choice theory | The Better Plan . .

Posts tagged “choice theory”

September 14, 2013 4 Comments

Compelling Reasons to Teach Choice Theory to Students

1. It will improve students’ mental health

I was reminded recently of one of the essential pieces of choice theory implementation, that being the need for teachers to teach their students about the concepts of choice theory. It is a little bit frustrating for me to see the excitement for choice theory and the commitment to nurture a choice theory environment in classrooms, and then learn that the usual pressures of the school year seem to derail the idea of sharing choice theory with students. I am convinced, though, that bringing students on as choice theory partners will sooner establish choice theory as part of the school culture.

The recent reminder came from an article I read in the Psych Central online journal. The title — Mental Health in High School: Teach Students Link Between Thinking Patterns, Emotions and Behavior — caught my eye. Sure enough, the article could have been written by a choice theorist.

Researchers from the Ohio State University College of Nursing found that a program called COPE (Creating Opportunities for Personal Empowerment) reduced depression, enhanced health behaviors, and improved grades. Health classes used an intervention that focused on cognitive behavioral skills. While not the only focus, the study’s author, Bernadette Melnyk, observed that –

“This is what has been missing from prior healthy lifestyle programs with teens — getting to the thinking piece. We teach the adolescents that how they think directly relates to how they feel and how they behave.”

The important thing about the program is building skills that help students learn to become aware of their negative thoughts, the ways in which such thoughts affect their self-concept, and the behaviors that can come out of that kind of thinking.

“Schools are great at teaching Math and Social Studies,” Melnyk continues, “but we aren’t giving teens the life skills they need to successfully deal with stress, how to problem-solve, or how to set goals, and those are key elements in this healthy lifestyle intervention.”

We know, as teachers and parents, how much our own mental health has been improved through our understanding of choice theory. What is keeping us from intentionally and purposefully teaching the concepts to our students? Glasser once pointed out that expecting students to be successful at life without teaching them about choice theory is like expecting them to play and win a game without teaching them the rules. Kids are wrestling with so many personal challenges and conflicts. And without choice theory (or something like it) their mental health is put at risk.

2. It will improve teacher understanding of choice theory principles

It has been said that a person never understands something so well as when he has to teach it to someone else. A German proverb comments on the same principle by stating –

He who teaches children learns more than they do.

A classic book from 1971, Children Teach Children: Learning by Teaching, cited the results of an anti-poverty reading program in New York City in which older students tutored younger students with reading difficulties. After five months of one on one help it was discovered that the younger students showed a six month gain in their reading scores, which was great. They also tested the older tutors and were blown away to discover that they had made a gain of 3.4 years in their reading scores. Not expecting that kind of gain at all, it alerted them to the potential of increasing the learning through teaching.

Not only will we learn choice theory better as we teach the concepts to our students, imagine for a moment how well students could learn choice theory by teaching it to each other.

I think some teachers may hesitate to teach about choice theory because they don’t feel like they have a lot of expertise in it yet. Maybe they’ll share more after they read another book or attend another workshop. I think some may hesitate, too, because giving the choice theory concepts away to students could lead them to monitor or judge our fledgling efforts toward non-coercive change. It is true that at the very beginning we may want to experiment with the ideas privately, without making a big deal out of them. Pretty quickly, though, we need to share choice theory with our students. Maybe they will monitor our fledgling efforts. All the better as situations and events become teachable “choice theory” moments.

Chances are you don’t need the Psych Central article to remind you that students need mental health instruction as much as they need physical health instruction. I encourage you to go for it!

————————–

One of the things we’ll be doing at our Choice Theory Study Group this coming Sabbath afternoon, Sept. 21, at Foothills Elementary is sharing some of the ways we have used or implemented choice theory so far this school year. I will pass on some of these examples in future blog posts.

————————–

Spread the word about The Better Plan blog. Share it with a colleague or share a post that you appreciate on your Facebook page.

September 9, 2013 6 Comments

It Is More Important That I Like Them

Jim Roy

Fall quarter begins on September 23 at Pacific Union College, the school at which I teach in the teacher credential program, which means that two weeks from today I will be teaching. Next week there will be quite a few campus meetings and time will feel crunched. Therefore, I thought it wise to get going on office organization and class preparation today. I attacked some stacks of stuff on top of my file cabinets, stacks that had been resting there for some time (it turns out), and re-discovered some papers, folders, and articles that were actually worthwhile in some way. One of the sheets of paper I ran across was some notes I took from a presentation I attended. It is written in my handwriting, but I had no name or no date anywhere on the paper. I remember being impressed with the talk, but I can’t remember who gave it. If one of you shared these thoughts, let me know. In any case, I have typed out my notes from the talk below –

What have you not learned yet?

What can I offer you?

It takes three years to figure out if you’re in the right place, doing it well, etc.

Give yourself permission to fail; and then to fail again.

Be reflective about your teaching.

I felt I couldn’t do anything well.

It is more important that I like them, rather than focusing on them liking me.

What mountain are you willing to die on?

One week does not a year make.

God does not call us to be successful; He calls us to be faithful.

#1 rule of teaching – Do no harm.

The one about it being “important that I like them” really jumped out at me. Of course, it oozes and overflows with choice theory. We can choose and nurture our own thoughts and behavior, but that is where our control stops.

It is amazing how much energy we can put into worrying about being liked by others. New teachers especially have to come to grips with this. Until they do it can be so draining trying to manipulate others into behaving a certain way. Being a teacher takes real strength. It takes strength to like students when they aren’t very likeable.

It can be easy to skip over the liking part and focus on having a spirit of love. The thing is, liking is loving in action. Liking is the “hi” in the morning, even when you know you’re not going to get an enthusiastic hi in return. Liking is talking about the football game and making small talk. Liking is being interested in another person and the things they are interested in. Liking is wishing another person a good evening and reminding them that you are looking forward to seeing them tomorrow.

