Learning From Dr. William Glasser

Last Wednesday I had the opportunity to attend a presentation by 83 year old Dr. William Glasser and his wife at BYU. When introducing him Dr. Tim Smith mentioned that while education fads come and go, Dr. Glasser's education principles live on.

The reason that Dr. Glasser's theories are still alive and well today is because they are built upon sound principles such as:

• Relationships must be built upon trust and respect.


• Learning must be based upon competency and quality work, not grades--The lowest grade one can receive is a B.


• School must be a joyful and welcoming (and as William Purkey would say, "inviting") place because of a supportive, caring environment and healthy relationships.


• All the school's stakeholders (students, parents, principal, teachers, staff, etc.) must rely on the choice theory principles of survival, love/belonging, freedom/power, and fun rather than the seven deadly external control habits: criticizing, blaming, complaining, nagging, threatening, punishing, and bribing.


• The message students need to receive from teachers must be: "My job is to teach you to learn, my job is not to find out what you don't know and punish you for not knowing it."


• Teach what is useful which is more than acquiring knowledge and memorizing facts


• Don't teach with threats or punishment.


• By changing one's acting and thinking rather than a focus on what one is feeling will help one feel better.


• Make all tests open book and open help from classmates and the teacher.

What is wonderful about these principles is that they work! The lives of delinquent girls at the Ventura School in California and hard core students in a Cincinnati school were turned around when these principles were used with them.

Dr. Glasser recommends that everyone who works in a school should read the research called Protecting Adolescents from Harm (Resnick et. al, 1997). Glasser says that what this important extensive research points out conclusively is that only two groups of people can prevent adolescents from harming themselves and others: parents and teachers.

Also, Dr. Glasser has a book called Every Student Can Succeed that can be ordered from his website http://www.wglasser.com/ At this time it is $14 inclusive of postage and handling.

"For vs. For"

You would think they would learn. It's always disappointing when political candidates or those advocating for a political issue resort to attacking opponents rather than sticking to one's own platform. It's a sign of weakness. Keeping one's composure and calmly explaining the rationale for one's own platform can win the confidence of American people.

This is extremely difficult to do, especially when recommending change, because most people tend to choose the status quo rather than risk change, even if that change could have positive results.

The voucher debate in Utah is a good example of what can happen when sides resort to an attack tactic. More often than not in a situation such as this, the status quo wins.

There are some lessons to be learned from the Utah voucher debate:

Lesson #1: Rather than making vouchers the focus, it may have been more constructive to focus on the education of diverse learners, parental rights, teacher shortage, improving public schools, saving money, and/or some other issue.

Lesson #2: Rather than having a "for vs against" stance, a "for vs for" stance has a greater chance of a win-win. In other words, all sides of an issue present a solution platform to improve the education of diverse learners. This way, status quo is not an option. People will have to make a decision and not just vote against something because the proposed change is still fuzzy in their minds. Voting against something without having to offer an alternative solution is an easy out and doesn't take much thought.

Lesson #3: Sticking to one's own platform on how to address the issue explaining the rationale rather than attacking the other platform shows respect not only for the opposite side, but also for the American people.

Lesson #4: Trusting the American people to make a wise decision is a respectful manner that appeals to their mind as well as their heart.

These are lessons that all political candidates and those advocating for political issues might want to consider learning if we as American people are to be well served. We as the American people have a responsibility to continue to encourage that these lessons be learned through our example of words and actions.

Civic Education Is An Answer

Representative LaVar Christensen in his 2006 publication for the Annual Journal of Utah's Hinckley Institute of Politics quotes Frederick J. Ryan, Jr.: "Freedom is a fragile thing and never more than a generation away from extinction...It must be fought for and defended constantly by each generation."

Schools are an important part of this process. "Producing better citizens" was the original justification for creating America's public schools. Christensen states in his document that education's original aim was not simply to convey knowledge but rather to forge character. Therefore, when a school's focus is exclusively on reading, math, and other academics to improve one's personal economic prosperity, something very important is lost. This is exactly what is happening in our schools, especially for our diverse learners. Yet, they are the ones who have the most to gain from civic education--the purpose of which is to develop good citizens.

According to David E. Campbell's article Bowling Together, the characteristics of an education that develops good citizens are:

1. Equip the nation's future with the capacity to be engaged in the political process
2. Have citizens not only participating in democratic institutions, but also doing so knowledgeably
3. Impart the "ability to deliberate" in a context of "mutual respect among persons" which stems from political philosopher Amy Gutmann's defining characteristic of democratic education

Of course our diverse learners need to know the academics, but focusing exclusively on academic and leaving civic education to chance is not providing them an equitable education.

Considering the recent published findings of Dr. Robert Putnam's research study that he revealed in the 2006 Johan Skytte Price Lecture called E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and Community in the Twenty-first Century, it is even more critical that all learners have the knowledge and skills to be involved. Putnam's study found that in diverse communities, there is a greater distrust of neighbors, not only between groups, but even among members of the same group. Everyone seems to "hunker down"--pull in like a turtle. They expect the worst from their community, they volunteer less, they vote less, and have less faith that their cries for social reform will make a difference. All of which results in less social capital for everyone.

Rather than responding negatively to these findings, we can look at them as a challenging opportunity. After all, it is inevitable that diversity is only going to increase in America.

So what is the answer to this challenging opportunity? Although diversity can ultimately be valuable and enriching, we also need something that will unite us. I would propose that the characteristics of an excellent civic education as they have been described have the potential to do just that.