validated by re
search and that have been shown towork
in the classroom.
Research has demonstrated that Asser
tive Discipline works and that it isn't just
a quick-fix solution. In school districts in
Lennox, California, and Troy, Ohio,
teachers who were
RESEARCH AND ASSERTIVE DISCIPLINE
Over
the last several years,
a number
trained 10 years ago
still use the program effectively.5 The
program works
because
it is based
on
practices thateffective teachershave fol
lowed instinctively for a long time. It's
of dissertations,master's theses, and re
searchprojectshave dealtwith Assertive not new to have rules in a classroom. It's
Discipline. The results have consistent not new touse positive reinforcement.It's
trators, and take part in regular inservice
training to refine their teaching skills. ly shown that teachersdramatically im not new to have disciplinary conse
Classroommanagementskillsdeserve the prove studentbehaviorwhen theyuse the quences.
Teachers who are effective year after
sameattention.Unfortunately,some edu skills as prescribed. Teachers who use
Assertive Discipline reduce the frequen year take the basic Assertive Discipline
cators view training in Assertive Dis
cipline as a one-shot process; they attend
a one-day workshop, and that's supposed
to take care of their training needs for the
rest of their careers.
One day is not enough.
It takes a great
cy of disruptive
behavior
in their class
competencies
and mold
them to their in
rooms, gready reduce thenumberof stu dividual teaching styles. They may stop
dents they refer to administrators,and using certain techniques,such as putting
dramaticallyincreasetheirstudents'time marbles in ajar or writing names on the
on-task.1 Other research has demonstrat
board. That's fine. I don't want
the lega
to be - and
cy of Assertive Discipline
deal of effort and continuing training ed that student teachers trained inAsser
tive Discipline are evaluated by their I don'twant teacherstobelieve tey have
for a teachertomaster the skills of class
roommanagement.A teacheralso needs master teachers as more effective in touse -names and checks on thieboard
60
PHIDELTA
KAPPAN
in a jar. I want teachers to
or marbles
learn that they have to take charge, ex
plain theirexpectations,be positivewith
students, and consistently employ both
positive reinforcementandnegative con
sequences.These are the skills thatform
the basis of Assertive Discipline and of
any effectiveprogramof classroomman
agement.
A
1. Linda H. Mandlebaum
et al., "Assertive Dis
Pro
Behavior Management
cipline: An Effective
Journal, vol. 8,1983,
gram," Behavioral Disorders
pp. 258-64; Carl L. Fereira, "A Positive Approach
to Assertive Discipline," Martinez
(Calif.) Unified
the
Save
Bfaby!
to
Response
'Integrating
Of
the
the Children
Second
System'
SchoolDistrict, ERICED 240 058,1983; andSam
mie McCormack,
"Students' Off-Task Behavior and
Assertive Discipline"
(Doctoral dissertation, Univer
1985).
sity of Oregon,
of Assertive
Dis
Effects
Smith, The
cipline Training on Student Teachers' Self Concept
and Classroom Management
Skills" (Doctoral dis
of South Carolina,
sertation, University
1983).
2.
Susan
L. Moffett et al., "Assertive Discipline,"
California School Board Journal, June/July/August
"Assessment
1982, pp. 24-27; Mark Y. Swanson,
of the Assertive
Discipline
Program," Compton
3. Kenneth
To throwout the baby (bydismantling special education)
because the bath water ismurky (thereare still unresolved
problems)wouldproduceunintendedresultsof disastrous
proportions, these authors charge in their response to a
November Kappan article.