I really believe that some students have never experienced an unconditional liking relationship. As their teacher or significant adult in their life, you may be the first to treat them like they are special and that they have a purpose in this world. They may be used to being ignored, resented, yelled at, manipulated, and controlled. It may be a shock to them to have someone say, “good morning,”

——————————-

Which of the statements from the notes speaks to you? I’d love to hear from you.

——————————-

Remember September 21!

If you live within driving distance of PUC, think about joining us for a choice theory study group!

Where: Foothills Elementary (just down the hill from PUC)

When: Sept. 21, 2:00-4:00 pm

Attend services at one of the local churches (The Haven, next to the St. Helena Hospital, is close and they provide a lunch each week after church) and then head over to Foothills for choice theory ideas and support.

September 5, 2013 20 Comments

The Rest of the Story: Part 2

Jim Roy

Today’s blog continues where we left off in The Rest of the Story: Part 1. You’ll get more out of the story if you read Part 1 first.

——————————————-

I began the presentation, and had only been going a few minutes when I noticed someone in the corner of my eye enter the room. There were no seats left and he edged along the wall to my left and sat down on the floor. When I realized that the person sitting on the floor was Jeff Tirengel, I was almost overcome emotionally, and even physically. Jeff and I had met 10 years earlier, when we were both completing the Glasser certification week training. We became friends and stayed in touch from then on. Although he possesses a wonderful, dry wit, he has a way of always bringing the conversation to the important. And as we talked about the important things in life we became close. As he sat there on the floor, though, I knew the rest of the story, as the late Paul Harvey would say. I knew that he was in a battle for his life, that he was hanging in there through tough chemotherapy that, while trying to kill the bad cells, was draining him of the good, too. That he would somehow muster up the strength, which he had in such small supply, and come to my talk . . . I can barely write about it even now without choking up.

I briefly described each of the chapters, occasionally reading excerpts from the manuscript. I pulled back the curtain and talked about how the whole thing began and how Bill and worked together. Pictures of Bill on the screen behind me, from childhood to adulthood, added to the story. The hour and fifteen minutes for the breakout went by quickly and I began to wrap things up. I had prepared more material than the breakout time would allow, but had presented what I could. I fairly frequently give breakout talks and trainings, so I know the drill, but I was not prepared for what happened next. Instead of people saying thanks and then heading off to supper, they started asking me when they could hear the information from the rest of the chapters that I was not able to get to. I got my wits about me and stammered that I would be open to that. One person wondered aloud if we could continue early the next morning before breakfast. Other suggestions were tossed back and forth and it was finally decided to continue that evening after supper. Instead of the classroom we were in at that moment we agreed to meet in the general area, a large open space surrounded by vendor tables.

When the breakout was over I went over to Bill. He tried to speak, but he was too choked up to get the words out. “I don’t know what to say,” he finally got out. I tried to lighten the moment (I’m not saying it was the right thing to do, but it’s what I did.) and said, “I couldn’t have done it without you, Bill,” in an obvious attempt at understatement. “Thank you,” he said quietly as he held my hand tightly. I became overcome, too, the two of us in a moment that only the two of us could understand. Jeff joined us, our hug simultaneously conveying congratulations and appreciation. After I returned home Jeff emailed a picture he had taken with his cell phone during the breakout. It shows me talking to the group with Glasser in his wheelchair in the background. The resolution is not very good, yet it will always be one of my most treasured photographs. Jeff was not in the picture, but to me, he is as much in the picture as Bill and I.

Jeff Tirengel’s picture of me presenting during the first breakout session with Glasser in the background.

I was drained, in a good way, as I headed to supper. I don’t remember eating much. Instead I got ready for part two of the presentation. As it turned out, more than twice as many people came to the next session. In spite of the late hour, Bill came to the next session, too. There was so much interest in Glasser’s life, the circumstances surrounding his career, and the evolution of his ideas. He was quiet throughout the evening, but I could tell he was taking everything in, the appreciation that people at the session had for him, the admiration, and the affection.

After the conference was over and I was driving back home to northern California it began to sink in. I had met or re-connected with so many wonderful people, learned important ideas from other breakout presenters, poured everything I had into my own breakout sessions, and, as I visited with others, even came upon more anecdotes for the ending of the biography, yet none of these things represented the most significant piece of the conference for me. It began to sink in that the most important part of the conference for me, the best reason for my attending the conference, was Glasser hearing and seeing the interest that others had in his story and hearing their thanks and affirmation for his efforts. I had been concerned for months and even years that he might pass away before I could put a physical copy of the book in his hands. Now, after the breakout sessions that he attended, I felt that he had experienced what readers would feel as they read his story. Somehow it felt to me that a ribbon had been placed on the package, so to speak, during those breakout sessions. He knew the book was coming and got a taste of the interest others had in the book’s content. I didn’t have a publisher yet, but at least I knew that Glasser knew it was coming and knew that people were looking forward to it.

Driving on Hwy 5 from Los Angeles to northern California can provide a lot of time to think.

As I drove up Hwy 5, the main north and south roadway artery from the southern part of California through Oregon and Washington all the way to the Canadian border, I had such a deep feeling of contentment as I reflected on my Glasser conference experiences. It struck me just how close I had come to not attending at all. I would have missed so much had I not attended. A bit of pride could have kept me from wanting to do the breakout at all. Discomfort at the thought of having to share a room with someone tempted me to pull the plug on the whole idea of attending the conference.

