discipline in beavers
indigo.ie
a Beaver night.
We find that some children misbehave to such an extent that we waste a lot
of time which could be used more constructively.
Never sure how far things should go before informing parents and considering
whether child should be suspended.
Would be grateful for any opinions on this or tips on how we could handle it
more easily.
Many thanks
Ann Sherratt
Beaver Leader
48th Dublin - Lucan S.A.I.
pau...@my-dejanews.com
<@indigo.ie> wrote:
> Can any Beaver Leaders out there let me know how they approach discipline on
> a Beaver night.
> We find that some children misbehave to such an extent that we waste a lot
> of time which could be used more constructively.
> Never sure how far things should go before informing parents and considering
> whether child should be suspended.
> Would be grateful for any opinions on this or tips on how we could handle it
> more easily.
I would not leave it too long before you take some action, like advising
parents, otherwise you may end up losing the nice quiet well-behaved one.
Also check that your programme is interesting enough to hold their attention
- find out what these 'naughty one' like best in the world and try to get
them doing it.
There comes a time when any child misbehaving enough to disrupt others needs
to be told that perhaps they should not be in Beavers anyway.
Take up the challenge, get to know the disruptive ones, give them some
responsibility, and try to win their confidence. If all else fails - let them
go - you cant win 'em all!
Paul C-G
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Tony Bryer
> I would not leave it too long before you take some action, like advising
> parents, otherwise you may end up losing the nice quiet well-behaved one.
>
say nothing but (we found out too late) found disruptive behaviour very
stressful.
I have no easy answers. If the trouble comes from one or two individuals
then a short (1-3 week) suspension might be appropriate: we have done this
in the past and when the boy came back they were better behaved (for a
while anyway <g>). What I find hard is when they are all on edge (perhaps
it's being a wet day and they haven't been out at school) and the messing
round and talking is going on all over the place.
We had one dreadful evening last November (week 1) when we spent 45 minutes
sitting in a circle waiting for people to be quiet so that I and others
could talk (it should have taken five minutes to say what we had to say)
and everyone (boys and leaders) went home thoroughly miserable.
The following week (week 2) they were so shocked by what had gone on the
week before (each one knew that they were in part responsible) that the
behaviour was exemplary (the Chief Scout would have been impressed) and
it's been much better since.
I don't know whether I played it right in week 1, but my instinct was that
if I responded to their disruption by shutting up and having a game, then I
would be rewarding bad behaviour. I was particularly struck by one of the
worse offenders coming up to me at the end of week 2 and saying "I have
been good haven't I?" - it was my delight to confirm that he had been, so
perhaps I need to be better at identifying and reinforcing good behaviour
rather than focusing on the negative.
Tony Bryer BSL 8th Twickenham
Ewan
>In article <77jdb6$48m$1...@news.indigo.ie>,
> <@indigo.ie> wrote:
>> Can any Beaver Leaders out there let me know how they approach discipline on
>> a Beaver night.
>> We find that some children misbehave to such an extent that we waste a lot
>> of time which could be used more constructively.
>> Never sure how far things should go before informing parents and considering
>> whether child should be suspended.
>> Would be grateful for any opinions on this or tips on how we could handle it
>> more easily.
>
>I would not leave it too long before you take some action, like advising
>parents, otherwise you may end up losing the nice quiet well-behaved one.
>Also check that your programme is interesting enough to hold their attention
>- find out what these 'naughty one' like best in the world and try to get
>them doing it.
>
>There comes a time when any child misbehaving enough to disrupt others needs
>to be told that perhaps they should not be in Beavers anyway.
>
>Take up the challenge, get to know the disruptive ones, give them some
>responsibility, and try to win their confidence. If all else fails - let them
>go - you cant win 'em all!
>
I'm not a BSL, I'm GSL, but have taken Cubs, and Scouts on a regular
basis, and have stood in at Beavers. All the above is well and good,
but IME when arriving at a group the first to step out of line is told
quite seriously where to toe the line. Upon their repeated breaches of
accepted behaviour, whilst all the above may apply it might also be
very constructive to administer a serious bollocking in full view of
the Colony, Pack, Troop or Unit.
the public reprimand serves more than one purpose. It will either
bring Jimmy into line, or send him on his way. It will let others who
think his behaviour is acceptable see that it isn't, and perhaps most
importantly, it lets those who do behave in the manner we expect see
that they are doing the right thing and that their behaviour will not
warrant them such a dressing down. It would not be the first time that
section morale has been raised by tackling the situation in this way.
Yes, you will feel let down when it happens, yes you will feel that
you have failed when it happens, and yes there may well be some kid
who fails to respond to even that situation. But whatever, you will
have retained his trust by not going to his parents.
I once felt the need to report a child to his parents. He had up to
that point accepted his rows, but he steadfastly refused to come to
Scouts. His brother is in Beavers and due to come to Cubs - he is a
clone of his older brother, with the same behavioural problems. I
cannot win his trust because I **grassed*8 on his brother.
It is worth a thought that if Jimmy doesn't behave well it is most
likely a home based behavioural problem anyway, so asking mum and dad
to help is not particularly likely to help. Mum and dad may give the
kid a good hiding and force him to go back to Beavers anyway. Which
means that you have been drawn into their problem and become part of
it rather than the solution.