(Calif.)Unified SchoolDistrict, Spring 1984; "Dis
cipline Report,"
School District,
ation of Oregon
letter, 28 April
(Ariz.) Elementary
Cartwright
10 February
1982; and Confeder
School Administrators,
personal
1980.
of Internal
4. Helen Hair et al., "Development
in Elementary
Structure
Students: A System of
Classroom Management
and Class Control," ERIC
T
ED 189 067, 1980;EdmundEmmer andCarolyn
At the Begin
"Effective Management:
Everston,
ning of the School Year in Junior High Classes,"
Research and Development
Center for Teacher Edu
of Texas, Austin,
cation, University
1980; Marcia
on At
Broden et al., "Effects of Teacher Attention
tending Behavior of Two Boys at Adjacent Desks,"
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, vol. 3,1970,
Use of Nor
et al., The
pp. 205-11; HiU Walker
mative Peer Data as a Standard for Evaluating Treat
ment Effects," Journal of Applied Behavior Analy
sis, vol. 37,1976,
pp. 145-55; Jere Brophy, "Class
room Organization
and Management,"
Elementary
vol. 83, 1983, pp. 265-85; Hill
School Journal,
et al., "Experiments with Response
Walker
Cost
in Playground
and Classroom
Settings," Center for
in Behavioral
of the Handi
Research
Education
of Oregon,
1977;
capped, University
Eugene,
Thomas McLaughlin
and John Malaby,
"Reducing
and Measuring
Jour
Inappropriate Verbalizations,"
nal of Applied Behavior Analysis, vol. 5,1972,
pp.
329-33; Charles Madsen et al., "Rules, Praise, and
Ignoring: Elements of Elementary Classroom Con
vol.
trol," Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis,
et al.,
1, 1968, pp. 139-50; Charles Greenwood
in
for Group Consequences
"Group Contingencies
Classroom
A Further Analysis,"
Management:
Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, vol. 7,1974,
pp. 413-25; and K. Daniel O'Leary et al., "A To
in a Public School: A
ken Reinforcement
Program
and Systematic Analysis,"
Journal of
Replication
vol. 2,1969,
pp. 3-13.
Applied Behavior Analysis,
5. Kenneth
L. Moffett et al., Training
and Coach
to Reality
An Antidote
Teachers:
ing Beginning
Shock," Educational
1987,
Leadership,
February
pp. 34-46; and Bob Murphy, Troy
High School:
An Assertive Model," Miami Valley Sunday News,
12 March
IB
1989, p. 1.
Troy, Ohio,
BY GLENN A. VERGASON
O
AND M. L. ANDEREGG
SAY THAT we are dis
turbed by the attack on spe
cial education that appeared
in theNovember 1988Kap
pan is an understatement.'
We do not understandwhy profession
als in special education are attempting to
make major changes in the professional
practiceof regulareducation.Moreover,
we question why such well-known re
searchers
as Margaret
Wang,
Maynard
attack based on researchmethodology
that is so clearly
flawed.2 While
it is
bothhealthyandhelpful to raisequestions
about educational practices, these re
searchers have gone beyond the data to
conduct a campaign to change special
education in their own image. Their
previous articleson this issue 3and their
speecheshave promptedone critic to de
scribe their efforts as more a "public re
lations campaign" than a research ef
Reynolds, andHerbertWalberg are so
dedicated to dismantling special educa
tion. The movement they championhas
fort.4Others have characterized their
solutions as "patentmedicine."5
been given different names -
ticle (and elsewhere in thewritings of
the Regu
larEducation Initiative, the SharedRe
sponsibility Initiative, theGeneral Edu
cation Initiative - but the underlying
message
is the same: a group of special
educators knows what is best for all kinds
One of the premises
these
in the Kappan
three educators)
ar
is the idea that
regulareducation and special education
form
separate
systems.
Our
own
ex
perience andour discussionswith teach
ers and administrators
do not
lead us
of education.
to accept that notion. In fact, the very
We also question why professionals children that thesewriters hope to res
who are so well-known
for their interest
in research persist in pursuing a plan of
GLENN A. VERGASON (Metro Atlanta!
Georgia State University Chapter) is a pro
fessor in the Department of Special Educa
tion and coordinator of the Special Education
Administration Program at Georgia State
University, Atlanta, whereM. L ANDEREGG
is a doctoral student in special education.
cue from special education
are, by and
large, in regular education classes for
most of the school day. Special educa
tion is an adaptive support system for the
mildly handicapped;
it is not a separate
system.
Wang, Reynolds, andWalberg suggest
that special education programs are usu
ally "pull-out" programs and criticize
SEPTEMBER
1989
61