The good feelings I had, especially the feelings I had about Glasser attending the breakout sessions, were enough to fuel my contentment for quite a while. (Here comes the Paul Harvey “Rest of the Story” part.) But there’s more. In November, 2012, five months after the Glasser conference in June, I get a call from Carleen Glasser. I was just getting out of my car and about to head into Calistoga High School to observe a student teacher when her call came in. She said something about Barry Karlin and that I should call Jeff Zeig because he was interested in seeing the manuscript. For months I had been working on finding a publisher for the book, even exploring self-publishing options. Harper-Collins was a possibility, I thought, but they turned it down, even though they liked the manuscript a lot. It appeared there might be a possibility with Simon & Schuster, but that didn’t work out either. Queries to Beacon Press didn’t open any doors and I was really wondering what to do next. Then the phone rings and it is Carleen encouraging me to get in touch with Jeff Zeig. Zeig is the founder and CEO of the Milton Erickson Foundation, a highly respected organization in the field of counseling and psychotherapy. I did get in touch with Zeig and sure enough he was interested in seeing the manuscript. He read it, along with others on their editorial board, and they decided they wanted their publishing company to print it. We have been working on the book together, especially with his editor, Suzi Tucker, ever since.

It turns out that Barry Karlin, who I met at the Glasser conference months before, contacted Jeff Zeig and let him know of the manuscript’s existence. Barry and I had good visits during the conference and I was impressed with how committed he was to the Glasser message. He attended my breakouts and was one of the voices that asked for the second breakout session later that evening. Barry and I departed the conference as friends. I sent him the manuscript and sought his comments on what he read. He really felt like the book needed to be published and on his own he contacted Jeff Zeig and the Milton Erickson Foundation. That contact ultimately led to the book being published within the next few months.

Once again, the details of the situation hit me. Had I not gone to the conference I wouldn’t have met Barry and he wouldn’t have become part of the manuscript and the publisher search. The Milton Erickson Foundation would probably never have come up on my radar screen. I knew that Jeff Zeig was the force behind the success of the Evolution of Psychotherapy conference, but I didn’t know that the Milton Erickson Foundation had a publishing house until Carleen and Barry told me about it. Barry taking the initiative made all the difference in the world.

So now you know how the biography came to be published. It’s a bit of a convoluted tale, but most good tales are. The moral of the story? Don’t let pride keep you from experiencing life. As far as this story is concerned, a little bit of pride would have scuttled everything.

Bill Glasser at the banquet, held on the last evening of the conference, June, 2012.

————————————————-

If this post has been interesting or helpful to you, it might be of interest to others, too. It’s easy to share this post with your Facebook friends or Twitter connections. Simply click on the Facebook icon at the end of the article. The rest is easy.

September 3, 2013 10 Comments

The Rest of the Story: Part 1

Jim Roy

Bill and Carleen Glasser during the 2012 international conference.

This is a story I think needs to be shared, however I am not sure where to share it. At first I thought about it as an Epilogue for the biography, but I don’t think it is a good fit for that. So I will share it here. Some of you will be especially interested in the details of the story; others of you probably not so much. But there are lessons in the story, particularly one that stands out for me. The story is too long for one blog article so I will share it in parts. Here goes Part 1.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

William Glasser passed away in his home, the home that he built after first moving to Los Angeles in 1954, on Friday evening, August 23, 2013. He was 88 years old.

I had wanted to place a copy of his biography in his hands while he was still living, but I will miss being able to do that by just a couple of months. While writing the manuscript I shared portions of it with him and he affirmed the story that was taking shape, so he was aware of at least that much. Something happened last summer, though, that helps me to better accept that he never held a copy of the completed book in his hands. That “something” goes like this –

The annual International Glasser Conference was held at Loyola Marymount University in southern California during June, 2012. Compared to most international conferences the planning took place rather quickly, however this was due, to a great extent, to Glasser’s health. It was clear that he was not doing so well and Institute board members realized that if colleagues and friends from around the world were going to be able to thank him for all he had done that a conference should be planned as soon as possible, and that it should take place as close to Glasser’s home as possible.

When I received the announcement about the conference, which also included a call for breakout proposals, I immediately felt that I should submit a proposal that would serve as an update on Glasser’s biography. I had been less involved with the Institute since 2008 and wanted to let people know that the manuscript was almost done. More than that, though, it would be a way for me to say thank you to Glasser for what he meant to me and for what we had accomplished together.

I went ahead and completed a breakout proposal called My Time with Bill, and then waited to hear from the organizers. Several weeks later I heard back from them and was surprised, and a bit miffed, to learn that they wondered whether I would be alright with doing a half a breakout, instead of a full time allotment breakout. My ego pretty quickly echoed thoughts like, Well, if they don’t think this is important enough for a full breakout then I don’t need to do it all. I didn’t respond to their email immediately, though, and thought about the situation for a bit. Within a couple of days I realized that this wasn’t about me or my ego. The conference was about him, about Bill, and it was about me saying thank you to him. And so I emailed back and said, Sure, I’ll take whatever time you give me. I had already begun communicating with Jim Coddington, the person I was going to split the breakout time with, when I received word that things had changed and that he and I would each be given a full breakout slot. I was fine with that, too, and proceeded to prepare the presentation.

Not long after that I contacted the organizers to reserve a room at Loyola during the conference. I had wrestled with what to do about lodging, but eventually settled on staying in one of the dorms right there on campus. I indicated that I wanted a private room, thinking my dorm days and living with other guys was behind me. I learned, however, that there were no more private rooms available and that I would have to share a room with someone. (The words surprised and being miffed come to mind.) Once again, my ego weighed in–Why even go to the conference when it felt that at every turn things felt difficult? I didn’t want to share a room with a stranger, probably listening to his snoring at night (or him listening to mine). But again, after thinking about it, I remembered that this wasn’t about me. It was about saying thank you to Glasser. So I let the room reservation people know that it was fine and to put me with whomever.

