Collaborative problem solving and values

It is important to convey to kids the values underlying words like CPS, talking, listening  and choices.

Kids often have difficulty in moving discussions in the direction of collaborative problem solving and not negotiation.  They will try to get the best bargain for themselves. So when it comes to sharing a computer with a sibling they will try to get the best deal - something close to a 100% access.  Anything less than a 100% is a compromise, it is giving up on what they would consider the optimal solution to address their needs.

When kids, parents, teachers and other care givers engage in collaborative problem solving they are also expressing values and beliefs.  It is a belief that we can consider the perspectives and concerns of all and try to address them  in a collaborative way by finding mutually satisfying solutions and work for the common good. Kids need to learn that best solutions are win-win , solutions that all can live with and not the  solution which that gives you the most. Successful negotiators know that they need to work towards a win-win but will try to first get as much for themselves as possible. Collaborative problem solving is different. We don't ignore our concerns , we just start with the concerns of others.

The problem also revolves on how we relate to ' choice'  -  individual choice or the choice of a people, friends or community . When we engage in cps, it seems clear that what must occasionally be restricted is not choice but individual choice. Cooperation opens up the way to so many more opportunities and choices despite the fact that individual choice may be compromised in some areas. We need to talk in the plural – we need to , or our problem , our choices.

Sometimes when we get stuck in the cps process, we need to show kids that the solution we offer does address their concerns in some way or at least elements of their concerns.  This helps them to be more flexible and adaptive.

Talking is more about sharing information rather than trying to get what you want. Listening is more about caring , giving the other person all your attention and empathy.  When try to address both our and the other's concerns by brainstorming mutually satisfying solutions or making a compromise – a bit of give and take we take caring a step further.

It is important to convey to kids the underlying values behind collaborative problem solving. If care givers just see it as technique that will help them get compliance or what they want , self centered values will be taught. But if talking is about sharing, listening is about caring , and solutions are worked out by collaborative problem solving and not negotiation we further reinforce the very values needed for CPS. We also need to reframe how we view choice – solutions and choices that further the goals of the family and it 's individual members or just individual choice.

Mindfulness for children 2

I have discussed Mindfulness for children here and shared especially the work of Susan Kaiser Greenland.

http://tiny.cc/eawzdw

Here is article on mindfulness for children.

http://cme.ucsd.edu/bridging/slides/Kaiser%20Greenland%20-%20Article.pdf

Mindfulness is for all children, but especially for challenging kids. Mindfulness helps kids become intrinsically motivated, by addressing their needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness.

 They become more   mindful of the present, more autonomous by helping them connect to their inner beings, more competent by being   attentive in an impartial, non-judgmental /emotional way. They learn to identify the concerns of others and their perspectives in a compassionate way which builds connection and belonging.

Instead of automatically giving medication for attention deficits (give kids the attention they are lacking?), why not actually teach kids the skills of being attentive; see clearly what is happening, as it is happening, without the emotional charge. Having the perspective of a friendly impartial spectator puts themselves in a position to respond with compassion.

 Mindfulness teaches kids calming skills to settle the mind and see things more clearly. They can use these skills to help them deal with upset, calm themselves before a test, deal with anxiety and help them soothe themselves to sleep. 

Mindfulness can also help kids on the autistic spectrum who have difficulty in making eye contact. In the Hello Game we start with the color of your eyes, a practice that helps kids really look at somebody else in a way that is not emotionally charged. When kids look at others closely they start to notice and identify what is happening in their minds and bodies.

I recommend taking a look at Susan's web site for updates. She has a Ted talk on the new ABCs of learning.

http://www.susankaisergreenland.com/clips.html

'When I was in elementary school teachers used "the ABCs" as a shorthand phrase for the alphabet, a fundamental building block of learning to read. While the traditional ABCs are as crucial as they ever were when it comes to reading, there is another set of ABCs which, in their own way, are equally important to learning: Attention, emotional-Balance and Compassion. 

A strong capacity to pay attention helps kids and teens stay on task and do well in school. But attention without a context is only part of what kids and teens need to flourish in our complex and ever changing world.

