Anyone read the Paul Dix book (When the Adults Change)?

[JamDoughnuts]

I found it quite horrifying and I'm really worried that it is being so heavily promoted.

I've worked in 'that' area of town for ten years now and I completely understand that relationships can make or break it. BUT that does not mean that there are no boundaries and that's all I was getting from that book.

I'm feeling totally jaded atm and it just seems the icing on the cake- bad behaviour is our fault because we've not got a 'relationship' with the child, not the fault of lazy parents or the impact of poverty.

JamDoughnuts

Does that not also apply to a 'positive' policy?

Yup, but then parents, pupils and the government have to trust teachers to choose what is best for the pupils in a given situation.

Unfortunately the government has gone so far down the road of undermining teachers that it will not happen hence these sort of books.

and like all teaching fads it will go around in a circle.

Nononannette

Part of the problem is that according to some school should be more like work. Unfortunately these are the same people that tend to moan if their child is sanctioned.

I read the whole book and went to the training. He was very entertaining and I really liked most of it.
I suspect some of it might be harder to use in secondary?
As far as the botheredness goes, I think (as with almost anything in teaching) you have to know your kids. No substitute for getting to know them. Some want tlc, some don’t.

I haven't read that book, but his other one - Taking care of behaviour.

Now, assuming that he hasn't changed his opinion too much between the two books, I actually think that most of his ideas are pretty good and have seen a few gifted colleagues use the same principles - conciously and unconsciousy - in secondary classrooms, with huge successes.

In Taking care of behaviour he talks a lot about the need for positive relationships with students, being visibly bothered about them as humans and treating them with respect, BUT he also points out the need for sanctions. The difference lies in the delivery.

Yes, you can take some of his ideas to the extreme - I would not start shaking everyone's hands (goodness knows where they've been) - but the general principle behind what he says is true and always has been. Detentions don't work and create resentment on both sides and you do get people to work with you better when you create a positive environment.

It works for adults, too - I have left a few very toxic schools with resentful staff who did the minimum and worked in schools where the loyalty of staff to the head meant that they went the extra mile.

A colleague got students we both taught to eat out of his hands while I really struggled to teach the same bunch of students. I asked him why there was such a massive difference in how they behaved for the two of us and it really was only down to the relationships he had built with them and his positive nature.

He doesn't advocate giving chances over and over again beyond what we are expected to do anyway - fresh start every lesson etc. He does, though, recognise that a punitive system doesn't work.

Decent managers use the same principle of relentless positivity to get their staff to work harder. No one works their best out of fear of punishment.

I don't think there is so much about detentions in the new book. He wanted to have a USP so really pushes the botheredness bit. I agree with him on detentions but I do think he dwells in some kind of utopian world with hi vis SLT in corridors. And I don't think teachers should go round students' homes : there needs to be a barrier. A lot of his stuff is too time intensive to be practicable.

My school begins in year 9 and I think that's why I can't imagine much of what he says. Especially the hand shaking. Gret them at the door by all means.

I suppose what I find frustrating is the ideologising of the 'teacher shout'. My control is good (or used to be ; kids are definitely more challenging) and I ahve always managed that through a range of strategies including : good relationships, teacher voice, the dreaded sarcasm(!), humour where appropriate, a focus on actually teaching - and a good old fashioned shout! A good teacher knows when, who, where, why with all of these things and I think it is always easy for a tall man with a loud voice to suggest some of thsoe strategies are wrong. I have increasingly been treated by young people as if I am their mum and - horrifyingly for their mothers- that is often not very well! The worst behaviour in my school is in corridors and he doesn't address that at all, whereas Bill Rodgers is good on that kind of thing.

To me, support from other colleagues (notably HODS who I think bury heads in sand), support from SLT, and support from (and a not overly time consuming relationship with) parents are the extra things that make a huge difference. I do work in a school where the answer to evreything is seen to be 'issuing a sanction' (ie a detention) and no one will support you unless you have done this and I would quite like it if those rigid school systems were re evaluated in the light of Dix's book : but that seems to be the bit SLTs ignore!

Ok, I’ve not read the book. From this thread I gather he:

Doesn’t like detentions
Does like following up poor behaviour with a chat later (presumably in a detention?)
Likes shaking hands at the door (urgh)
Thinks teachers should deal with all behaviour (this leads to teachers ignoring behaviour that they don’t have time to deal with IME)
Likes teachers being ‘bothered’ about their pupils (fine, relationships are important, but remembering we should be spending the vast majority of the time teaching our subject)
Thinks teachers should go around students’ houses (eh?)

Is that right?

I agree that students need adults who are bothered about them, this is surely why we have a pastoral team?