The conference turned out to be an amazing experience for me! Even the lodging arrangements contributed to the positivity. When I checked in to my room I discovered that one of the two wonderful gentlemen with whom I shared the rather spacious accommodations was Rhon Carleton. Rhon and I were acquaintances before the conference. We knew each other through various Glasser Institute functions. During the conference, though, we were able to become much closer friends. He and I are somewhat unique in that while we are fully immersed and committed to the principles of choice theory, we come at these principles from a faith perspective. Rhon is a former chaplain in the armed services, and now serves as a pastor in Mississippi. I am a professor in a teacher credential program in a liberal arts college sponsored by the Seventh-day Adventist church. My first book, Soul Shapers, alerted SDA teachers to the incredible ways in which Glasser’s ideas informed and supported the journey of faith. During the conference, Rhon and I had many discussions on these kinds of topics. As a result, my lodging arrangements actually added to the quality of my experience.

I met or re-connected with many wonderful people as the conference progressed. Those who were aware of the Glasser biography project expressed interest in it and wanted to know how close we were to seeing it in print. One of the people I was surprised to see at the conference was Diane Gossen. Diane was viewed as controversial by some because of her central role in the organizational schism of 1996. She had authored a program called Restitution, which became very successful in schools looking for practical help with effective student discipline. Diane was a long time Glasser trainer and had tapped into control theory principles as she developed Restitution. Yet, when Glasser rejected all school discipline plans, including his own Ten Step Plan, he rejected Restitution, too. Ultimately, Diane left the Institution, along with others, and continued on her own. When I saw her walk into the general eating area as the conference began, it had been over 15 years since she had attended a Glasser function. Maybe her presence, more than anything else, underscored to me what the conference really was about. It was about saying thank you to an important person in a lot of our lives. It was about saying good by, too. In spite of whatever had happened in the past, Diane was proclaiming loud and clear that Glasser was that important to her! It meant a great deal to me to see her there.

Diane Gossen and Bill Glasser share a moment at the conference.

I also met Barry Karlin at the conference. He was very interested in the Glasser biography project and, as it happens, I like talking with people who are interested in projects on which I am working. He had an energy about him and I enjoyed listening to his ideas.

When it came time for my breakout the room began filling as I set up my computer and got things ready. By the time I started the room was packed to overflowing, however it wasn’t the numbers in the room that caught my eye. As I scanned the room it hit me what I was about to do. Glasser himself was there, along with Carleen. He was in a wheelchair, as he had been throughout the conference, yet he seemed very present to me. Many who had been part of the Glasser organization for many years, some since almost the very beginning, were seated there, too. Diane Gossen was part of those in attendance as well. Diane and Bill in the same room after all these years. I couldn’t believe it! I looked at the faces looking at me, so many of them people I had written about or mentioned in the biography. I thought, with a note of panic, Who am I to be talking about Glasser’s journey when these people experienced the journey with him.

That concludes Part 1; stay tuned for Part 2

——————————-

Those of you in the northern California area, remember to join us for our first Choice Theory Study Group on Sabbath afternoon, September 21, at 2:00 PM at Foothills Elementary in St. Helena. Mark it in your calendar right away!

——————————-

If you haven’t already done so, sign up for The Better Plan Facebook page. By “signing up” it would be more accurate to say LIKE the page.

August 29, 2013 11 Comments

William Glasser: A Life to Celebrate

Jim Roy

Bill and Carleen Glasser (2007)

William Glasser passed away on August 23, 2013. He was 88 years.

As an every-man psychiatrist, Glasser was appreciated by people around the world for his views on mental health and his strategies for counselors and especially educators. A progressive before it was in fashion to be progressive, he rejected commonly held beliefs that blamed mental disease for people’s behavior and instead described methods whereby people could recognize their own role in returning to wellness.

Glasser’s ideas on mental health began to form in the late 1950s when he worked with veterans in a mental hospital in Los Angeles and with delinquent teenage girls in a prison school. He burst onto a national stage, though, when he published Reality Therapy in 1965, and then Schools Without Failure in 1969. Reality Therapy was like a psychiatric shot heard around the world and he began to receive a lot of attention, especially from those working within the helping professions — counselors, social workers, corrections officers, addiction clinics, and especially teachers.

Reality therapy went on to become one of the main talking therapy options that future therapists learned about in degree programs and established Glasser as one of the most well-known psychiatrists in the world. He believed that the concept that people suffer from a mental illness was actually a road block to effective treatment, rather than being a help. Glasser wanted to compassionately help people become stronger and more responsible. To that end, reality therapy emphasized the need for a warm, caring relationship between therapist and patient; was built on the belief that people are capable of becoming responsible for their behavior; focused on the present and future, rather than the past; focused on present, conscious thinking and behavior, rather than trying to discover “unconscious” thought patterns; and desired to teach patients ways to fulfill their own needs within an effective (personal) moral framework. It was a groundbreaking approach that ultimately led to many others also building on the site that he began.

School principals and teachers recognized something special in reality therapy that could make a positive difference in the lives of students and when Glasser received a large grant to improve public education in 1967 the Educator Training Center was established and he embarked on a lifelong quest to show educators the importance of providing a need-satisfying environment for students. Of his 23 books, five of them were exclusively school related.

Glasser came to be known for control theory, the theory that he felt explained why reality therapy was so effective. Control theory described how people are internally motivated and are always acting in a way that they think will best meet their needs, which may even include choosing to be miserable. He became known for his emphasis on the idea that the only person we can control is ourself. Mental health, or happiness, is maintained as a person learns to stop trying to control others behavior and instead learns how to form and keep good relationships with the important people in his life. Glasser liked the details of control theory, but not the label, and in 1996 he changed the label to choice theory, which he felt more accurately described the essence of his beliefs.

