If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"toto" wrote in message ... On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:36:58 -0500, "Donna Metler" wrote: And teachers are told not to use rewards because it "ruins intrinsic motivation". So there are no grades then? No report cards? Grades are merely a measurement device. Thus, the reward of a good grade is the reward of doing something successfully, much as winning a game because one played it well is a reward or playing a song on the piano well is a reward. Conversely, bad grades "punish" in the same sense that losing a game as a result of making mistakes is a "punishment" or making mistakes while playing the piano is a "punishment." The "reward" or "punishment" inherent in grades is intrinsic to the child's knowing that he is doing something well or poorly. It is not something extrinsic intended solely for the purpose of manipulation. Indeed, the only way children WON'T feel the reward of being highly successful in their studies or the "punishment" of being less successful is if adults refuse to provide the children with accurate information about how well they are doing. Personally, I view hiding information from children out of fear that knowing the truth might hurt their "self-esteem" as reprehensible. True self-esteem comes from recognizing one's abilities and limitations and regarding it as success to do one's best even if other people's best is better, not from ignorance. And false self-esteem founded on ignorance is doomed to failure in the long term because once children see the truth, their old sense of self-esteem collapses and they have no foundation on which to build a new sense of self-esteem to replace it. Nathan |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
"Doan" wrote in message ... "Chris is now admitting that there are evidence of beneficial effects of low-level spanking. Good, but he went on to misrepresent the Straus & Mouradin (1998) study. As I have pointed out early, and Chris cannot dispute this, the study only asked the mothers thus there is no true "never-spanked" group to speak of. Furthermore, this study included children as old as 14 years and by asking only about spankings in the last 6-months, there is a period of up to 13.5 years where spankings were not even accounted for. In short, the study just don't support what Chris claimed above." Unless my memory is failing me miserably, Straus and Mouradian's 1998 study did include a category of mothers who spanked but had not spanked in the last six months. So it did draw a distinction between those who never spanked and those who did not spank recently. Of course that still leaves the issue of how many mothers might have started off never intending to spank, didn't like their results, and ended up changing their minds and spanking at least once. When a group is allowed to eject at least some of its less successful results into another group, that can easily make the group look more effective than it really is. |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Doan wrote:
On 16 Jun 2004, Kane wrote: ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doan" Newsgroups: alt.parenting.spanking,alt.parenting.solutions,mis c.kids,alt.activism.children Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 3:18 PM Subject: "Parenting Without Punishing" I wouldn't this far. Parent without using punishment? We know. You don't have the capacity. Many have it and use it. Some got it the hard way, but thinking and learning. So where are they? How have their children faired? Did they grow up to be a Mother Theresa? A Ted Turner? Or do they grow up to be like you and Steve ? ;-) Doan ------------------ You'd be glad to have a kid like me! And you never would. Steve |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Donna Metler wrote:
"Lesa" wrote in message ... "jitney" wrote in message om... The very title of this thread indicates a the kind of egghead academianistic theorizing that is so full of **** that such people need colostomy bags hooked up to their ears. If you raise a child without punishing bad behavior, you are inflicting a criminal on society and should yourself be held accountable. People that advocate mindless theories like this would be far more useful to society if they removed the grafitti that their hellion brats put up on the walls in the first place.-Jitney If one praises "good" behavior and treats a chid with repsect, talking to said child when "bad" things occur, there is no need for punishment. With all children? ------------------ If you do it 1) from the start, or 2) long enough to deprogram them, yes indeed. With non-neurotypical children? ------------------ Wire them up, we'll still do better than you do! With children adopted at the age of 3 from foreign countries? With children in foster care? ----------------------------- It does work, takes a while, but the results are worth it. Your results will always be worse over time. You see, "teaching without punishing" has been pushed down the throats of the educational system for more than a decade (I've been teaching that long). ANd while it works with some children-the naturally compliant kids who will burst into tears at the thought that they've failed an adult, there are others who definitely take advantage of the situation. ----------------------------- Then you're doing it wrong. The result is what you see in many public schools today (probably private ones, too)-a bunch of kids who are very sure that nothing you can do will affect them. They don't care about the