I think it is always easy for a tall man with a loud voice to suggest some of these strategies are wrong

This is very true. I did suggest to a young female student teacher that asking a tall male teacher with a loud voice who also was on SLT for behaviour management advice wasn’t going to be especially helpful as their main behaviour management technique was who they were.

What's this guy's background? Does he come from PRU/ EBD Special?

I ask because in that setting it is absolutely right that each Teacher should deal with 'behaviour' there and then, in their own classroom, by de-escalating it quickly using agreed strategies in the pupil's individual behaviour plan.

As soon as you send them to someone else you are saying a) you are not confident enough to deal with it yourself b) you are not 'top dog' c) you are scared d) you don't care enough about the pupil to ride their emotions with them e) your relationship with them is conditional f) you are judging them... delete as appropriate. It will lead to a spiral of problems as the pupil tests all of the above.

If you need extra hands to deal with a big problem, they come to you, in your space and help you- you do not defer it.

But in specialist settings for SEMH/ challenging behaviour, that is what we are all there to do. I wouldn't dream of telling mainstream that they should all work like us. Not until they also have a staff ratio of 1:4 in every classroom, break out spaces within classrooms, flexibility to come off timetable, time to write individual plans for every pupil and review them almost daily and a tonne of specialist training.

Paul Dix has been in a range of places, including the US and , yes, Aleternative Provision. He has also been in mainstream in 'tough' settings but I seem to recall the 'ordinary' comprehensive is not a common stomping ground. We get a lot of this : teachers from AP telling us their wosdom on behaviour management , and really they are totally different issues and settings.

You ahve more or less summed him up noble. He contradicts himself a bit :

don't shout
don't throw any one out
deal with everything yourself
SLT shoudl also be a supportive presence, however
don't give detentions
but do find time to follow up behaviours with the child

There's more such as botheredness and hand shaking. He says there is no compromise on the handshake. There was a threda on that before, if you recall! Got quite heated!

It frustrates me that he rarely mentions actual teaching. Or really tries to think about why poor behaviour arises in schools. He puts it down to faulty systems quite a lot.

I poo poo a lot of what he says but I do thinks SLTs should read him.

This is my review of the book from the 50 Book Challenge thread at which point I remembered it in more detail!

*This book is written by he of the now infamous handshake on the way into classrooms approach. Everything about rapidly promoted males with loud voices who leave actual teaching early and then hop form school to school getting rich consulting annoys me anyway, so I was bound not to warm to this book. However, what annoys me is he doesn't really set out a vision. He just sys' this is the way to do it because it's what I do so it must be right' and I don't really think he says what to really do with day to day low level to mid level poor behaviour because he just doesn't believe it will happen if we meet and greet and show 'botheredness'. And I loathe scripts with a passion. A poor trainee reading this would talk in constant scripts and feel they should follow every incident up with a 15 minute meeting with a child, tell the child's mum that she has lost weight (I kid you not) or her hair looks nice... and then , if all else fails, wander the streets of Britain visiting the houses of the worst offenders.

I don't think we would get on because I am a shouter. We do agree on some things. I too don't like endless convoluted sanctions and names on boards. I also don't believe in detentions. But I do think teachers should have back up, where he seems to believe all teachers should deal with their own classroom issues. He does, fair play to him, state the obvious that if SLT were more involved , things would help. And does say that if they chivvied students to lessons in the corridors, fewer of the issues would occur. He seems to be responsible for my SLT's idea that wandering around with a binbag at lunchtime and picking up the rubbish the kids have dropped is somehow a good look for a head.

A few of my SLT have come across his thoughts ( I refuse to believe they have read the book) and interestingly seem to have got to about chapter 3 of his ideas.

An irritatingly smug book. He lost me by repeatedly self promoting himself as a 'teacher wrangler' and by putting excerpts from his own reports at the end of the chapter to prove how naughty he was at school. Oh do fuck off.

On balance, it was a pile of shite *

tell the child's mum that she has lost weight

I didn’t think that anything would ever topple ‘pretend you’re eating a can of dog food’ from the winner’s podium of truly awful behaviour management advice, but this has nailed it.

He sounds like he’s from the school of thought that says ‘behave exactly like me and it will all be fine’. Tom Bennett has a lot to say about this sort of behaviour advisor - i.e. they’re shit.

I couldn't believe the 'you've lost weight' thing either. Tbh it sounds like he flirts with mums of naughty children!

But, again this kind of 'closeness' with mums (always mums, I note) is a feature of SEN/AP/ the most needy pastoral cases and not really an everyday teacher/parent norm.