Glasser was a prolific writer and lecturer and leaves behind a body of work–23 books, multiple booklets, and many, many journal articles– that will provide support and challenge traditional approaches for years to come. Besides eight active regional organizations throughout the U.S., the Glasser Institute also has a presence in more than 20 countries on six continents. Australia is one of the countries that has especially embraced Glasser’s ideas.

Glasser became a board-certified psychiatrist in 1961, and while he was well known in the popular press, he was not embraced by his own field. Writing books like Warning: Psychiatry Can Be Hazardous to Your Mental Health (2003) may have something to do with that. Being progressive has a price. Yet, even though he was somewhat ignored within psychiatry, toward the end of his career he received a great deal of official appreciation. In 2003 Glasser received the Professional Development Award from the American Counseling Association for his significant contributions to the field of counseling. The following year the ACA conferred to him the Legend in Counseling Award for his development of reality therapy. In 2005, along with being one of the faculty for the esteemed Evolution of Psychotherapy conference, he was presented the prestigious Master Therapist designation by the American Psychotherapy Association. He received two honorary doctorates–one from the University of San Francisco in 1990 and the other from Pacific Union College in 2006. And in May, 2013, Glasser was officially recognized by the California state senate for a lifetime of achievements and his meritorious service to humanity.

Glasser was preceded in death by his first wife, Naomi, and his son, Joe. He is survived by his wife, soul mate, and co-author, Carleen; and his daughter, Alice, and son, Martin; five grandchildren and two great-grandchildren; as well as his brother, Henry, and sister, Janet. He is survived, too, by the many who heard him talk and read his books and articles and who, in some small way, felt like they were his soul mate as well. To his loved ones and close friends, and to every one of his “survivors” — Here’s to a life of choice!

———————————————-

What could be added to this tribute to make it even better? What did I leave out?

———————————————

Thank you to those of you who responded to the initial announcement of Bill’s passing away. Some very heartfelt and eloquent thoughts were expressed in those comments.

———————————————-

If you haven’t, I hope you’ll take a moment and sign up to follow The Better Plan blog. It’s also easy to register for WordPress, which then allows you to click on the LIKE button of blogs you appreciate. I think this would be especially good for the blogs about Glasser’s passing away. WordPress is the biggest of all blog sites and a blog like this one being LIKED by a large number of people would alert a huge blogging community to the life and work of William Glasser.

August 24, 2013 38 Comments

I will miss you, Bill.

Jim Roy

Bill Glasser, as we were watching a basketball game together.

William Glasser passed away yesterday, August 23, at 6:30 PM. He died peacefully in the loving arms of his wife, Carleen. He was 88 years old.

I anticipated this day, his being gone, but it didn’t prepare me for the loss that I feel. He became more than a mentor to me. His ideas appealed to me at a deep level and ultimately changed the paradigm from which I view the world. That he and I were able to spend so much time together talking about his life and his views will always mean a great deal to me. In some ways, the biography that came out of those visits takes on even greater meaning now.

To a great extent, The Better Plan blog exists because of him. Scripture and other spiritual writers like Ellen White pointed toward a human behavior model of internal control, yet for some reason it was Bill Glasser that alerted me to the importance of the internal control model. It was my agnostic friend Bill Glasser that, in his own unique way, encouraged me to take another look at what Scripture and Ellen White have been saying all along. It was Bill who put me on the trail of the better plan.

For me, a light has gone out today. I feel a little bit more alone, a little bit more on my own. Grief is like that. It has its own agenda, it’s own clock. In time, the grief will lessen and I will see more clearly the many lights that his message ignited. Many besides me were affected by his ideas. As the creator of reality therapy and the architect of choice theory, Glasser meant a lot to a lot of people. That really is where I want my focus to be. Instead of dwelling on the light that has gone out, I want to think about the many lights that will begin to shine brighter. And by many lights I mean you and me and the potential of our modeling lives of strength and freedom.

In the coming days and months there will be time to say more. For now I am of the mind to reflect on Glasser’s effect on my life and cherish the time I had with him. My heart goes out to those who are especially feeling his passing–his immediate family and his close circle of friends and colleagues. We will miss him and there’s no getting around it.

I hope the media takes note of his passing and reminds people of what Glasser stood for and what he accomplished during his career. I would appreciate it if you would let me know if you see or hear something on the news or in the print media regarding William Glasser. I feel blessed to have called him my friend.

August 20, 2013 2 Comments

Good morning, Mr. Kinney

Jim Roy

Chris Kinney, in his classroom at Lower Lake High School.

Chris Kinney, a former student of mine who is now teaching in the Clear Lake area of northern California, shares a great update on how choice theory is making a difference in his classroom and school. He also shares some good reminders for many of us in the process.

Hi Dr. Roy,

I received the your email and a request to join your Choice Theory Facebook Page on the same day and I thought it was a happy coincidence. I have been successful in putting in place Choice Theory practices within my classroom and have received a great response about it, as evidenced in the email below. Other than that I thought I would drop you and PUC a line about how I am doing at Lower Lake High.

The first year at LLHS I noticed the lack of effort by the students. There was a huge culture of failure. I approached the principal about creating a new world history class geared towards students achieving a higher success, he agreed and I had 32 students take a Honors level class the following year. The principal and superintendent took notice and I was placed on a committee to help improve the school on with a campus wide focus. The implementation was this year and already students have said how much they look forward to coming to school, instead of looking at it as just somewhere they have to be.

This year the honors class has grown to two periods with nearly 60 students in it. At first the students were standoffish about taking the class but once in it the use of CT techniques soon leads them to a path of success and enjoyment of the class. LLHS has also seen an increase in test scores for World History of 25% shift from the bottom two CST levels towards the top three in the past two years. This success has directly been related to my teaching, and prompted the principal to make me chair of the department and teaching the AP US History class, both of which came with a nice pay bump.

