Learn to speak the correct love language
Matthew was the Bouncer. His fist was ready to settle all and any problem. Mark was the Scowler. He could hold a scowl a full hour when offended. Luke was Despair personified. He dealt with difficulties by bowing his head on the desk in woeful despair. John was Paralysis – he would sit and pout all day, even skipping lunch, when something upset him.
Obviously there were other things going on with these children than just having a bad day or waking up on the wrong side of the bed. Making these children learn was a daily challenge. And for the first four months of one school year nothing I tried by way of incentive – positive or negative - worked. I scowled back. I offered tickets to redeem for free play time. I gave them stickers. Some days I was so angry and frustrated that I stood in front of the class, and, as James Thurber would put it, begin “to quiver all over like Lionel Barrymore.”
Rewards and incentives. It seems a simple matter. But what does research say? There are some in education who oppose the use of reward. Some early research have shown that internal motivation is reduced when people are rewarded for doing something they already want to do anyway.
Robert Marzano in “The Art and Science of Teaching” cites several studies and meta-analyses that make important conclusions. First, there is a need for both positive and negative consequences to decrease disruptive behavior. Second, overly attractive rewards that call too much attention to the student, rewards that focus on an activity instead of a goal, and rewards that control behavior, are detrimental to performance and motivation.
Nevertheless, researchers Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy conclude, it is increasingly clear that the effects of reinforcement depend on the nature of the reinforcement used and especially how it is presented.
I have tried different systems of rewards and incentives, but none worked as well as when I read Gary Chapman’s bestselling book “The Five Love Languages.” Chapman’s five love languages are acts of service, receiving gifts, quality time, physical touch and words of affirmation.
Although the original context for Chapman’s first book was marriage, the principles transfer so well to any kind of human relationship that he as since written a series of books on the five love languages for teens, singles and children.
Chapman’s premise is that we all have an “emotional love tank” that needs to be full for us to live satisfying, fulfilled and productive lives. Problems in relationships occur when an emotional love tank teeters on empty. The way we fill each others' tank is by speaking the appropriate love language.
Chapman cites many marriages where a mate continues to be unfulfilled and dissatisfied with the relationship. All because the other spouse has not learned to “speak” his or her mate’s love language. For example, a husband might try to be a devoted father, helping around the house and bringing home an adequate paycheck. But if he is married to a wife whose love language is words of affirmation, the wife will not go through life with a full emotional love tank.
Corporations spend a lot of money trying to fill their employees’ love tank. Not always with success. “I’ve started projects from the ground up, and my boss showed appreciation by taking me to expensive restaurants and giving me designer gifts. They were nice but what I wanted to stay with a project and grow it. Another person was always named as leader. It was very demeaning. I was in depression. I had to walk away to preserve myself. He was stunned.”
The Apostle Paul once wrote: “though I speak with the tongues of angels and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal….Faith, hope and love. And the greatest of these is love.”
Sometimes there is love, but we do not speak it in the correct language.
“Employing the wrong language is not a neutral act but can be very negative,” writes Chapman. He dreams of a “day when children’s developing energies are channeled to learning and serving rather than seeking the love they did not receive….”
Not wanting to continue to be a sounding brass or tinkling cymbal, I tried to know more about my students. I discovered Matthew liked to be told he was getting better (words of affirmation), so I found reason to praise him. Mark liked to sweep the floor (acts of service), so some days I had the cleanest floor in school. Luke liked being with me at recess (quality time) so sometimes I let him shadow me. John was fine if he got at least two hugs a day (physical touch). He learned to ask for a hug when he needed one.
The situation remained imperfect, but Matthew, Mark, Luke and John became more productive. My scowling, bribing Lionel Barrymore days ended. And in place of the Scowler, the Bouncer, Despair and Paralysis I had Tweet, Sweep, Tag and Hug.
The school year was not all lost. And I learned to speak four new languages.
Obviously there were other things going on with these children than just having a bad day or waking up on the wrong side of the bed. Making these children learn was a daily challenge. And for the first four months of one school year nothing I tried by way of incentive – positive or negative - worked. I scowled back. I offered tickets to redeem for free play time. I gave them stickers. Some days I was so angry and frustrated that I stood in front of the class, and, as James Thurber would put it, begin “to quiver all over like Lionel Barrymore.”
Rewards and incentives. It seems a simple matter. But what does research say? There are some in education who oppose the use of reward. Some early research have shown that internal motivation is reduced when people are rewarded for doing something they already want to do anyway.
Robert Marzano in “The Art and Science of Teaching” cites several studies and meta-analyses that make important conclusions. First, there is a need for both positive and negative consequences to decrease disruptive behavior. Second, overly attractive rewards that call too much attention to the student, rewards that focus on an activity instead of a goal, and rewards that control behavior, are detrimental to performance and motivation.
Nevertheless, researchers Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy conclude, it is increasingly clear that the effects of reinforcement depend on the nature of the reinforcement used and especially how it is presented.
I have tried different systems of rewards and incentives, but none worked as well as when I read Gary Chapman’s bestselling book “The Five Love Languages.” Chapman’s five love languages are acts of service, receiving gifts, quality time, physical touch and words of affirmation.
Although the original context for Chapman’s first book was marriage, the principles transfer so well to any kind of human relationship that he as since written a series of books on the five love languages for teens, singles and children.
Chapman’s premise is that we all have an “emotional love tank” that needs to be full for us to live satisfying, fulfilled and productive lives. Problems in relationships occur when an emotional love tank teeters on empty. The way we fill each others' tank is by speaking the appropriate love language.
Chapman cites many marriages where a mate continues to be unfulfilled and dissatisfied with the relationship. All because the other spouse has not learned to “speak” his or her mate’s love language. For example, a husband might try to be a devoted father, helping around the house and bringing home an adequate paycheck. But if he is married to a wife whose love language is words of affirmation, the wife will not go through life with a full emotional love tank.
Corporations spend a lot of money trying to fill their employees’ love tank. Not always with success. “I’ve started projects from the ground up, and my boss showed appreciation by taking me to expensive restaurants and giving me designer gifts. They were nice but what I wanted to stay with a project and grow it. Another person was always named as leader. It was very demeaning. I was in depression. I had to walk away to preserve myself. He was stunned.”
The Apostle Paul once wrote: “though I speak with the tongues of angels and have not love, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal….Faith, hope and love. And the greatest of these is love.”
Sometimes there is love, but we do not speak it in the correct language.
“Employing the wrong language is not a neutral act but can be very negative,” writes Chapman. He dreams of a “day when children’s developing energies are channeled to learning and serving rather than seeking the love they did not receive….”
Not wanting to continue to be a sounding brass or tinkling cymbal, I tried to know more about my students. I discovered Matthew liked to be told he was getting better (words of affirmation), so I found reason to praise him. Mark liked to sweep the floor (acts of service), so some days I had the cleanest floor in school. Luke liked being with me at recess (quality time) so sometimes I let him shadow me. John was fine if he got at least two hugs a day (physical touch). He learned to ask for a hug when he needed one.
The situation remained imperfect, but Matthew, Mark, Luke and John became more productive. My scowling, bribing Lionel Barrymore days ended. And in place of the Scowler, the Bouncer, Despair and Paralysis I had Tweet, Sweep, Tag and Hug.
The school year was not all lost. And I learned to speak four new languages.