By and large if the kid has done wrong, he/she knows it, and few have
the temerity to involve their parents when they know they are wrong
and have received what is seen as a justified bollocking - even at
Beaver age. Needless to say the level of bollocking increases as the
age group increases.
i hasten to add that I am on very friendly terms with most of our
beavers. Cubs and Scouts. By the time the trouble makers from Beavers
and Cubs reach Scouts and my domain, they are usually very well
behaved. The only problems we have are from incomers who think they
need to challenge the establishment to win status, in which case the
Alpha - male has his PLC lay down the law :-)
Ewan Scott
Ian N. Ford FRSH
districts and counties have guidelines on discipline policies. . If you
don't have a local policy contact me and I will try to scan in ours.
If the problem is with one particular child you need to consider a number of
possibilities including :
- family circumstances ( anything from birth of a new baby to family
break-up)
- issues at school such as bullying " spilling over " to Beavers
- specific learning disabilities - dyslexia, dyspraxia
- " gifted " child in need of further stimulation
- sensory impairment
- Attention Deficit / Hyperactivity Disorder and similar developmental
disorders such as Asperger Syndrome or autistic conditions . ( Some
estimates put incidence of AD/HD as between 3% - 5% )
- Sudden behavioural changes <may> be indicative of child abuse, but this is
a difficult
call even for trained professionals in the absence of other evidence or
disclosure.
- Dysfunctional family / absent or inconsistent discipline at home
You will often find other Beavers saying " he's like that at school too "
if the problem is more than boredom or conflict with particular individuals.
We all reflect our own experience of parenting. Quite a few years ago I had
a Cub Pack a few hundred yards from the Pack which my friend Bill ran.
Every year we had a few Cubs move from one to another. Kids came to me "
because Bill always shouts at us " ... he regularly blew steam, and most of
his kids accepted that was just his style. Kids went to Bill because they
felt uncomfortable with my " counselling " approach. Where kids did change
Pack it was often to the Pack where the leader had a similar sort of "
parenting style " to that they got at home, i.e. that with which they felt
most secure. Maybe your style of kid-management is mis-matching your "
problem " Beaver, and a move to another colony would help both of you.
Frank discussion with parents may yield further information. Your District
or County Special Needs Adviser / Commissioner should be able to assist.
My personal interest is in AD/HD ... if that is an issue feel free to
contact me by email at : add...@dircon.co.uk
Ian N Ford
Special Needs Adviser, Greenwich
Roger Woods
>Can any Beaver Leaders out there let me know how they approach discipline on
>a Beaver night.
>We find that some children misbehave to such an extent that we waste a lot
>of time which could be used more constructively.
>Never sure how far things should go before informing parents and considering
>whether child should be suspended.
>Would be grateful for any opinions on this or tips on how we could handle it
>more easily.
>
>Many thanks
>
>
>Ann Sherratt
>Beaver Leader
>48th Dublin - Lucan S.A.I.
>
We find that a "sin bin" with timeout periods works for us. We place
two chairs at opposite corners of the room facing the walls. Any
Beaver who misbehaves is put there for a 2 minutes and this increases
by one minute each time. It's simple to understand and we've found it
to be very effective.
Roger Woods
BSL 1St Sawley (All Saints) , Long Eaton
Ewan
I know that the sin bin is a common approach with younger children.
However, be careful since there have, I believe been court cases where
pre-school playgroup leaders have been sued for using this method.
Certainly in Kirklees it is no longer permitted and our local PPG have
had parents shouting at them for using the sin bin.
Ewan Scott
Dave Mayall
wrote:
>The letter itself is not very long, if there is enough interest, I can
>re-post it here.
Yes please!
--
Dave Mayall
SL 7th Stalybridge
Roger Woods
wrote:
I'd be interested in some more details Ewan.
Its not a course of action we would take lightly and after a few uses
the behaviour improved dramatically. don't use it now but we only have
to put the two chairs out and the noise - horse play stops
immedialrly.
What exactly were they sued for - are we losing our marbles?!?
Roger woods BSL
1St Sawley (All Saints)
Falco
someone needs time to think about his actions it is a useful place to have.
It is also an amazingly good deterrent the closer you get to picking up
time. So far I have known no Beaver actually wanting or willing to be in
the BBC when their Mum or Dad comes to pick them up.
Falco AVSL Foxley VSU
Ewan <10173...@compuserve.com> wrote in message
<369dd713...@news.mcmail.com>...
>On Thu, 14 Jan 1999 09:09:22 GMT, pau...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
>
>>In article <77jdb6$48m$1...@news.indigo.ie>,
>> <@indigo.ie> wrote:
>>> Can any Beaver Leaders out there let me know how they approach
discipline on
>>> a Beaver night.
>>> We find that some children misbehave to such an extent that we waste a
lot
>>> of time which could be used more constructively.
>>> Never sure how far things should go before informing parents and
considering
>>> whether child should be suspended.
>>> Would be grateful for any opinions on this or tips on how we could
handle it
>>> more easily.
>>
Falco
SNIP.
>However, be careful since there have, I believe been court cases where
>pre-school playgroup leaders have been sued for using this method.