Thank you for helping teach me the use of Choice Theory while I was at PUC.

Chris

At the start of this school year Chris was really pleased to receive a letter from a parent helped to confirm his efforts.

Good Morning Mr. Kinney,

I just wanted to take a moment to contact you to let you know what an impact you had on Corrinne. Prior to the first day of school she was the least excited about your History class and would exclaim that she “hated History”. When I picked her up from school the first day, she was so excited about your class. She went on and on about your expectations, your teaching style and she was suddenly so incredibly motivated. She feels that you have challenged your students to get an A in your class and instead of begrudging it, she is excited to face your challenge. She would be so perturbed and bothered if she knew I contacted you so please don’t tell her. I just wanted to thank you for kick starting my sometimes procrastinating sophomore.

Hope you had a great start to your new school year!

Tracie

When I asked Chris if I could share his email with others he said that would be fine, and went on to share a few more key points.

By all means feel free to share it. It was intended as an artifact that CT works, and can work very quickly in some cases, such as with this student. What I have been doing shows the effect that CT can have on a school, even if only one person is actively doing it. Other staff members are picking it up and asking questions about my classroom management. I really don’t go out of my way to label what I am doing as the staff is very suspect of “fad teaching” and immediately resent anything that has a label. What I do find is they see what I am doing as effective teaching regardless of what it is called. It truly is an amazing transformation that is going on at this school.

Several things stand out for me in Chris’s emails. One is that I introduce candidates to choice theory during their credential classes at PUC, but because of the pressure of state requirements, I am not able to go into a deeper training mode. That Chris is having this kind of impact with an “orientation” level of choice theory is amazing! Imagine what he could do if he dived even more deeply into choice theory. The second thing that stands out for me is the label phenomena. I really agree with Chris that teachers can be highly suspect of something new, especially if it has a label. He is right to simply do what choice theory can do and let people see the results, rather than argue with some about the theory. Chris’s email made my day as one of his former teachers, but it was more than that. He is on the front lines of education in a placement that many would describe as difficult, yet he is thriving and helping his students to thrive, too. May Chris’s testimony be an encouragement to all of us!

———————————————-

Those of you in the northern California area may want to be a part of a Choice Theory study group that will be meeting on Sabbath afternoon, September 21, from 2:00-4:00 PM at Foothills Elementary in St. Helena. You might want to attend the wonderful new church format at The Haven (formerly the Elmshaven SDA Church) and hear Matthew Gamble preach the Word, enjoy the meal provided each week by The Haven, and then head the short distance to the school for the study group. Mark it in your calendar and make plans to join us.

August 16, 2013 2 Comments

Hey! It works!

Jim Roy

A teacher shares what happened recently when he had the opportunity to use the conferencing skills he learned earlier this summer.

This summer I had the privilege of taking the Soul Shaper 1 & 2 class at Pacific Union College. After doing so and reading a number of Glasser books, I was extremely interested in putting conferencing into practice. We did a number of role plays in class to prepare for a conference, but there is something exciting about leading out in a real life scenario.

I received a call from a close friend about a relationship issue he was experiencing. He was looking for some advice from me, so I told him to meet me at a local coffee shop. On my way to our meeting, I thought back to the role plays in class and the acronym WDEP came to mind. After reminding myself what each letter stood for, (W – What do you want, D- What are you doing? E- Evaluate if it is working, and P- The plan) I convinced myself that this would be the ideal time to practice what I had learned.

After breaking the ice a bit over coffee, I finally began our dialogue by asking him what was on his mind. He gave me a long version of his dilemma, which was whether or not he should break up with his girlfriend. He was quick to blame this dilemma on his significant other, telling me how he didn’t like how she did such and such. I listened carefully and after he was through I simply asked him, well what do you want right now? He looked at me, kind of perplexed and asked me what I meant. I asked him again, “deep down, what is it that you feel you need right now? I know we are here about the relationship, but that aside, what do you want?” He thought a bit, I sipped some coffee trying to keep myself from talking to break the silence. Finally he spoke up and began to paint a picture that depicted freedom to me. After he was through, I said, “would it be safe to say that what you need right now is freedom?” He assured me that this is what he needed. I then asked him if he could find this freedom in his current relationship. Without much thought he told me no. To make sure, I asked him what it would take to gain the freedom that he felt he needed and again asked if there was any way the relationship could still work with this need. He assured me that he did not think he could get the freedom he needed while maintaining the relationship. I then reminded him about the blame he put on his significant other for the current conflict. I asked him, “Could it be that deep down you have wanted out of this relationship for awhile and you were waiting for a good excuse to end it?” At this point he looked at me and told me that I was “freaking him out”. He thought I was reading his mind or something. We joked a bit and then continued on. He agreed that this was indeed the case, but he was worried that if he broke things off he may not find someone else that had some of the traits he appreciated about her. We worked through the process again a bit and he came to the conclusion that he needed to end the relationship. We role played how that would look and talked about blame and how destructive that could be. He agreed and we were able to talk out what a break up might look like.

I don’t want to say that this experience went perfectly. I talked a bit more then I have expressed here and wish I could have been better at listening, but overall I saw that he had self-evaluated which made for a very rewarding experience for me, and hopefully for him.

——————————————-

The story above reminds us that we experience problem-solving conferencing opportunities in many normal, every day moments. We can use WDEP conferencing skills as teachers and principals, but we can also tap into WDEP skills as parents and friends. The above story also seems to embody the definition of problem-solving conferencing – that being

A lot of us are well-intentioned “fixers” who quickly start sharing advice and solutions when our student, colleague, or friend really just wants someone to listen and help them figure things out. The concept of self-evaluation is hugely important in the choice theory scheme of things. Whether it relates to academic performance and grading or to conferencing with a student regarding a behavior at school, the student’s ability to self-evaluate is the key. The KEY! We can count on this reality as surely as we can count on the law of gravity or the sun coming up in the morning. There is no getting around it. We can advise, direct, order, prescribe, or even threaten, but until a student comes to understand and acknowledge the situation for himself our efforts will lead to frustration and a strained relationship.