Bill Rodgers is like that, too, but I quite like his methods and ideas and so I let him off! (also, I attended some training by him and so have a soft spot as he was engaging)

Who would anyone here recommend for help with challenging behaviour?

I'm nodding along with so many of these points, especially the one on male influence.

The dog food is still top for me. She doesn't even just switch the label- she washes the whole can out. Stupid.

I think the search for a USP drives out a lot of the sensible points authors make- what I do remember about dog food woman is 'never ask a question you don't want to know the answer to'.

I honestly think that there is no substitute for a teacher who has been in your school for a long time, but it can look so effortless from them too, which doesn't always help.

It's ages since I have read her but Sue Cowley has the merits of being a woman and, therfore, may be a bit more realisitc about how difficult things can be. I have no idea if she seems a bit dated now.

Sue Cowley was the one recommending eating dog food. Also faking a breakdown in front of your class if they won’t shut up. Maybe that sort of thing appeals to drama teachers but is no use for a socially awkward maths teacher.

I heart Tom Bennett for behaviour management, he’s got loads of blogs and videos if you don’t fancy shelling out for one of his books. And he admits that he was shit at behaviour management for the first couple of years of teaching and then learned how to do it properly, so it’s not all about his personality.

I don't remeber those thigns about Sue Cowley! I'll have to reread it!!

I've read a few things by Tom Bennett and can't remeber why I dodn't warm to him : I may possibly have found him a bit cocky but I get all the male ones conflated.

Still think Bill Rodgers talks the most sense really. Tactical ignoring and repeating the rules are solid tips.

But all these people still think we all have acres of tiem to deal with each kid and many of them think only one child misbehaves at a time.

I've come to the conclusion that a lot of behaviour management is just time spent in the same school.

I've read loads of behaviour books because I was shit at it for the first couple of years. I always think their ideas seem fantastic on first reading (Sue Cowley and Paul Dix are the main 2 books I'm thinking of here), but then when I try it, their methods don't work any better than any other method.
Even these authors will say things like "you may have to enforce these rules/do this thing for at least a term or 2 before behaviour starts to improve".

I'm now starting to think that as long as a teacher follows the behaviour policy as best as possible (most commonly a 3 strikes and you're out type thing in various forms) and you're consistent with it then most kids will eventually fall into line. So, Sue Cowley did her thing, realised that after a term or two the kids seemed to start behaving and thought "wow, I've found the holy grail to cracking discipline". Paul Dix does HIS thing and also realises that after a term or two the kids seem to start behaving and he also though "wow, I've found the holy grail to cracking discipline". When in actual fact it's just TIME. I think the kids often just need to get used to the new face.

I've moved schools a few times and every time it's the same - kids are a nightmare for the first term, particularly if I start mid-year (Easter being the worst), then after a couple of terms they calm down (mostly) - unlike these authors though, I'm not going to write a book about it because I don't think I do anything special, whereas for some reason they think they do.

I think the kids often just need to get used to the new face.

I think it's more than that, especially when the school catchment is generally deprived. They might not like overt botheredness but they do appreciate a familiar face. Teaching siblings helps too.

Having tried to help a teacher who was really struggling with behaviour there are definitely strategies that help and it’s not just standing in front of the same class day after day. Classes can get worse and worse, you can lose them and it’s very difficult to get them back.

I didn’t realise just how much subtle and more overt behaviour management I did until I watched a teacher not do it. Standard things like entry and exit routines. Seating plans where you change them once you observe kid X and kid Y really don’t get on. Then more subtle things like where you stand in the class when you’re helping an individual and how you deal with kids who are pissing around. If they are not in place, the class will not suddenly start behaving for you.

I can’t believe, Piggy that you rate Didau but didn’t warm to the lovely Tom.

I found this guide by him and he quotes Bill Rogers in it, so I think they’re singing from the same hymn sheet anyway. www.unison.org.uk/content/uploads/2015/04/On-line-Catalogue22970.pdf

I just found Bennett's book a bit (well, very) superfical but my memory is hazy. I rate Didau specifically on two things:

a) his depth of knowledge and research especially on literacy
b) his rebellious up yours streak

However, he now seems to think HE is the established viewpoint and winds up anyone who disagrees on Twitter so he is coming across as quite the arse of late.

Just skimmed it : it is quite Rogers like indeed.

My favourite Rogers thing is 'Call in the troops'. I like that he says to ask for help from colleagues and that thy should give it. Too many behaviour policies overlook this or create barriers to support by making teachers jump multiple hoops (all evidenced and logged!) first.

But - ugh- he uses 'gotten'. Bleugh

Actually I love his writing style, the more informal stuff he does. And if you like research, he set up ResearchEd!