>Certainly in Kirklees it is no longer permitted and our local PPG have
>had parents shouting at them for using the sin bin.
>
>Ewan Scott
Obvious answer is to put the parents in the Sin Bin for shouting at the
leaders. :o)
Before this is taken to frivolously, have you never been to a school
football or Rugby match where a slightly over vociferous parent has been
red-carded? It works absolute wonders....think on't.
Falco AVSL Foxley VSU
Ian N. Ford FRSH
Falco wrote in message <77q9cs$42t$2...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
>Our Colony has always (Since it started) had a "Bad Beaver" Chair and if
>someone needs time to think about his actions it is a useful place to have.
>It is also an amazingly good deterrent the closer you get to picking up
>time. So far I have known no Beaver actually wanting or willing to be in
>the BBC when their Mum or Dad comes to pick them up.
This is apalling ! The emphasis should be on directing attention to the
behaviour that can be changed, not to ridiculing a boy and giving him the
message that HE is bad.
Many behaviour problems are associated with low self-esteem and this only
serves to make it worse. At best this is bad practice ... at worst it is
psychological abuse.
Ian N Ford
Special Needs Adviser, Greenwich
Neil Williams
>This is apalling ! The emphasis should be on directing attention to the
>behaviour that can be changed, not to ridiculing a boy and giving him the
>message that HE is bad.
>Many behaviour problems are associated with low self-esteem and this only
>serves to make it worse. At best this is bad practice ... at worst it is
>psychological abuse.
If it works for them, good for them. Surely it is more of a deterrent than
an actual punishment, but I wouldn't call it abuse by any sense of the word.
When you're dealing with lots of kids peer pressure is very often more
effective than the 'take them to one side and explain what they have done
wrong' approach, which I don't believe is nearly as effective with younger
children, for example Beaver age.
I agree with you in the sense that it is important to make clear WHY the
punishment is taking place, but I don't see a problem with the approach -
for example sending someone out / to this chair / into the corner / telling
them they can't take part in Grand Howl and saying out loud "<name> - go
over there - it isn't acceptable to laugh during prayers" or whatever.
I hate to be blunt, but in cases where simple explanation doesn't work, you
NEED another approach, and it doesn't help particularly when people 'in the
know' state that something that works is wrong in this way. Scout leaders
are NOT child psychologists. We do our best under the circumstances, but in
the end 'in-depth' stuff is the job of the parent, not of us.
What next, are Leaders (or even worse, parents) going to be told they aren't
allowed / it is wrong to shout at children? A very extreme prediction, I
know, but the way things are going... :(
Neil
Falco
>>Our Colony has always (Since it started) had a "Bad Beaver" Chair and if
>>someone needs time to think about his actions it is a useful place to
have.
>>It is also an amazingly good deterrent the closer you get to picking up
>>time. So far I have known no Beaver actually wanting or willing to be in
>>the BBC when their Mum or Dad comes to pick them up.
>
>
>behaviour that can be changed, not to ridiculing a boy and giving him the
>message that HE is bad.
>Many behaviour problems are associated with low self-esteem and this only
>serves to make it worse. At best this is bad practice ... at worst it is
>psychological abuse.
>
>Special Needs Adviser, Greenwich
>
he didn't get enough sweeties as a child".
I assure you that some of our worst "behaviour problems" as Beavers are now
model citizens in the right sense of the phrase. Not purely because they
got punished when they did wrong things but obviously in spite of it.
Falco AVSL Foxley VSU
Peter Smith
<URL:mailto:i...@ford.dircon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Falco wrote in message <77q9cs$42t$2...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
> >Our Colony has always (Since it started) had a "Bad Beaver" Chair and if
> >someone needs time to think about his actions it is a useful place to have.
> >It is also an amazingly good deterrent the closer you get to picking up
> >time. So far I have known no Beaver actually wanting or willing to be in
> >the BBC when their Mum or Dad comes to pick them up.
>
>
> This is apalling ! The emphasis should be on directing attention to the
> behaviour that can be changed, not to ridiculing a boy and giving him the
> message that HE is bad.
> Many behaviour problems are associated with low self-esteem and this only
> serves to make it worse. At best this is bad practice ... at worst it is
> psychological abuse.
>
> Ian N Ford
> Special Needs Adviser, Greenwich
>
So Ian, what is the answer?
If you have a Beaver Scout who has been asked to stand with the rest of the
colony to sing 'Happy Birthday' to another Beaver and the candles are lit
and the lights dimmed and that Beaver then runs off and hides under the
piano thinking that no one has noticed him.
As this running about in the dark is hazardous and is giving the rest of
the Beavers the mistaken impression that this sort of behaviour is *cool*
how should the child be disciplined - or is that the wrong term?
How should this Beaver and all of the rest be made to understand that this
sort of behaviour is unacceptable to the Leaders and could be bad for the
Beavers own safety?
--
Peter Smith, 3rd Kingswinford Scout Group, Dudley West, West Mercia.
Sponsored by Kingswinford Methodist Church, Stream Road, Kingswinford, UK.
mailto:<mer...@duewest.demon.co.uk> - Due West, local District Scout Shop.