When we can non-judgmentally ask WDEP questions the results are frequently amazing! Often, people just need a little help thinking through things on their own and coming up with a plan of their own creation.

August 13, 2013 2 Comments

Gentle Parenting (and thank you, Milo)

Jim Roy

A great list for parents, but just as great for the rest of us, too!

What a great poster from Little Hearts / Gentle Parenting Resources! It makes essential points in a very small amount of space. Some of you may have seen the poster on Facebook, but I wanted to share it with the rest of you who may not have seen it. I have done some exploring on the Little Hearts website, from whence the poster originated, and I am impressed with what is being said and how it is being said. For those of you who are parents, you can check out the website for yourself at –

www.littleheartsbooks.com

The Little Hearts message is so choice theory, yet I didn’t see any evidence of a connection with Glasser or any of his material. For a second, I wondered how the site could be so choice theory, yet not have any choice theory background. Then, of course, I am reminded that effective ideas can be discovered from many angles, by many different people, in many different locations, and in many different ways. If a certain approach works better, that approach is likely to be found by those searching for a better way.

Glasser’s ideas are an example of this kind of “parallel development.” Even though he was an original thinker, not all of his ideas were original. There were other therapists that placed a high value on a positive, caring relationship with clients, for example, and there were other writers who tried to explain the fallacies of the commonly held views regarding mental illness. Each of them, Glasser included, came at their ideas from their own unique perspectives. The upcoming Glasser biography will say more about this kind of parallel development.

—————————————-

An aerial view of Milo Adventist Academy.

I did a Soul Shapers 1 workshop last week at Milo Adventist Academy in southern Oregon. Along with the staff from Milo there were teachers from four other schools in the Oregon Conference also in attendance. I was blessed by the experience in several ways. One of the blessings came from making new friends. Choice theory has a way of opening doors to deeper, more personal discussions, and while I didn’t know many of the staff before the week started, I feel that I made some very good friends by the time the week ended. Another blessing came in the form of their good questions. They truly wanted to understand how choice theory could be applied in their lives, personally and professionally. As a result, I have been thinking about some of those questions ever since. I hope to stay in touch with Milo over the coming school year. Maybe technology can help us with that.

—————————————-

The 2013/2014 school year is about to begin. (At least that is the schedule for schools located on west coast of the U.S., from where I am writing.) As a teacher your physical, emotional, and mental “clocks” are probably counting down to the first days of school. Some of you are literally in final countdown mode as you process how many hours you have left compared to the To-Do list of what you still need to accomplish. Even for veterans this can be an intense time as you try to get everything done that needs to be done.

For those wanting choice theory concepts to have a greater presence in their classrooms, just remember that “Structure is our friend.” The opposite of boss-management is not lead-management. The opposite of boss-management is laissez-faire, or the lack of structure or guidance at all. On this continuum, with over-control on one end and no control on the other end, lead-management comes somewhere in between. A lead manager very much wants elements of appropriate and helpful structure to be in place. It is especially helpful when classroom Procedures are identified, clearly described, and then rehearsed as a class. Procedures help classrooms run smoothly. It is also helpful when the classroom rules, the behaviors — e.g. – disrespect toward the teacher or classmates, bullying, dishonesty — that are never acceptable are also clearly outlined, along with a description of the natural consequences that come after breaking a rule. Too many people wrongly assume that choice theory means that kids can apparently do whatever they want. Not true at all. What is true is that lead-managers want to create need-satisfying classrooms in which discipline is not an issue. And if a rule is broken, lead-managers want to lovingly confront the behavior and help the student to make a plan for its correction.

Structure is our friend.

I would love to hear from you regarding ways in which you are keeping choice theory elements in mind for the coming school year – either as a teacher or a parent. Take a moment and share an example of how choice theory is going to affect your classroom or your home.

August 2, 2013 3 Comments

The World According to Wilson

Jim Roy

Lessons on mental health from Wilson, one of the stars of the movie, Castaway. The William Glasser Institute recently shared this article with members and I thought many of you would find it interesting, thought provoking, and maybe even helpful. Check it out.

Wilson

by Mike Rice

So much of the world appears to be caught up in the belief that any behavior that is not considered usual or normal is the result of a mental illness . . . that there is some sort of chemical imbalance in some people’s brains. I am often challenged in my group sessions about the behavior of those who have been labeled schizophrenics, when I state that most of what we are calling mental illness is no more than the behavior of unhappy people. Even those who have received this diagnosis have challenged me on this statement. They seem to want to wear their badge of mental illness to let others know they are helpless and that there is nothing they can do to improve their happiness. I often hear, “Normal people don’t talk to themselves or see things that aren’t there. So there HAS to be something wrong with their brain.”

Those who have received mental illness diagnoses have been told that they have some abnormality within their brain and that there is nothing they can do about it . . . that they will have to learn to live with it for the rest of their lives while taking medications that drug their brains to cause them to not hear voices and stop seeing invisible people. These drugs also stop the person from functioning normally by shutting down all of their emotions; having a flat affect; losing interest in the things that they used to enjoy, and losing their ability to be creative. Ironically, many of these medications prevent the person from overcoming their unhappiness or to discover other creative ways to deal with their unhappiness.

It is their creative ability that led them to choose the behaviors they discovered to deal with their unhappiness and frustration in the first place.