 They also need Balance and Compassion. Emotional balance allows children and teens to see what's happening in their inner and outer worlds clearly without an emotional charge, and compassion is the lens or perspective that allows kids to see both sides of an issue at home and in school. Thus, it's important our kids learn a new set of ABCs too -- one that draws upon the very old values of Attention, Balance and Compassion '

Declarative language and questions – A CPS/RDI view

The CPS – collaborative problem solving approach's mantra is kids do well if they can and not 'kids do well if they want to'. Kids on the whole would prefer to be successful and adaptive. These kids are lacking crucial cognitive skills needed to help them be more flexible and adaptive – skills which would include executive functions, language processing, social skills, emotional regulation skills, and cognitive flexibility etc.

The way to learn how to teach these lagging skills is to ask how we teach  kids on the autistic spectrum these skills. The traditional ABA – applied behavior analysis approach focuses more on compensating kids for their missing skills rather than helping kids develop authentic communication and life skills ,  which is the goal of the RDI – Relationship Development intervention approach .

One of the ways RDI teaches skills is to use Declarative language with kids.

 Here is  an excerpt  from an  article by Linda Murphy  'Using declarative language with children on the Autistic spectrum '   . The whole article is worth reading.

'Declarative language, plain and simple, is stating out loud what one knows or thinks in the form of a comment. It may be used to share an opinion (I love spaghetti!); make a prediction (I think we are going to the movies tomorrow.); announce / celebrate (We had a great time today!); observe (I notice that your friend wants a turn.); reflect on past experience (Last time this stopped working we checked the batteries.); or problem solve (We need tape to fix it.). Declarative language does not require a verbal response. Rather, it invites experience-sharing, and provides an ideal social framework for later conversational interactions.'

'Unfortunately, however, when people talk to children with ASD they frequently use imperative language, which is in the form of questions or commands that require a particular response. For example, "What color is that?"; "What is your name?"; "Say: block;" and "Look at me", are all imperatives. The problem with this type of language is that it does not teach children how to become authentic communication partners, because its circumscribed nature does not invite experience-sharing, which is the basis for interactive language use. Indeed, when people primarily use imperative language with a child, he or she learns, incorrectly, that communication consists of right and wrong answers and questions and directive. It also teaches that the main purpose of communication is instrumental; that is, to "get" something from another person. In truth, authentic communication is primarily about experience-sharing. We communicate with others to share memories, gather information, learn about one another and the world, seek different opinions, and share emotions. While it is true that we sometimes need to communicate in order to "get" something, if children with ASD are to learn how to socially communicate with others, they need a linguistic environment that is rooted in declarative language input.'

The CPS approach teaches skills indirectly when care givers solve problems with kids in a collaborative way. Problem solving requires skills such as perspective taking, using hindsight and foresight, language processing , articulating concerns, being flexible , brainstorming solutions, consequential thinking etc . Successful cps relies on the caregiver's ability to ask the kid questions, to probe and drill down for information that will give them  a clear and accurate picture of the child's concerns. 

CPS holds that  Questions are the key to thinking, problem solving and communication

If the RDI approach is encouraging us to avoid asking questions and rather use ' declarative language it would seem that CPS and RDI differ when it comes to questions.

How can we reconcile the 2 approaches?

Declarative language gives kids a point of reference, some information to reflect on , a springboard to use ,so that the kid can respond and share some information , or an experience . Instead of asking questions, we should precede them with declarative language – first make an observation and then follow with a question.  

The ' empathy stage'  = the information gathering stage about the kid's concerns  in the cps process  starts with a neutral and specific observation ..  ' I have noticed that when you are watching TV and we need to go and have a bath , you are not so happy about it , what's up ? We first give information and then the question. When we use reflective listening and then follow with a question we provide information on which our question is based. This gives the kid a clear idea of what we are talking about and puts him in a position to share his input.

The type of questions used in CPS are not the imperative type, seeking the ' right answer ' from the kid , but rather an attempt to gather information about the kid's concerns, perspectives , and perceptions.  It is more about the kid's authentic thinking .

So in a nutshell , we use both Declarative language and information gathering/sharing questions in the CPS process.

IEPs _ Individual education plans - CPS/RDI and the autistic spectrum

The pedagogy of poverty discriminates not only against poor children and their families but also against kids who receive ' special ed' ,  or are behaviorally challenged. The IEPs – the individual education plans   that are supposed to remediate their problems  often fail them because they do not  address kids' needs for autonomy , competence and relatedness.