* Any opinions expressed are my own and are not official Scouting policy *
Ian N. Ford FRSH
Falco wrote in message <77r8km$dvb$1...@plutonium.btinternet.com>...
>This appears to be in the same league as "He is only a bank robber because
>he didn't get enough sweeties as a child".
>I assure you that some of our worst "behaviour problems" as Beavers are now
>model citizens in the right sense of the phrase. Not purely because they
>got punished when they did wrong things but obviously in spite of it.
I did not say there was anything wrong with " time out " ... it works. The
point is the name " Bad Beaver Chair " ... it implies that the child is bad.
My point is that if we are going to overcome behavioural problems we need to
get a message that whilst there are unacceptable behaviours, the youngsters
themselves are accepted, warts and all. We want to try to help them to learn
self control. The other way is to give them an image of being a bad kid
which they can go grow into.
It is not a matter of sweeties, Falco. It is a matter of recognising that
punishment and humiliation do not teach moral values, they just teach a
desire not to get caught. Far better to catch a kid doing something right
and give sincere praise than to punish him or her for doing something wrong.
Ian N Ford
Falco
Ian N. Ford FRSH wrote in message <36a15...@newsread3.dircon.co.uk>...
>
>
>I did not say there was anything wrong with " time out " ... it works. The
>point is the name " Bad Beaver Chair " ... it implies that the child is
bad.
Does this mean that you would also not tell a child they were "good"? Or do
you say something along the lines of "Although I realise that you in
yourself are a model child, this behaviour is unacceptable"? I would argue
that in a colony situation with 5 year olds then sometimes reasoning is
inneffective and deterrent works, however this is only my opinion, not Holy
Writ.
>My point is that if we are going to overcome behavioural problems we need
to
>get a message that whilst there are unacceptable behaviours, the youngsters
>themselves are accepted, warts and all.
This is where I feel a Bad Beaver Chair actually argues in your favour,
except in terminology. Would it be better to call it a "Bad Behaviour Chair"
and just tell the boys that it is the behaviour we are punishing and that
the Boy just happens to be attached?
> We want to try to help them to learn
>self control.
No argument there
>The other way is to give them an image of being a bad kid
>which they can go grow into.
>
>It is not a matter of sweeties, Falco. It is a matter of recognising that
>punishment and humiliation do not teach moral values, they just teach a
>desire not to get caught.
Hmmmm, not all the time, they do however promote a linkage between "crime"
and punishment which is a pretty useful lesson.
> Far better to catch a kid doing something right
>and give sincere praise than to punish him or her for doing something
wrong.
>
Absolutely right, but who said that using a Bad Beaver Chair meant excluding
doing this? In my opinion you read too much into it. Our Beaver Leaders
make a great deal of use of praise and "Catching people doing it right" and
very little use of the "Bad Beaver Chair". They aren't ogres trying to abuse
children they are merely volunteers doing their best to put something back
in to society.
Falco AVSL Foxley VSU
Ian N. Ford FRSH
Falco wrote in message <77sssn$lh9$1...@mendelevium.btinternet.com>...
>
>Does this mean that you would also not tell a child they were "good"?
I would usually say something like " Well done, Alpha Lodge ... all sitting
up straight ready for the next game. " or " Jimmy, your uniform is a lot
neater today - well done. " In other words, both praise and criticism need
to be specific.
>Or do you say something along the lines of "Although I realise that you in
>yourself are a model child, this behaviour is unacceptable"?
I would usually refer to rules. " You know that we don't hit other people
at Beavers. " Maybe I would follow up with " I think that you can control
your temper if
you try ... but if you can't, the first time I will get you to sit on your
own until you calm down. And if that doesn't work, I will ask you parent to
come and take you home."
This avoids :
" But Freddy called me names ... "
( We don't fight at Beavers. I will deal with Freddy later.)
" But John started it "
( We don't fight at Beavers. Walk away and tell a Leader.)
" You are always picking on me ! "
(You know the rules. They are the same for everybody.)
For some kids I would say you need individual, SMART objectives :
- Specific - stay sitting down, quietly, with your arms and legs folded
- Measurable - during the opening ceremony
- Attainable
- Realistic
If that works, reward. Maybe have a similar objective regarding the closing
... so even if he blows it during the opening he can " redeem himself "
during the closing. It may be that " sit quietly every time you are told to
be in your lodges " is not realistic for a particular child, and you need
a more attainable standard to trigger the reward. The reward can be praise,
or points for his lodge, or a chance to choose the next game ... whatever
works.
>I would argue that in a colony situation with 5 year olds then sometimes
reasoning is
>inneffective and deterrent works, however this is only my opinion, not Holy
Writ.
It depends ... if you recognise that most Beavers are still concrete
thinkers and reason in their terms. In other words, an appeal to abstract
moral imperatives is unlikely to be successful. " How would YOU feel if
someone called you names ? " might work ... this is the age at which kids
can often understand right and wrong in terms of reciprocity, but it is not
until later that altruism emerges.
>This is where I feel a Bad Beaver Chair actually argues in your favour,
>except in terminology. Would it be better to call it a "Bad Behaviour
Chair"
>and just tell the boys that it is the behaviour we are punishing and that
>the Boy just happens to be attached?