I saw the movie, “Cast Away,” starring Tom Hanks, when it first came out in 2000. Since then, I recently saw it again on my local cable network and was able to make the connection of how some behaviors would be considered mental illness by some in certain circumstances, but not mental illness in other circumstances. Allow me to explain:

In the movie, after being marooned on a small island in the South Pacific, Chuck (Tom Hanks) found himself without his basic genetic needs. He had to be creative to survive and began to improvise ways to find shelter, food, thirst and dehydration quenchers. He soon found himself without the power to do much about his situation, but maintained enough power from within to continue to survive. Even when he considered suicide, his tested method failed and renewed his internal power for survival.

His freedom was now very limited. He had only a small portion of the island in which he could navigate as most of it was mountainous and surrounded by pounding waves. He was held in solitary confinement. He certainly was not having any fun. All of his basic needs for happiness were not being met to the degree that he wanted.

The first thing he did when he reached the island after his plane crash was to yell out to connect to someone . . . anyone. Even the sound of dropping coconuts led him to think that someone might be near and he would yell out towards the area where he heard the sounds. He was missing the genetic need for connecting with others and belonging to the social world he had recently lost. He still had the image of Love in his Quality World from his deeply satisfying relationship with his girlfriend, Kelly (Helen Hunt), back in Memphis.

From what I have described so far, and for you who have seen the movie, you would not think any of Chuck’s behaviors were the result of a mental illness. In fact, you would probably think that it was his creativity and improvisation that was able to allow him the ability to meet his needs of survival: shelter, food, and drink.

But it wasn’t long after his initial awareness that he was, indeed, stranded in the middle of nowhere and the odds of being rescued were minimal. He still had the strong genetic need for love and belonging and after injuring his hand while attempting to make fire, his frustration led to him choosing to throw objects that had washed up from the plane crash, kick the sand, swear, and destroy whatever was near him. His bloody hand from the injury he incurred left a palm print on a soccer ball that had been part of the cargo in the plane. After he had calmed down and successfully created a fire, he began staring at the soccer ball and saw the potential for something in the bloody hand print . . . a human face. Since no one was around to offer a need-satisfying relationship in the form of connecting with others, he would create his own person to meet this need.

He made the air hole the nose and erased some of the blood to make the eyes and mouth. The company who made the soccer ball was Wilson and their name was boldly printed on the ball. This became Chuck’s compensation for connecting with someone whom he named, “Wilson.” So far, you may be saying to yourself, “So . . . . ? What’s your point?”

Chuck then began talking to Wilson and even answering on Wilson’s behalf to satisfy his need for love and belonging and connecting. And I would be willing to wager that you would still be thinking, “Well, sure. There’s nothing wrong with that. He did it to keep his sanity . . . to keep himself from going crazy on a deserted island.”

AHA! If he did that back in Memphis where he lived, would you still say his behavior was an acceptable way to behave? One might be inclined to get as far away from him as possible because, “who knows what a crazy person who talks to himself or to inanimate objects might do?” One might also believe he is seriously mentally ill and should be placed on brain meds and is in dire need of a psychiatrist.

In an isolating experience, you are more likely to accept Chuck’s unusual or unnatural behavior as typical, rational, and understandable. But if not deserted on a lonely island, the same behaviors are seen as symptoms of mental illness and chemical imbalances. The unusual behavior one may create and perform serves the purpose of easing their unhappiness and frustration, at the time . . . just like Chuck on the island. If he didn’t have Wilson to talk to, and imagine that Wilson was talking to him, he would have felt much more unhappy and frustrated than if he hadn’t created Wilson.

The person who sees things, hears things, and talks to people who are not present, or to inanimate objects, is no different than Chuck. While they are not physically on a deserted island, they are in a deserted world based upon their choice to isolate or detach from others because of unsatisfying relationships with the important people in their life. They have detached from others and can be alone while around others. Their creativity to deal with their frustration and unhappiness is no different than Chuck’s creativity in producing and talking to Wilson, a soccer ball.

The only difference is the circumstances. You could see Chuck’s dilemma and rationalize Chuck’s behavior because you could relate to being in his situation. And since you could relate, you deem it normal, acceptable, and not a mental illness at all. You were living in his world on the screen and silently thinking, “I’d probably do the same thing.”

If Chuck behaved in this manner back in Memphis, you would not see the situation he would be experiencing in his world. His unsatisfying situation and internal frustration would be very real to him, but invisible to you. And since you have most of your needs met, on a somewhat regular basis, in a world where they are more easily attainable than a desert island, you might be inclined to think and believe his behavior is a mental illness.

When Chuck was rescued and came back home, he didn’t talk to things or people who weren’t there anymore. First of all, Wilson was lost at sea before he was rescued. But when Chuck got home, he was back in a world with people with whom he could connect. And it didn’t take brain meds to get him to stop talking to imaginary things or hearing imaginary voices. He only had to connect with others and those who are important to him. After five years of living in isolation, his rescue not only saved his life, it restored most of his basic genetic needs for happiness: Survival, Love and Belonging, Freedom, Power, and Fun. The love of his life had given up hope for his return and had married someone else. There would obviously be some emotional pain from that loss. But even that didn’t cause Chuck to return to his island-surviving behaviors.

Would you say a child who has an imaginary playmate is mentally ill? Or would you say they are being really creative? When you dream at night . . . are some of your dreams really “out there”? Does that mean that you are crazy when you are dreaming or is your mind simply being creative? If your brain can do that when you are asleep, it is also capable of doing it when you are awake?

In our world, it appears it is much easier to convince others that a person is mentally ill than to convince them that they are sane and only frustrated and unhappy.

Learn more about The Glasser Institute at www.wglasser.com

Contact The Glasser Institute at wginst@wglasser.com

————————————

I’m headed to southern Oregon next week to conduct a Soul Shaper workshop at Milo Academy. Looking forward to it!

Posts tagged “choice theory”

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: