Yr 1 - reward and de-merit system????

[beagle101]

My DD has just started year 1 and her new teacher (who is newly qualified - not that I am making a point about that just mentioning incase this is some new education philosophy that I don't know about!) has set up this huge landscape wallchart in the classroom.

The class is a mixed class of year 1 & 2

Each child is represented on the chart by a balloon face and they start up in the sky near the top of the chart - if they break a rule or talk (God knows what rules although I do know 'talking too loudly' is one that moves you down a level) they are made to get up from their seat and move their balloon face down the board towards the mud at the bottom. If they do really good work they get to go and move their balloon face up.

Kids who are in the stars at the top of this lovely landscape get the whole of 'golden time'- where they can choose a fun activity those further down the chart have their time reduced with those in the mud at the bottom getting no 'golden time'.

On Friday there were 3 kids (all Yr1 rather than Yr2)at the bottom of the chart who had to literally sit and watch the other kids playing. It wasn't my DD but I am absolutely HORRIFIED that such a system could be implemented.

A few of the other parents have expressed unease about this and DH and I are thinking of going in and speaking to the teacher and probably Head about this - surely this system is just humiliating for the kids in the mud - making them move their face things down in front of other kids and it teaches really unpleasant thing to all of the others.

It strikes me as just a really lazy way to impose rule obeyance and doesn't take account of the differences in children - am I wrong is this some new educational philosophy thing - what do others think?

Thanks!

My DD has had this system implemented in both schools she's been at so far. But from what I observed, people are right in saying that the same offenders are always the ones who miss out on playtime or treats, so it can't be that motivational for them.

My DD1 loves it but that's because she is always good and would be I think even if this system wasn't there.

What I find a little worrying is that it's more a punitive system than one that recognises that some children might be naughty as they need support - although as I said, I haven't been on that side of the fence...

DD's just started FS1 (today!) and her classroom has a poster thing like loudlass describes; everyone starts the day on green, you can move up to silver then gold, or down four red bars.
Not sure what happens if you get to the bottom (or indeed the top), I didn't ask

Vesela, it is called "golden time" the children are not Called Golden Children.

Could you explain to me how it could be perceived as racist? I do not necessarely agree with reward system in the first place but the "gold" in my understanding is linked to "gold medal" for example for a champion of some sort. I really cannot think of a way to see that as racist.

While I am not sure about the bit of publicly removing your sign, how would you control a class of 30, including a couple of bullies, without any means of reward or sanction? Given that there are likely to be at least two or three little dears whose attitude towards the teacher will be "you can't make me do things". And how would you feel if your child was at the receiving end of their attentions? My nephew spent three years in a class where discipline was out of control and there were basically no sanctions. It was hardly an educational experience.

While I find the constant micromanaging of reward charts irritating, they are there to (hopefully) control a situation before it gets to a stage where you have to get out the big guns (headteacher, complaints to the parents, exclusion). It might just pull somebody up before they get into more trouble than they can handle. A friend's ds lost several playtimes for knocking other children down- but it did help him to get a clear message that the school would not tolerate this behaviour.

The other point about punishment is that it reassures the victim. Suppose it was your child who was constantly called names or hit or having their hair pulled because they were a different race, or disabled, or small, or good at maths? What conclusion would they draw if there are never any consequences for the aggressor? Presumably that it's ok to hit somebody who is coloured or disabled or good at maths?

If the teacher's explanations are constantly disrupted by children who won't sit still or stop talking, what conclusion are the other children supposed to draw? That the teacher has really important things to tell them? Hardly.

Golden time is widely used in the schools in my area.

My dc schools have used it effectively since although children can lose time for bad behaviour, they can also earn it back for rectifying that bad behaviour. In my dc experience there have only been a couple of children who have lost golden time and that was for things like biting and playground intimidation.

Things like talking in class are punished by losing a minute or two but this is usually earned back by the end of the day.

I just think the name "golden time" is really odd - kind of insidious and disturbing - and it also occurred to me that it might sound a bit racist, too. If it doesn't sound that way, then that's good, but I still think it's a vomit-worthy term.

Re. how to keep order without rewards - google Montessori, classroom management and rewards. The Montessori system manages to do fine without rewards.

"Golden time" just means a good, special time- happy hour without the alcohol so to speak. It's not gold in the sense of "goldenhaired, blue-eyed", but gold in the sense that gold is a more precious metal than iron, that the gold medal is the one you get for doing really well. A reward worth having. Surely, children would be far more likely to see it in these sporting terms, than in any way relating to racism.

My dd2 thrived at Montessori but has really switched off at school. The reward system doesn't interest her very much at all.

I agree that Golden Time is icky. So the rest of school is less than golden, then? My, that makes it sound enticing. 'Put up with the crap all week to get a bit of 'Golden time''. Great. Like living for the weekend.

"I would also like to know how people who don't agree with punishment and reward actually think order can be kept in schools?"

Well said Pixie, my sentements too. As part of a child's learning they need to learn that there are consequences to actions. The children who find themselves receiving sanctions for disruptive behaviour are often the same children who are not disciplined at home.

It seems to me that modern classroom management ideas if carried out kindly, fairly and consistently are beneficial to all children. I work in schools and I see that behaviour effects all children and that lessons are disrupted and in some cases only half the lesson is covered.