Again, I would not use the term " punishment " ... Using the three count
method I would first remind the child of the " rule " : " Jimmy, you know
we don't chew
gum in the hall. " If the behaviour persists - " Jimmy - that's your
second warning. "
Maybe add an instruction - " Spit that chewing gum out into the bin. " Allow
time to comply ... " Jimmy, that's three. Five minute time out. " At no
point have I said
explicitly that either Jimmy or his behaviour is good or bad ... it is a
purely
behavioural approach.
Hopefully the Beavers will have been involved in deciding, or at least
agreeing to, the colony rules. At this age kids think more in terms of fair
/ unfair than right / wrong. Indeed, they are more likely to invoke rules
inappropriately - e.g. an accidental injury during a game is often regarded
as the same as a
deliberate foul. They still have problems in ascribing motivation to
others, even though they can recognise it in themselves. How many times
have we heard :
A: " He hit me, Big Beaver ! "
B: " I didn't mean to ... it was an accident. "
A: " No it wasn't ... "
>Hmmmm, not all the time, they do however promote a linkage between "crime"
>and punishment which is a pretty useful lesson.
Up to a point. It's a bit like the law ... most people are fundamentally
honest and obey the law most of the time. If they are tempted to digress the
fear of public exposure and opprobium is probably more significant than
the punishment. ( E.g. for many people the real deterrent for shoplifting
is not the fine but the fact that it might reported in the local paper, a
criminal record
will affect job prospects, etc.) Persistent criminals do not appear to be
deterred even by the " three strikes " legislation in some parts of USA. If
you don't have any significant stake in society then societal norms will be
far less relevant than if you have something to lose. Punishment is not a
deterrent for truly impulsive behaviour. ( And at Beaver age MOST
negative behaviour is impulsive rather than pre-meditated ! )
>Absolutely right, but who said that using a Bad Beaver Chair meant
excluding
>doing this? In my opinion you read too much into it. Our Beaver Leaders
>make a great deal of use of praise and "Catching people doing it right" and
>very little use of the "Bad Beaver Chair". They aren't ogres trying to
abuse
>children they are merely volunteers doing their best to put something back
>in to society.
I am certainly not saying they are orgres. The original post asked for ideas
about what worked. I agree that my short post was a little too sweeping in
its condemnation ...and if that was taken amiss that was not my intention.
I am also aware that on occasions I have dealt with situations less than
optimally, usually because I acted off the cuff rather than from a rational
position.
I think we can only be effective as youth workers if we have an
understanding of the psychology of the kids we are dealing with. I am not
saying we need to be barefoot psychologists or counsellors, but at least
what we do should be based in the developmental needs of the age group we
are working with. IMHBCO.
There are people who have a problem with behaviourist approaches. My point
was that kids who have persistent behaviour problems are often told that
they are BAD when in fact their " offences " are impulsive rather than
premeditated badness. If you get a reputation as the " bad boy " you
don't have any incentive to change - in fact, there may be a temptation to
live up to it. For some kids any attention is better than no attention, and
if you can't get peer approval for activities that adults approve of, then
get yourself recognised as the toughest / rudest / naughtiest kid on the
block.
YiS
Ian Ford
Special Needs Adviser, Greenwich
Roger Woods
<i...@ford.dircon.co.uk> wrote:
>It is not a matter of sweeties, Falco. It is a matter of recognising that
>punishment and humiliation do not teach moral values, they just teach a
>desire not to get caught. Far better to catch a kid doing something right
>and give sincere praise than to punish him or her for doing something wrong.
>
>
>Ian N Ford
>
>
>
Ian,
Sorry but your wrong. It much better to do both. You reward when they
do something good and punish when they do something unacceptable. We
also us our mascot "Bernie Beaver" as a reward for the beaver who, on
the night, has been either very good, done something very nice or
generally excelled. Probably not the best description but you will get
my drift.If they all behave badly then no one gets the mascot.
W often lose sight of the fact that Leaders need to get enjoyment and
satisfaction from the meetings otherwise they will get discouraged and
go away.
Ian N. Ford FRSH
>Sorry but your wrong. It much better to do both. You reward when they
>do something good and punish when they do something unacceptable.
My post was not about punishment, but about LABELLING. It was about having a
child sit in a " Bad Beaver chair " if you recall. NOT about time out or
punishment per se. My reading of the original post was that it was not about
" time out " or allowing a child to cool off. [From memory , but I think I
have the gist ... ] " None of the Beavers wants to be in the BBC when the
parents arrive " ... in other words, the sanction is a fear of being seen
by other children and their parents to be a " Bad Beaver ". I accept that I
may have read more into the original post than was intended, but I saw this
as possibly damaging to a child's self-esteem.
" The sanctions applied in the case of unacceptable behaviour must take
account of the age and stage of development of the child, be given at the
time, be relevant to to the action or actions and be fair. The child should
always be told why his behaviour is not acceptable and the reasons for
applying a particular sanction. "
[ Ref: Children Act 1989 : Guidance and Regulations Vol. 2 " Family Support,
Day Care and Educational Provision for Young Children " para 6.21. ]
Although most Beaver Scout Colonies fall outside the requirements to
register because meetings do not last longer than two hours [ CA
Sect.71(2) ] the above is, IMHBCO, an indication of the standard of care
reasonably expected.