'In 1991, Martin Haberman, a professor at the University of Wisconsin, coined the phrase “pedagogy of poverty.” Based on his observations in thousands of urban classrooms, Haberman described a tightly controlled routine in which teachers dispense, and then test students on, factual information; assign seatwork; and punish noncompliance.  It is a regimen, he said, “in which learners can ‘succeed’ without becoming either involved or thoughtful” -- and it is noticeably different from the questioning, discovering, arguing, and collaborating that is more common (though by no means universal) among students in suburban and private schools.'  - Alfie Kohn


The same approach – a top-down drill and skill approach   is used for special ed kids or kids whose  cognitive skills are lagging behind.  The truth is that these kids need a   constructive   approach more than regular kids. All kids need a constructive approach to help them develop a love of learning and to become creative and critical learners. The challenging kids need the approach to also help them overcome developmental   delays and promote cognitive skills that they can use in dynamic environments.  Teaching kids skills like a pet dog in a static way does not promote dynamic skills. Teaching that focuses on kids' thinking and how they make meaning of what they learn will promote skills.


Teachers need to undergo a paradigm shift and focus more on ' guiding ' and less on 'getting' certain responses and certain things from their child. Deborah Meier, the esteemed educationalist said that teaching is more about listening and learning is more about talking. Here is an article by Libby Majewski  , a RDI relationship development intervention consultant – Tips for creating an IEP with a developmental focus  IEP = individual education plans


She recommends a teaching and communication style that uses a lot of non-verbal communication, the use of indirect prompts and hints rather than telling them or direct prompts.  We should give them more time to process language by waiting longer for responses, share  experiences, and use  'declarative ' language to introduce open-ended questions. Expressive language which is driven by the kid's thinking and autonomy is far more important than answering questions or quizzes.


These   tips however are only a part of the plan. They focus on teaching skills ' in the moment ' , as part of one's  general interaction with kids. The IEP also needs to include the collaborative problem solving of the kid's pile of specific   unsolved problems which are predictably occurring on a regular basis.
IEPs should be replaced with the CPS Plan ( collaborative problem solving Plan ) – CPS Individual education plan  and include the RDI – relationship development intervention plan

Rewards -a Collaborative problem solving and SDT approach

In a Sunday times article Professor Richard Ryan , the co-author of the Self determination motivational theory ,  Should we reward kids for A grades ?  warns parents not to reward children for A grades.

 His arguments for grades are similar to the CPS – collaborative problem solving approach discouraging rewards for good behavior.

1 Kids are naturally motivated to be curious and learn, do well and behave in an adaptive and appropriate way. Rewards undermine intrinsic motivation as kids see themselves learning and behaving only when there is a reward. Kids do well if they can and not if they want to. If they are struggling we need to ask what is getting in their way and how we can help them. When it comes to motivation we can try create an environment which is conducive to kids motivating themselves.


2 Rewards put the responsibility for learning and behaving on the parent.' Now the parent is the one who has to monitor the child, instead of the child assimilating and really internalizing the value of learning and hard work, (pro-social behavior ),which is really what we want to develop. The locus of control shifts from the child to the parent. Instead of asking what type of person do I want to be – a caring person who is curious and loves learning, kids learn to ask what will I get or what will be done to me ?


3 Rewards reward outcomes and often negative behaviors and values such as cheating, non-cooperation, not taking risks,  that help kids get good grades. They ignore the process of learning, the activity itself , valued behavior   and the feelings of the whole child.


4 Rewards actually cause the very problems – poor grades and maladaptive behavior – they are supposed to remedy. Rewards increase stress and anxiety which in itself can compromise performance.


5 They way to go is to avoid rewards and instead express appreciation and encouragement. We can be supportive and love a child unconditionally no matter how well he does in school or how he behaves. We can take steps to foster the child's competence, and his perception of being autonomous, self –directed and help him enjoy whatever he does. This will lead to a happier and self –motivated child.

I.E.Ps vs CPS - collaborative problem solving plan

Many teachers and parents of challenging kids need to participate in writing up an I.E.P – an individualized educational plan for the kid. The question asked and addressed in the CPS book for schools             Lost at School

 Is ' How do we incorporate collaborative problem solving into an I.E.P'?

