Testing The Limits
By Mary Beth Hewitt
This article is reprinted with the
permission of Mary Beth Hewett. It is reprinted from CHOICES, volume
2, pages 13-14. For more information, see the bottom of this page.
Just as individuals go through fairly predictable
developmental stages as they grow, many students go through typical behavioral
phases throughout the year. This is the second in a series of articles,
which describe some common behavioral stages.
In the last issue of the CHOICES Newsletter, “The Honeymoon Phenomenon” was described as being the time, during the first few days or weeks of school, when students are on their best behavior. When the honeymoon period comes to an end, many students relax and settle into a routine. Although their behavior may not be as “stellar” as it was a few weeks ago, for the most part they follow the rules.
Other students, however, begin mildly testing the boundaries. They have transitioned into the “Limit Testing” phase. During this stage, children move ever so slowly off center to see how far they can stray before they get into trouble. Watch a young child in a new situation and he/she frequently cowers and stays close to his/her parent. However, once the fear subsides and the comfort level increases, the child moves in ever widening circles until someone sets the limit, “That’s far enough!”
We all know that a gap exists between the stated
and enforced rules in most areas of our lives. When New York State raised
the speed limit from 55 to 65, the officials said that they were going
to take a hard line on enforcement. Gone would be the days of allowing
a 10-mph window of enforcement. At first, most drivers took them
at their word. Gradually, however, speeds inched up. When nothing
happened, a new upper limit was formed; 10 miles over the legal speed limit.
Most people stay within this range and although they are “technically”
breaking the law, it’s not considered a blatant act of defiance and is,
therefore, tolerated. We have a similar “behavioral safety gap” in
our classrooms. Limit testers are looking for that behavioral safety
gap.
THE ISSUE OF CONSISTENCY
Some people would argue that the way to achieve behavioral
compliance would be to have all adults strictly and immediately enforce
all the rules, all of the time. I disagree. I think being totally
consistent is not only an impossibility, but it would make the adults solely
responsible for enforcement, taking all responsibility away from the students.
Furthermore, no instruction would occur, as it would be impossible to do
anything other than monitor behavior. I also believe that since motivations
for rule violations are different, in order to be effective, the manner
and timing with which they are handled needs to be different too.
Have you ever had a time when, in an attempt to be consistent, you addressed
a minor behavioral infraction and the situation escalated into a major
confrontation? If so, you were not dealing with a mild case of limit testing.
If you felt compelled to handle all situations the same, you would continue
to escalate the confrontation.
THE NEED FOR LIMIT TESTING
Testing limits is not an inherently evil action. There is an inborn need for individuals to exercise free will and personal judgment. Since all situations are not the same, conflicting priorities may make total, unquestioning compliance unrealistic or even dangerous. We cannot raise a generation of strictly controlled automatons and then expect that they will have the skills to make intelligent choices. The ability to think independently of external influence is the key to being able to resist group pressure or stand up against immoral decisions of leaders in positions of authority like Hitler. Just because authority figures determine rules, this does not automatically make them good rules. Therefore, in order to enable students to make responsible, ethical decisions, we must provide them with opportunities to develop and exercise their freedom of choice and personal judgment in all areas of their lives.
Let’s just talk about how to address the limit testing of the “good rules” right now.
USE THE LAW OF “LEAST INTERVENTION”
With many students, all that is needed to send the
“that’s far enough” message is a simple look, getting closer (proximity),
or simple non-verbal signals (shaking your head). I know that all it takes
for me to “get back in line” is simply looking in my rear view mirror and
seeing a police car or viewing a sign that says, “Radar-Speed Limit Strictly
Enforced." You don’t have to disrupt your teaching to address a mild
misbehavior. Some students, however, may not take the warnings seriously
unless they also see that you are willing to follow through on giving a
consequence. That’s why I need to hear about or see people being
given tickets occasionally. However, writing “tickets” takes time away
from instruction, so don’t take the time to write a ticket when a look
will do.
BE QUICK
The best time to set the standards and establish
the behavioral safety gap for your classroom is at the beginning of limit
testing stage. This will set the upper limits of the boundaries.