" Inappropriate non-physical punishment " can constitute a form of
emotional abuse.
[ DoH 1988 " Protecting Children : A Guide for Social Workers undertaking a
Comprehensibve Assessment " ]
And Peter Smith wrote in message ...
>So Ian, what is the answer?
>If you have a Beaver Scout who has been asked to stand with the rest of the
>colony to sing 'Happy Birthday' to another Beaver and the candles are lit
>and the lights dimmed and that Beaver then runs off and hides under the
>piano thinking that no one has noticed him.
>How should this Beaver and all of the rest be made to understand that this
>sort of behaviour is unacceptable to the Leaders and could be bad for the
>Beavers own safety?
If I knew anything about your group, your Colony, your Leaders, this boy,
his normal behaviour, his family background, the layout of the meeting place
... I might hazard a guess about how I would handle it.
If I were asked in my role of ADC(LT) or Special Needs Adviser I would want
to observe him at a colony meeting, talk to the Leaders and get them to work
through their hypotheses.
These are some of my questions :
- Is this a one-off or part of a number of problems ?
- How have problems ( if any) been handled in the past ?
- Family background ?
- Any sign of educational or behavioural problems ?
- Any relevant medical history ?
- What was everyone doing immediately prior to him running off ?
- Did anything happen whilst the lights were being dimmed ?
- Did any of the other kids do anything in the darkness to provoke the
behaviour ?
- Did he come out on his own volition, and what did he do then ?
- Did anyone ask him his explanation ? What was it ?
- Can the parents provide any idea as to why this happened ?
- Is he afraid of fire or candles ?
- Did he know the lights were going to be dimmed ?
- What makes you say the others thought running around was " cool " ?
- Is he normally a kid the other follow ? A follower ? An isolate ?
- How did the other kids react (a) a the time, and (b) later ?
- How does the Leader define the " problem " ?
- Maybe he doesn't like the kid whose birthday this is, and this was a
protest ?
- What is the Leader's assessment of the the probability of this behaviour
recurring ?
You said :
>As this running about in the dark is hazardous and is giving the rest of
>the Beavers the mistaken impression that this sort of behaviour is *cool*
>how should the child be disciplined - or is that the wrong term?
- What were the actual, objective risks to his safety ? He didn't leave the
room. What significant harm could he cause / suffer under the piano ? If
the hall was not in total darkness, there are no dangerous obstructions, and
all the others are in one place, what is the dangers ?
- What makes you think the others see his behaviour as " cool " as opposed
to eccentric or " naughty " ? If they do think it is cool, do they all now
run around and hide under the piano ? Some of them ? Any of them ?
- If I asked one of the other Beavers what he had done wrong, what would
they say ?
What " rule " or norm has he broken ? Is there a rule not to go under the
piano ? Is there a rule against running in the dark ? Is there a rule that
everyone must sing " Happy Birthday " ? For him to be punished there must
be a violation of a rule.
Sorry, no glib answers ... It is a matter of individual judgement in the
circumstances.
I suggest that as Scouters we need to be able and prepared to justify the
sanctions used on any occasion, not because " they work for us " or that "
they didn't do me any harm " but in terms of appropriateness to the age
group we are working with. That means having a clearly thought out strategy.
My own feeling is to err on the side
of caution, and to leave the question of " punishment " to the parents. I
admit that I may be " wrong " but I feel a lot safer that way.
Ian N Ford
Kevin Naughton
news:36a18d4f....@news.radiant.net...
>
>"Daddy, am I a bad boy?
>"No, son, you are not a bad boy. But what you did was bad. You should not
>do that."
Karl,
Well said.
Kevin.
--
Kevin Naughton, Cub Scout Leader
18th. St. Helens, Haydock St. James, Scout Group, Merseyside, UK
http://www.haydock.org
Warning: remove .spamfree. in address if replying by email
Steve Spicer
<<snip>>
Having been around more than I would care to admit, I've seen discipline
methods ranging from things similar to the "Bad
Beaver Chair" to complete lack of acknowledgement that a child is doing
anything wrong.
Its difficult to say, from a distance, what the answer is someone elses
discipline problems.
Maintaining control of up to 24 potentially unruly young people can be a
daunting task. Most leaders, even if trained, have spent probably the grand
total of 2 hours discussing methods of discipline with other leaders, and
have rarely seen, unless their ADC (LT) is really on the ball, effective
methods of positive reinforcement in practice. Remember that when a lot of
leaders were at school they were probably sent for the cane when they
misbehaved. So as a result leaders invent systems to use in their colonies,
packs, troops, units, using their earlier life influences.
I've read a lot of books and publications on discipline and effective
control methods (its a horrible term, control methods, but that sums up what
you are trying to do). All of them suggest similar things- be positive,
reward good behaviour, etc, but the fact is that unless you see these
methods being employed its hard to use them yourself.
A big list of things to assess, like the one provided above, is all well and
good if the only thing you are interested in is one Beaver Scout. Trained,
experienced leaders may think of these things and ask them involuntarily,
but for the majority, IMHO, it might as well be a list in a foreign
language, and immensely time consuming, particularly if your group has a
number of unruly children.