relationship, or about pleasing the teacher. They don't care about pleasing their parents. They don't care about long-term results. ---------------------- Then they have no friends. BE THEIR FRIEND! If you have no time for that, if all you do is neglect to do the same evil **** you used to, of course that won't work right! If they do something that in adult life would be found criminal, then you have to sentence them to "jail". If they do things that an adult is allowed to do, leave them alone, or ask their help. And the results is that no child in the same classroom gets a good education. ---------------- Jail the evildoer, or send them home. The latter will scare the more abused ones more, but jail is boring. A few times in a featureless room with no furniture for an hour or two and they will avoid it if you're kind to them when they come out. But you must ONLY use jail when they abuse others criminally. And, it has been my impression that the "don't you DARE punish my child because I don't believe in punitive parenting" parents are the ones who generally have the WORST behaved children, and who stand up for their child, shielding them from even natural consequenses the most-rather than the other way around. ----------------------- You oughta see the way THEY treat them AT HOME! It is their paranoia of their home-behavior being discovered that causes them to lash out first and PRETEND to be a non-punitive parent. Actually they're just possessive of their favorite "punching bag" and the school getting close enough to their kid to find out!! Those parents who do use consequences at home generally don't have to use many. They're not shrieking lunatics beating their child with an extention cord (actually, those are more likely to be the parent who has never before punished their child and then snaps-the worst cases of abuse we've had in the school were exactly that). Rather, they've learned that saying "NO" and enforcing that "When I say NO, and you don't listen, there are consequenses" works. Punishment doesn't always mean spanking. It doesn't have to ever mean spanking. But there needs to be some way of showing that the child doesn't always have complete control of all situations. ------------------------ Terror is violence, no matter if threat of harm, or the few instances of harm that were done to cowe them. It makes kids swear revenge, and that leads to hatred of others and society even if they leave their parents to linger in nursing homes with bone-deep bed-sores. Steve |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
In fairness to non-punitive parenting techniques, public schools are probably a pretty lousy laboratory from which to see how good their results are. Suppose you take a child who is used to finding cooperative win-win solutions at home, and you put him in a school where the teacher keeps telling him what to do all the time. Suddenly, the child goes from having parents who bend over backward to cooperate to having an adult in charge whose job description doesn't allow much room for cooperation. -------------------- You can bully such teachers by arranging appointments with them and haranguing them, they are late getting home a number of times and they learn not to **** with your kid. Also, you let the kid leave school at 14 or 15 or home-school them and dummy the reports to the state. If you're a great parent your kid will learn more on their own anyway. Worse, where the child's love for and relationship with his parents provides a motivation for cooperating with their desires, the child does not have similar love for or a similar relationship with the teacher. ---------------------- Nonsense, the model of everyone is the parent. It's hard to even convince them the teacher might not be nice if YOU are! Ultimately, what a purely non-punitive parenting style needs is either home schooling or a kind of school that is more oriented toward cooperating with the child's desires. And in a voucher system, parents who want to could experiment with such schools without imposing their preferences (or their children) onto others. Personally, I would expect mixed results from such schools, with some bending over too far backwards catering to children's whims but others finding ways to interest children in learning. ----------------------------------- We need to ban vouchers because it causes societal schizm. We need to subject everyone to viciousness so that they'll gang up on it and change it. But if parents who use non-punitive techniques at home do want to send their children to a school that is not prepared to cater sufficiently to their children's desires, I think they should have two choices: either the parents accept responsibility for finding non-punitive solutions that deal with the issue to the school's satisfaction in a timely manner, or they allow the school to punish. Anything else is grossly unfair to the other children in the class, and also to the teacher whose hands are tied by both the school administration and the parents. Nathan ------------------- Nonsense, kids who are treated properly are no trouble at all at school, leave them alone as if you're ignoring them and they'll do what they ought to do anyway and learn by osmosis! These are the kind who read a book in math class and ace the test. I was, my kids were. Steve |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Donna Metler wrote:
