React or Respond: Your Decision

I have been thinking about the difference between a reaction and a response. Although they appear to be synonyms, I think that there is a significant difference between the two. One way to see this difference is to examine our actions following an event in light of our readiness. When we are caught off guard or unprepared for something, we tend to REACT. Our reactions can often be characterized as impulsive, emotional, or provoked. It continues to confuse me when professionals, who have chosen to work in our schools or agencies that assist youth, are surprised or shocked by the behavior of youth. We who work with kids every day should, more than anyone else, anticipate these difficult behaviors. If we anticipate them, we will be less likely to react to them and more likely to have an appropriate, reasonable response. When we anticipate problem behavior, we can prepare for it. When we are prepared, we have had time to think, to problem solve, to evaluate our resources, to discover our strengths and weaknesses, and to evaluate what impact our response will have on those around us. Using this information, we formulate our plan: our RESPONSE. Positive behavior support suggests that we must formulate a response by conducting a functional behavioral assessment.

A common mistake that many organizations make in reaction to negative behaviors is adopting an immediate “Get Tough Attitude” or “Zero Tolerance Policy.” This approach has been effective in “weeding out” or “separating” disruption; however, it is ineffective in evoking positive behavior change in individuals.One of the problems with these punitive approaches is the lack of concern as to what drives the behavior in the first place. They tend to frustrate youth who are learning to become self-managed, and it validates the student’s negative beliefs about authority and authority figures. There is typically little regard for individual differences when we adopt these policies.  

Zero tolerance policies are typically established in order to maintain a sense of control over the population. Granted, there is a place for such a policy in our schools and in our society: there are some non-negotiable situations that may occur in which a zero tolerance stance is absolutely the best approach. However, we already have laws in our society that cover such behaviors as physical and sexual abuse, bringing a weapon to school, or distributing drugs. Most of the behaviors that occur in a school setting or a home setting are not as serious as that, yet they also fall under the “zero tolerance” policy. Insubordination is a good example of this. How does one operationally define insubordination? What does it look like? How can I measure it? I think you get my point. If a behavior cannot be operationally defined, it is very difficult for us to be consistent when delivering consequences. Also, the delivery of negative consequences for talking back or using foul language very seldom changes the behavior in the future. Therefore, do we want to evoke behavior change or just deliver punishment?

If we are about the business of challenging behavior, we must first define what behavior we would like to see change and identify a behavior that we would like to see in its place. In order to make a positive difference, we must discover the function “bad” behavior serves in the first place. Once we know that function, we can follow up with replacement behavior instruction and loads of positive reinforcement.

The reinforcement is where we tend to meet with resistance from staff. It is imperative that we understand how our responses to behaviors tend to shape behaviors. If we attend to negative behaviors that are presented to get our attention and not to positive behaviors, we are reinforcing those negative behaviors. This is true even if our attention to the negative behavior is punishment. If you want an attention seeking behavior to continue, all you have to do is pay attention to it.

These comments are deeply rooted in the belief that we truly cannot control anyone’s behavior. We are only in charge of ourselves. It is only through our appropriate, reasonable response to others that we can make a difference. By responding differently, we can assist others in making better decisions about how to get their needs met. By anticipating and accepting behaviors for what they really are, we can formulate better responses in the future.