I can't condemn the "Bad Beaver Chair" idea out of hand. It is not something
I would use, or even feel comfortable seeing. But I have been trained to
know differently. Unless the leader concerned has had some support and
guidance as to "effective" and "positive" discipline then the fault does not
fall only on one pair of shoulders.
Steve Spicer
Aspley Guise Scouts SL
Ewan
>On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 09:18:10 GMT, 10173...@compuserve.com (Ewan)
>wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 15 Jan 1999 00:26:17 GMT, g8...@ukrs.org (Roger Woods) wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 14 Jan 1999 00:17:13 -0000, <@indigo.ie> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Can any Beaver Leaders out there let me know how they approach discipline on
>>>>a Beaver night.
>>>>We find that some children misbehave to such an extent that we waste a lot
>>>>of time which could be used more constructively.
>>>>Never sure how far things should go before informing parents and considering
>>>>whether child should be suspended.
>>>>Would be grateful for any opinions on this or tips on how we could handle it
>>>>more easily.
>>>>
>>>>Many thanks
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Ann Sherratt
>>>>Beaver Leader
>>>>48th Dublin - Lucan S.A.I.
>>>>
>>>
>>>We find that a "sin bin" with timeout periods works for us. We place
>>>two chairs at opposite corners of the room facing the walls. Any
>>>Beaver who misbehaves is put there for a 2 minutes and this increases
>>>by one minute each time. It's simple to understand and we've found it
>>>to be very effective.
>>>
>>I know that the sin bin is a common approach with younger children.
>>However, be careful since there have, I believe been court cases where
>>pre-school playgroup leaders have been sued for using this method.
>>Certainly in Kirklees it is no longer permitted and our local PPG have
>>had parents shouting at them for using the sin bin.
>>
On further investigation it seems that what happened was that a
parent. or parents complained about the use of a sin bin and
threatened to sue. The local authority sought advice and were advised
that there would be a strong case against them, and they issued
guidance to PPg that they should not use a sin bin.
Ewan Scott
Ewan
<will...@cs.man.ac.uk> wrote:
Snip
>What next, are Leaders (or even worse, parents) going to be told they aren't
>allowed / it is wrong to shout at children? A very extreme prediction, I
>know, but the way things are going... :(
>
You will guess from previous postings that I am playing devil's
advocate here, But in fact the sin bin/ bad beaver chair is seen as
pychological cruelty by some sectors and some social work departments.
As for shouting at the kids, well that is just not on. You have to
explain as many times as it needs that sticking their hands in the
electric fire is dangerous. You must never slap their hands and raise
your voice to intimate to them that if they do this it will be a
painful experience. You must let them learn by understanding and
explanaition, or by experience so the next time Johnny is at a
campfire and lights the end of a stick and waves it about, you must
not shout at him , you must not take the stick away from him, but you
must explain the situation calmly to him, or let him burn another
kid's jacket or poke his eye out in oreder that he will learn from the
experience.
My brother is an electrician, he started work with a local TV/Video
shop as a teenager and was amazed at the number of times he was
called out to repair videos, only to find toys, sweets and all sorts
jammed in the player. He said, the parents are the type who explain
everything, they never shout or smack hands. Why don't they just tell
them , NO!
Now he has his own family, and we love them dearly, but he has been
converted and for the first three or four years was continually
stripping the video to remove toy cars and sweets.
My kids on the other hand, whilst far from being little angels, have
never stuck their hands in the electric fire and never shoved sweets
in the video. they have a respect for property, theirs and other
peoples'.
But disciplining the former with the method for the latter can cause a
great deal of grief at Beavers/Cubs/ Scouts be prepared for angry
mother to unleash all that pent up anger she has refrained from
releasing on her children on you. :-)
Ewan Scott
Ewan
<ke...@haydock.spamfree.org> wrote:
>>Karl Pollak <pol...@fightspam.net> wrote in message
>news:36a18d4f....@news.radiant.net...
>>
>>"Daddy, am I a bad boy?
>>"No, son, you are not a bad boy. But what you did was bad. You should not
>>do that."
>
Ah, yes. But that only works if the child recognises that a wrong has
been done by him/herself.
The task we sometimes face is getting the child to recognise that what
he/she is doing is wrong, or may have unfortunate consequences. I am
convinced that many children come to us, and to school without the
first idea of the difference between right and wrong. We cannot
sacriofice the needs of the balance of the section to teach the
individual the difference beteen right and wrong by the most socially
acceptable, scientific method. if you have a full section and only the
minimum leaders than you have to take the quickest action available or
stand losing the rest of the section, either from the movement or to
anarchy.
You can discuss all you like the preferred methods, the scientific
methods, but at the end of the day you do what you have to do to kep
things on an acceptable level of disipline in general - I've watched
the explainers and the reasoners spend time on a troublesome subject
only to allow the rest of their charges degenerate to a screaming mass
at risk of endangering themselves and others due to the lack of
attention being paid to them.