"toto" wrote in message No, actually, what has been pushed is *not* teaching without punishing, though teaching without corporal punishment has been pushed in 27 states for more than a decade. Using different punishments like detentions and bad grades is still punitive. And what has been pushed is using material rewards like stickers and bribes which is the other side of the control coin. It works just as poorly. Detention isn't allowed in my school-too many parents don't want it. IN general, just about everything which could be deemed "punitive" has been disallowed. A teacher in my school was given a formal reprimand just for requiring that students clean up a mess that they had made-because it was "humiliating" for the students. And teachers are told not to use rewards because it "ruins intrinsic motivation". ------------------- You're merely lying in everything you just said. How pitiful. Steve |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"R. Steve Walz" wrote in message ... Nathan A. Barclay wrote: I have very little idea of how reliably purely non-punitive parenting techniques really work, and while people like Chris, Steve, and the article's author would LIKE to believe that such techniques would always work, they do not seem to be able to provide any solid evidence. ------------------- Just because we're WHOLLY UN-interested in the idiotic "cite-wars" that happen, when neurotic religiously-tortured morally-offended Right-wingnuts try to deluge this thread with their phony X-spurt website cut-n-pasties in response to our voluminous peer-reviewed journals that anyone CAN read if they want to, Steve, I find it insulting that you simply assume I would do that sort of thing. --------------------- That can't be helped. I believe you would if I permitted it. Rightists always do. I know the difference between opinion and evidence, and I have no interest in quoting opinions as if they were evidence. Doing so would only hurt my credibility, which I place a high value on. -------------------- Evidence does no good either, and is both a deception and a disingenuity, because any single bit of it alone is insufficient to the honest task, and any author is unavailable for examination. It reminds me of calling people on your cellphone to ask them! It's boorish compared to honestly airing the structural arguments for and against the issue. does NOT support YOUR moronic accusation that "they do not seem to be able to provide any solid evidence." In fact the reverse is true, by factors of ten to one or MORE!! Go ask all the child development authorities you want, and write down their opinions, and then let those stand as a vote for which is the Truth, if you're stupid enough to need that! Scientific truth is not determined by majority vote. ------------------- True, but people who collect selective support and discard most that do not should be required to do so if only to keep them honest! It is determined by the proper use of scientific methodologies and ONLY by the proper use of scientific methodologies. If scientists express opinions that go beyond what the methodologies they use can support, those opinions are merely PERSONAL opinions, not science. -------------------- The thing is, it cannot BE carried on fairly either on Usenet OR in any private conversation, the budget is not available! Any such situation then requries instead that people argue from structure, which is the way people actually change minds and come to believe new things anyway, and NOT through evidence, as odd as that seems! In the past, Chris suggested a few studies for me to read. However, from what I recall, those studies were always in terms of whether or not childen were spanked (or, in some cases, whether or not they were spanked within a prticular timeframe). As best I recall, none of them separated out a group in which no punishment of any kind was used, or in which punishment was used only in regard to situations in which the children's behavior would be a crime for adults. Therefore, the results of those studies provide no scientific basis for evaluating the results parents get from using purely non-punitive techniques. ----------------------- It takes an infinitude of studies to convince absolutely in a peer- reviewed arena, but doing so is not actually needed to prove anything reasonably. Instead, the reasonableness of believing this or that, namely an honest impersonal structural argument is superior! If you are aware of any studies that looked specifically at parents who never punished at all, or who never punished except when the children's behavior would be considered a crime in adults, or some such, I would probably find it interesting to look at. ----------------- In this culture those would be hard to find, but in the entire body of the research that conclusion is entirely implied by the trends in history and the research overall. This can be discerned by the logical reasonable person. (Although in order to constitute legitimate science, the study would also have to deal with the issue of parents who started off using purely non-punitive techniques, did not like their results, and started punishing at least occasionally. Showing that parents who like a technique's results well enough to stick with it tend to have good results is great for showing that it can work, but does not give a clear indication of how reliably it works.) If you do not have such evidence, then you can say only that the opinions of some number of scientists support your views, not that science supports them. ----------------------- No, you can produce nearly an infinite number of various and unsortable personalities hidden and revealed by using abuse. They prove only that results of bad methods vary in their