Where will it all end, teenage gangs, dangerous ferral children, no hopes for whole swathes of society. We did away with the cane(rightly so) but now well meaning but essentially daft individuals with no teaching experience want an end to all discipline.

cory, OK, fine, not racist! But as spiritmum says, it's icky.

minimathsmouse, I do believe in discipline - in proper discipline and teaching children how to behave well, not quick-fix gimmicks that are just storing up problems for later.

Yes, Pixie, I know it's the time that's golden, and I hate the term "golden time" because it sounds silly and icky.

Pixie, Montessori engages children so much that there isn't the usual talking and messing about. It's being used in a failing school near me in Essex and also one in Manchester and has turned both schools around.

It's also very respectful. There's no shaming children into behaving 'well'.

Vesela, I agree in terms of teaching good behaviour. Children need to know how to behave. I have lost count of the times I have heard mothers shouting "Bevave, will you" I think children need to know the difference and we need to be more specific about what we expect. Well it seems to work for me. "don't stand on the table" is less effective than "sit on your chair now"

However when lessons are disrupted a teachers attention is taken up with the behaviour and the children who are wanting to learn suffer. These kind and consistent measures are not gimmicky, they work. We all need to learn consequences, good and bad, it is essential to a child's future development to understand justice and fairness.

Also, as far as I can see, Montessori teachers see everything as something to be taught/learnt. So they expect to teach good behaviour just as much as they teach reading. They see it as all part and parcel.

sorry, X-post! I don't know if I explained that very well, but this:

"when lessons are disrupted a teachers attention is taken up with the behaviour" - a Montessori teacher would see it as all life skills to be learnt (and I think yes, it often involves being quite specific). You don't teach children to read by moving them up and down ladders and into the mud etc, and you take the same approach to behaviour.

I think they tackle behaviour very much in synthesis with everything else that's learnt in the classroom.

If I remember rightly children who are disruptive are removed from the classroom at Montessori, I definitely remember dd2's teacher needing to pick a little boy up who was kicking off and carrying him away. It was done very respectfully though, and as soon as they are ready to go back they can - there's no exclusion as punishment. But part of Montessori is that a child chooses to learn, and if they choose not to then the classroom isn't the right place for them at that time.

I also remember the teachers using phrases like 'you worked hard' rather than 'good girl/boy'.

don't have any experience of Montessori schools; do they have as many children in the class, and do they generally have the full range of ability/background/etc (eg are there state Montessori schools or only private ones)?

There are very few State Montessori primaries and not very many private ones. Most are at pre-school level. The pre-schools take anyone who can afford the fees IME, which can vary widely. The State Montessoris that I know of are in deprived areas or were struggling badly.

If I could send my dc to a Montessori primary I would, like a shot.

Vesela, ime teachers in the ordinary state system also spend an awful lot of time teaching good behaviour as a life skill. I have been very impressed by the way this has been done im dcs' schools. But the fact remains that state schools have to take on all comers, not just children of parents who take an interest in education, and that there will be some children who (whether from bad parenting, a negative attitude towards authority or stresses in their lives) are not very amenable to listening to the teacher's teaching of life skills. This doesn't mean the teaching shouldn't happen, or indeed that it doesn't happen, but it may mean that it has to be reinforced by discipline.

(The little boy who used to knock ds down in the playground had been taught to behave, he knew all about it- but he was going through a bad patch and didn't want to do what he had been taught. They couldn't well just let him get on with the punching. It was a very good school: they also offered him counselling and all sorts of support. But he needed to know that he would be stopped if he tried any hitting.)

Besides, the teaching of life skills takes time - what is the punchbag going to do until their aggressor has decided he wants to learn these life skills?

"if they choose not to then the classroom isn't the right place for them at that time"

This is exclusion surely then. OK, you can say the child has chosen to exclude themselves by dispaying non acceptable behaviours or whatever, but the teacher has still hasd to remove this child from the class and excude them from the lesson. The child gets to chose when to return - you mean the child has chance to calm down and then return when they are "bheaving" again? In others words they have time out?

TBH not sure the above is much different to many normal school systems - expect the removal out fo the room, it is normally to one side of the class IME apart from for more extreme behaviours. Most teachers and classes can't manage for the teacher to have to leave the room, hence being in same room.

Golden time is present in pretty much every primary school I know of. If used properly it can be very effective. However, in Y1 some children struggle with the waiting for their sanction - we have a mini Golden time on a Wednesday to help combat this TBH and have not had problems. Children are given loads of chances to earn back their 5 minutes loss (and in our school they do only lose 5 minutes, never all of it) over the days and the teachers specifically find ways to let them earn itback IYSWIM.

According to this, the ideal Montessori class size is one teacher and one TA to a class of 30+ children. [http://www.puremontessori.com/explained/j.htm This]] says 25-35.

There are some state Montessori schools in the US - the woman I was talking about above definitely taught in one. From what spiritmum says, there are some in the UK.

"But part of Montessori is that a child chooses to learn, and if they choose not to then the classroom isn't the right place for them at that time."
So then what? You can't very well leave two or three children who aren't ready and willing to learn in the corridor all day.