Ewan Scott
Ian N. Ford FRSH
Ewan <10173...@compuserve.com> wrote
>As for shouting at the kids, well that is just not on. You have to
>explain as many times as it needs that sticking their hands in the
>electric fire is dangerous. You must never slap their hands and raise
>your voice to intimate to them that if they do this it will be a
>painful experience. You must let them learn by understanding and
>explanaition, or by experience so the next time Johnny is at a
>campfire and lights the end of a stick and waves it about, you must
>not shout at him , you must not take the stick away from him, but you
>must explain the situation calmly to him, or let him burn another
>kid's jacket or poke his eye out in oreder that he will learn from the
>experience.
I take it this is meant to be ironic ?
Where there is a risk of injury, of course intervention is called for. If a
Scout has a temper tantrum and has another kid on the floor and is kicking
in the kidneys ( as happened when I was visiting a troop in camp ) then you
have to intervene. I did use physical restraint, and actually pinned him to
the floor until he calmed down. I did so after verbal intervention and
trying to block him did not work. After the event I documented the incident,
informed the DC and GSL, and told the boy's parent. The parent withdrew him
from the troop before the GSL could dismiss him.
The point is there must be no more than reasonable force to prevent injury
and protect property. In the case above, removing the stick or restraining
the child from putting his hand in the fire is part of the overall
responsibility to protect children from harm. If time and circumstances do
not permit an oral instruction or warning, or it ignored.then of course
reasonable physical intervention is appropriate.
One of the toughest calls I had was as co-director of a district event when
a Scout punched his Scout Leader. He was a fairly solid fourteen year-old,
so it was not a trivial tap. The problem was the Leader was at least in
part to blame. The Scout was known to have some psychological problems, and
was under some stress. When he became oppositional the Leader made a fatal
mistake of stepping foward into the boy's personal space. The Leader was
very authoritarian and had to " win " the " contest of wills ". The Scout
was dismissed from the troop, and rightly so. But the whole incident could
have been avoided if the SL had been more aware of the body language.
Peter Smith
<URL:mailto:i...@ford.dircon.co.uk> wrote:
<SNIP>
> You said :
>
> >As this running about in the dark is hazardous and is giving the rest of
> >the Beavers the mistaken impression that this sort of behaviour is *cool*
> >how should the child be disciplined - or is that the wrong term?
>
> - What were the actual, objective risks to his safety ? He didn't leave the
> room. What significant harm could he cause / suffer under the piano ? If
> the hall was not in total darkness, there are no dangerous obstructions, and
> all the others are in one place, what is the dangers ?
<SNIP>
> For him to be punished there must
> be a violation of a rule.
>
> Sorry, no glib answers ... It is a matter of individual judgement in the
> circumstances.
> I suggest that as Scouters we need to be able and prepared to justify the
> sanctions used on any occasion, not because " they work for us " or that "
> they didn't do me any harm " but in terms of appropriateness to the age
> group we are working with. That means having a clearly thought out strategy.
> My own feeling is to err on the side
> of caution, and to leave the question of " punishment " to the parents. I
> admit that I may be " wrong " but I feel a lot safer that way.
>
> Ian N Ford
>
Thank you for your reply Ian.
I could possibly answer some of the questions you came back with but I don't
think it is appropriate to at this time.
If you refer to the above I used the term *disciplined* I did not say *punished*
I consider there to be a difference.
As to your last comment, we as Scout Leaders are acting 'in loco parentis' and
therefore have a responsibility to *disipline* inappropriate behaviour.
In the 'piano incident' there may not have been any obvious danger but surely
that is the time to make similes to other more dangerous situations and to
use the incident as a learning experience.
How about if the child ran off to hide in a small cave whilst exploring the
local mines. (Purely as an example?)
It is the inappropriateness of trying to 'hide' from the group, during an
activity that all of the Beaver Scouts enjoy, when the approval of the
Leadership would not be given. So the Beaver is trying to 'get one over'
on the Leaders. It is this that I consider the be the unacceptable behaviour.
I would not have allowed my own children to act in this manner so I feel that
I have every right to expect a normal Beaver Scout not to act thusly.
If the parents had informed the Beaver Leaders of any family problems, behavioral
problems, learning problems etc. as we ask them to, then obviously allowances
and additional support / supervision could be used.
But a naughty child that should know better can only be dealt with by correct
discipline procedures.
Ewan
<i...@ford.dircon.co.uk> wrote:
I did say, devil'ss advocate.
There has to be a compromise, a middle line which is acceptable to
all. I no more agree with beating children, no matter how infuraioting
they may be than I agree that reasoning and explanation is always the
answer.
One kid may respond to a single no, don't do that it will hurt/is
wrong, etc., others need to have the specific details of why it will
hurt and why something is wrong. And I don't mean - it is wrong and
it will hurt if you do it again because I will make it hurt.
In an ideal world one set of disiplinary codes would be the solution,
but we don't live in an ideal world and I'm sure we all treat each
situation and each individual as we must in order to handle the
problem.
Ewan Scott
Ewan
>
>But a naughty child that should know better can only be dealt with by correct
>discipline procedures.
>
he is being naughty. The other way of looking at things assumes the
cxhild does not know he is being naughty and needs to have this
explained to him. Oh, and he is not naughty, but his actions are
inappropriate - now where have I heard that before?
Ewan Scott