' In the real world, problems, persons and settings continually change. And , attempts to solve problems actually modify the problem itself. Events or activities are inherently dynamic, rather than consisting of static conditions. Change and development, rather than static characteristics, is assumed to be basic..

A problem solving approach places primary emphasis on people's attempts to negotiate the stream of life, to work around or transform problems that emerge on the route to attaining the diverse goals of life '   - Barbara Rogoff

I think the way to go is to understand where traditional IEP and CPS differ.

The IEP may contain useful information such as lagging skills and academic problems that would impact on behavior.  

 IEPs and behaviorism focus on behaviors =static intelligence which makes IEPs static documents. CPS focuses on problem solving =dynamic intelligence which leads to a dynamic CPS plan.

 The goals and benchmarks in an IEP focus on the symptoms of the lagging skills -  behaviors that make the kid look bad – and teaching replacement behaviors for eg using words instead of hitting, stepping back to chill out, and asking for help etc. The focus on behavior is in part due to the way progress is measured and ' data ' collected.  Behaviorism looks at the ' behavior ', because it is easy to measure but ignores the child's feelings, concerns and the role of others in the problem, in other words the specific conditions giving rise to the problem. So IEP goals call for the display of appropriate replacement behaviors when the kid is challenged ignoring the problem

Treating the symptoms of an underlying problem with replacement behaviors or procedures does not deal with the underlying problem and the concerns of the kid. So the crucial components of an IEP and the goals and benchmarks should the pile of unsolved problems and lagging skills that need remediation. Once we have identified the unsolved problems and lagging skills we can use a CPS plan to prioritize problems and lagging skills.  The low priority problems will be put on the back burner - Plan C , and the high priority problems and lagging skills will be addressed by named teachers who will do plan B with the kid.

We can then show how Plan B – the mutually satisfying solution

 1 addresses the both kid's and teacher's solves problems in a realistic and durable way

2. and at the same time how the Plan B process teaches   indirectly the various lagging skills.

When we assess how the Plan B solution is addressing the problem, we are not only evaluating the lagging skills but whether the solution is the appropriate one to address the problem. We also need to reflect on the actual discussions themselves. These discussions are not only revealing about the kids concerns but also give information about how the kid is using his cognitive skills  for e.g– the ability to identify and express his concerns, planning, hindsight and foresight, perspective taking , being  flexible in his thinking.

Behaviorism and IEPs that focus on measuring behaviors gathering  ' static ' information . This leads to ' static' documents. CPS gathers ' dynamic ' information which is more helpful in dealing with the kid's issues.

Ross Greene concludes that since IEPs tend to be static documents, CPS is likely to be more effective at prioritizing and revising goals, tracking a kid's progress, deciding what skills have been satisfactorily trained and problems resolved, and helping kids appreciate the progress that is being made. IEPs become outdated rather quickly – the CPS plan is a living, breathing plan of action.

Struggling teen brains

On the subject of Parenting a struggling teen – Thinking beyond the crisis 

 Dr.  F. Reamer argues parents to look beyond the quick fix. He rightly says that these kids have skill deficits particularly  in the area of ' executive functions '.

'Thus, an important task with struggling teens is to place them in protected, supervised settings that can contain their inappropriate, impulsive, destructive, and counterproductive behaviors, keeping them safe during this critical period of brain development. As the brain matures, many struggling teens show evidence of improved judgment, better impulse control, more stable moods, and more appropriate behavior.  '

My question to Dr Reamer – why do we have to wait for the teen's brain to mature , why should we not act according to neuro-science and brain plasticity that CPS – the collaborative problem solving approach promotes brain development ,helps teens acquire ' executive functions ' and addresses their pile of unsolved problems in a realistic and durable way.

The high rates of recidivism in Juvenile Detention system prove that unless teens essential needs of autonomy, competence and relatedness are addressed by using collaborative problem solving , teens brains won't mature and be skilled over time.

CPS in Maine's Juvenile Detention System

Rod Bouffard, Superintendent at Long Creek Youth Development Center in South Portland, Maine, speaks about his experiences in implementing CPS in his facility.

Scroll down to the video clip

http://www.livesinthebalance.org/annual-conference