It is important to set these boundaries early. I think this is where
the old adage-give them an inch, they’ll take a mile comes from.
If you don’t address the fact that one student is late for class one day,
then you may have four late for class the next. It’s easier to close
the door before the proverbial horse gets out of the barn, than it is to
catch him and rein him in after he’s become used to being free. (With
some students, I can address the behavior and give the consequence immediately
and it has the desired effect. However, with other students, when
I address the behavior immediately it makes the matter worse. When I am
simply trying to curtail a minor rule violation and I end up with a major
confrontation, the student is not trying to see where the real boundaries
are; he/she is trying to send a much deeper message. MILD LIMIT TESTING
IS NOT THE SAME AS OPPOSITIONAL BEHAVIOR. If, in an attempt to set
the limit the situation gets worse, I need to switch to some of the strategies
described in the article that follows this one, “The Control Game.”)
What happens, however, when I wasn’t quick enough and let the behavior slide one day but decide to address it the next day and the student throws “You didn’t say anything yesterday” in my face? I’ve found it helpful to say something like, “You’re confused as to why I didn’t say anything about being late yesterday. You may have thought I didn’t mean what I said about it being important to be to class on time, but that wasn’t the case. Yesterday, when you (or someone) came in late, I was teaching the lesson and I didn’t want to interrupt it. It was also the first time you’d (someone had) been late. Since you are late today, I thought it was important to address it so everyone knows it is still a rule in this classroom.”
BE BRIEF
Road signs are very simple. Stop, Speed Limit
55, Slow, and Caution. Imagine if they said things like, “It is important
to stop at this intersection because there is traffic coming in another
direction and if you both proceed through the intersection at the same
time someone could get seriously hurt.” By the time you read it,
you’d be seriously hurt. The same is true for the verbal limits we
set with our students. Stop, No, Feet down, are all the words that
are necessary. Any more of an explanation only serves to confuse
and delay.
BE FIRM
Since limit testers are seeking the upper limits
of a rule, repeated warnings and extended time limits send the message
that the limit is really quite high. One warning should be sufficient.
Watch any little person when his Mom says she is going to count to three.
He lets one and two slide by and moves on three. My advice is to
keep your time limits short. Given a minute, a student might take
59 ½ seconds. Given 5 minutes, the student might take 4 minutes
59 ½ seconds. If, the student goes over the limit, even
marginally, they should be given the consequence. You’ll get a lot
of arguing from them about this because they’ll point out that they did
comply. I’ve found that saying, “You wish you
had made the decision to do it in the time limit.” Or “You
really didn’t think I was serious and if you had known I was, you would
have made a different decision”, are a few ways to address the,
“But
I did it!” plea. Don’t let a student’s arguments or promises
to “be good next time” keep you from enforcing the limit. If you
do, you are just rewarding pleading behavior and reinforcing the idea that
you do not mean what you say.
WHERE DO THEY GO FROM HERE?
The good news is that for most students, once they
find the outer limits of the behavioral safety zone, they settle in and
function quite well within the boundaries. You should have a long
and happy period of mutual co-existence. There are others, however,
who are motivated by fear and a feeling of powerlessness over changes in
their lives. These individuals continue to throw themselves at the
boundaries, like crazed animals trying to escape the confines of a cage.
Proximity of an authority figure, signals, consequences and the like, only
serve to make their behavior worse. These are the students I referred
to earlier as oppositional. Since it’s been about five years since
I published the article that follows, “The Control Game” in the CHOICES
Newsletter, I made the decision to run it again. The workshop we
offer, by the same name, is an expansion of this article. In the next issue
we’ll examine two stages some students with more serious behavioral difficulties
commonly go through: active resistance and behavioral relapses.
**If you like
the tips of Mary Beth Hewitt, you can purchase one or both volumes of CHOICES
(with about 25-30 of her articles in each) by going to the web site
www.edutech.org./choices/choicesf.htm. ,
calling 315/332-7255, or faxing
315/332-2117.
| Fetch Dr. Mac's Home Page |