badness and obviousness. One needs to use reason and logic upon data to determine WHAT IT MEANS, and that can be anticipated sufficiently by reason and logic and structured argument. If you refuse to provide any such evidence, I must make at least a tentative assumption that you do not have any. ---------------------------- Bad guess. You may dismiss this tentatively as well. Certainly, I will not accept claims that you have valid scientific evidence as legitimate if you refuse to present the evidence or indicate what it is. ---------------------------- I make no such claim, instead I claim it is not as important as a structural argument, which is what actually causes humans to believe and to adopt views anyway. And I assert that all needed evidence exists within awareness already as exemplar of reality. Our reality exists as out thought about reality, and nothing else. Steve |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Doan wrote:
On 17 Jun 2004, Chris wrote: This brings us right back to our aborted, unfinished debate of 2001, Nathan; aborted because you disappeared and days later said you "didn't have time" to debate about the scientific studies on spanking. You did your best to discredit the available evidence linking spanking to a wide variety of negative long term effects on children. When you disappeared was after I invited you to now produce evidence of equal rigor in support of your own position, adding that I would of course expect your evidence to meet all of the same standards you had recently demanded of evidence cited by me. Three years later, I ask you again: where is your scientific evidence of measurable long term benefit to children from spanking? If you have none, please signify by ignoring this question, or perhaps by vanishing again. Chris Here is what Chris said about Straus & Mouradina (1998) study in the past: However, there is evidence that this connection exists, however it may work. Gunnoe & Mariner (1997) and Straus et al. (1997) both found that the more children were spanked at the beginning of each study, the more their behavior had deteriorated years later in comparison with other children the same age, despite controlling for a variety of other variables such as maternal warmth/involvement, family socioeconomic status, race, sex, etc. Since neither of these studies had a "never spanked" group, they cannot rule out the possibility that low levels of spanking had positive effects. However, another study did look at children who had never been spanked by their mothers versus children who were spanked very infrequently and the difference in age adjusted antisocial behavior scores was quite pronounced. The children in the never-spanked group were markedly more well-behaved than even the most rarely-spanked children. And my response: "Chris is now admitting that there are evidence of beneficial effects of low-level spanking. ------------------ No, you were a ****ty little liar then as now. Steve |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Tori M. wrote:
This whole thing is unrealistic and will set a child to fail later in life. --------------- Nope. If you do something bad 90% of the time there will be consequences. ---------------- Duh. You dont show up to work and you get fired, you slack off at your work you get fired. You make a mess in your home eventualy you or your spouse will have to clean it up. You cheat on your spouse they will most likely leave you. --------------------- Yes, moron, but nobody hits you, not legally. Nobody does something EXTRA and nasty to you besides the consequences. While it would be wonderful to live in a world without punishment in general it is just not the case. ---------------------- YOU mean just not for children! Asshole! To raise a child to not have cause and effect other then the "natural consequenses" (IE sticking a fork in the outlet will get the child shocked) is just as bad IMO then to over punish a child. Tori ----------------- Children who don't know about plugs need to be protected, and later to know about plugs, they DON'T need to have a phobia of them and to hate the **** out of their parent so it turns them away from their REAL purpose here, to be happy!! Steve |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
"Parenting Without Punishing"
Nathan A. Barclay wrote:
"toto" wrote in message ... On Thu, 17 Jun 2004 15:36:58 -0500, "Donna Metler" wrote: And teachers are told not to use rewards because it "ruins intrinsic motivation". So there are no grades then? No report cards? Grades are merely a measurement device. Thus, the reward of a good grade is the reward of doing something successfully, much as winning a game because one played it well is a reward or playing a song on the piano well is a reward. Conversely, bad grades "punish" in the same sense that losing a game as a result of making mistakes is a "punishment" or making mistakes while playing the piano is a "punishment." ---------------------- Kids KNOW whether they are doing well, just from doing it. They just don't know how the class is doing. Grades compare them to others, and are then inherently not useful, because a child who likes the subject will do as well as they can, and one who doesn't like it, won't, no matter what! Steve |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
"Parenting Without Punishing" | Chris | General | 328 | July 1st 04 05:59 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Spanking | 12 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Spanking | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |