The New Dare to Discipline

by James Dobson

  A retarded child with an IQ of 70 would probably qualify for highly specialized and expensive educational programs, including a smaller class, specially trained teacher, audio visual aids and a “no fail” policy. By contrast, a slow learning child with an IQ of 80 would usually receive no such advantages. He must compete in regular classes against the full range of more capable students. Such competition implies winners and losers, and it is the slow learner who invariably “loses.”

  Let’s consider the plight of the unintelligent young student in the classroom. Here is the child who “would if he could—but can’t.” He rarely, if ever, gets the thrill of earning a “hundred” on his spelling test. He is the last child chosen in any academic game or contest. He often has the least sympathy from his teachers. He is no more successful in social activities than academic pursuits, and the other children reject him openly.

  Like the late bloomer, the slow learner gradually develops a crushing image of failure that distorts his self-concept and damages his ego. This was exemplified by a conversation overheard by a colleague of mine between two intellectually handicapped students. Discussing their prospects with girls, one of them said, “I do okay until they find out I’m a retard.” Obviously, this child was keenly aware of his inadequacy.

  There is no better way to assassinate self-confidence in our children than to place 25 percent of them in a situation where excellence is impossible to achieve, where inadequacy is the daily routine, and where inferiority is a living reality. It is not surprising that such a child is often a mischievous tormentor in the third grade, a bully in the sixth grade, a loudmouth in junior high, and a drop-out/delinquent in high school.

  The slow learner is unlike the late bloomer in one major respect: time will not resolve his deficiency. He will not do better next year. In fact, he tends to get further behind as he grows older. Traditionally, the schools have retained the incapable child in the same grade level for an extra year or two, which proves to be most unworkable, unscientific, and unfortunate.

  Retention accomplishes absolutely nothing but to ice the cake of failure. The accumulated scientific evidence on this issue is indisputable. Many follow-up studies have shown that children who were retained continued to fail the following year, and their academic problems were then compounded by emotional difficulties. The retained child is held back with the “little kids” while his contemporaries move on to a new grade level and a new teacher. He feels overgrown, foolish, and dumb. His relatives all know that he failed. Throughout his school life, people will ask revealing questions, such as “How come you’re thirteen and only in the fifth grade?” He will reply, “Aw, I flunked third grade.” It is a painful confession.

  A further problem can be anticipated; the child who is retained once or twice will probably undergo sexual development (puberty) before his classmates, which can produce many unfortunate circumstances. When the slow learner finally reaches high school a year or more late, he usually finds even less tolerance for his difficulty.

  One mature tenth grader was once referred to me because he announced he was dropping out of school. I asked why he was quitting, and he said, “I’ve been miserable since first grade. I’ve felt embarrassed and stupid every year. I’ve had to stand up and read, but I can’t even understand a second grade book. You people have had your last laugh at me. I’m getting out.” I told him I didn’t blame him for the way he felt; his suffering was our responsibility.

  Surprisingly, some unsuccessful students are still willing to struggle even after years of failure. As a psychologist, I was always encouraged when the toughest, roughest boys in high school got excited about a remedial reading program. They wanted desperately to learn this skill, but were convinced they were too dumb. This all changed when the remedial reading teacher showed them they could learn.

  One brawny lad named Jeff was awed by his own progress. He looked up at his teacher with tears in his eyes, and said, “When I was in second grade I brought home a report card with an “F” in reading. I was sitting on the couch while my old man read it. He came over with a strap and beat the ——— out of me. Since then, this is the first time I’ve done anything right in school.”

  I was once asked to evaluate a high school boy named Willie who failed history three times. He was unable to graduate because he couldn’t earn a “D” or better in this required course. I tested Willie and learned that he was a slow learner. His teacher, who had previously required Willie to compete equally with other students, was surprised by the results. His lack of awareness of the child’s limited ability seemed unfair to me, so I devised the following form letter to notify teachers of others like Willie:

  Strictly Confidential

  Name of Student ________________________________

  The above-named student apparently has some limitations which may be important to understanding his academic performance and classroom behavior. Although he does not qualify for Special Education, according to a strict interpretation of the Education Code, his intellectual ability seemingly falls into a “borderline” category. There is no legal basis for his removal from the regular classroom, but he should not be expected to compete with more capable students.

  If he is required to meet an arbitrary percentage of correct examination answers, as are students with average capabilities, he must be expected to fail consistently. On the other hand, he should not be allowed to coast along without using his potential.

  It seems appropriate that his grade be based on his efforts and progress, based on his individual learning capacity. To fail him in spite of his efforts is to deny him the opportunity to graduate.

  I would be glad to discuss the matter with you if further information is desired.

  NOTE: Please destroy this note to minimize potential embarrassment to the student.

  Some teachers had never considered giving a slow learner an easier academic target until receiving this note. A few did not consider it after reading this note, either.

  When I think of slow learners, the case of fourteen-year-old Robert sticks in my mind. He was five inches taller and twenty pounds heavier than the next largest student in his sixth grade class. Though retained in the second and fourth grades, Robert still had not learned to read or write. His teacher tried to motivate him every way she knew how, but Robert withstood all challenges and gimmicks. He simply quit trying.

  When his teacher threatened to fail him a third time, Robert responded with horror. He could visualize himself as a seventy-three-year-old student, still sitting in a sixth grade class. That nightmarish thought motivated him to do his best in class, but his deficient academic skills prevented much progress. Robert remained in a state of anxiety until the final report cards were issued. On that morning, he was literally white around the mouth and shaking with tension until he read the pronouncement, “Promoted to the Seventh Grade.”

  Robert’s teacher had not meant to be unkind earlier; he only wanted to obtain the best effort from this lad. Nevertheless, it was a mistake to threaten him with social disaster. A slow learner or retarded individual has the same emotional needs for adequacy and acceptance as a gifted or bright child, and emotional stability should not be sacrificed on the altar of education.

  Despite the effects of failing a slow learner, I believe some children do profit from a second year in the same grade level. The best guideline for retention is this: hold back the child for whom something will be different next year. For example, a child who was sick for seven months in one academic year might profit from another run-through when he is well. And again, the late bloomer should be held back in kindergarten (or the first grade at the latest) to place him with youngsters of comparable development.

  For the slow learner, however, nothing will be changed. If he was failing fourth grade in June, he will continue failing fourth grade in September. That’s because the curricular con tent of each grade level is similar to the year before and the year after. The same concepts are taught year after year; the student
s in each grade are taken a little farther, but much of the time is spent in review.

  For example, addition and subtraction are taught in the primary years, but considerable work is done on these tasks in sixth grade, too. Nouns and verbs are taught repeatedly for several years. The overlap in curricular material from grade to grade is represented more accurately in Figure A, below, than by Figure B.

  Thus, the most unjustifiable reason for retention is to expose the slow learner to another year with easier concepts. He will not do better the second time around! Nor is there much magic in summer school. Some parents hope that a six-week program in July and August will accomplish what was impossible in the ten months between September and June. They are often disappointed.

  Since retention and summer school do not solve the problem of the slow learner, we are faced with the obvious question: What can be done for these children? Listed below are the steps that could tip the scales in favor of this vast number of youngsters:

  1. Teach them to read, even if a one-to-one teacher-student ratio is required (and it probably will be). Nearly every child can learn to read, but many children have difficulty if taught only in large groups. Their minds wander and they do not ask questions as readily. It would be expensive for the school to support additional remedial reading teachers, but no expenditure would be more helpful. Special techniques, teaching machines, and individual reinforcement can be successful in teaching this most basic skill to children who are least likely to learn without individual attention. This assistance should not be delayed until the fourth or fifth grades or in junior high. By then the slow learner has already endured the indignities of failure.

  Many school districts have implemented creative programs to focus on reading problems. One such program, the “ungraded primary,” eliminates distinctions between students in the first three grades. Instead of grouping children by age, they are combined according to reading skill. Good readers in the first, second, and third grades may occupy the same classes. Poor readers are also grouped together. This procedure takes the sting out of retention and allows slow learners to benefit from homogeneous grouping.

  Another popular system is called the “split reading” program. In this method, the better half of readers in a class arrive at school thirty minutes early for specialized instructions. The slower half remains a half an hour later each day for the same purpose.

  There are many such programs to teach reading more effectively. Parents who are concerned about their child’s basic academic skills may wish to seek tutorial assistance to supplement these school programs.

  2. The slow learner should be shielded from the devastation of failure. Scholastic goals which the slow learner can’t attain should be de-emphasized. He should be required to do only things that are within his reach. He should be praised when he does his best, even if his work isn’t on par with his peers. The slow learner is entitled to self-acceptance too, even in this fast-paced technological world.

  3. Remember that success breeds success. The best motivation for a slow learner is to know he is succeeding. If adults in his life show confidence in him, he will more likely have confidence in himself. In fact, most humans share this characteristic. We tend to act the way we think other people “see” us.

  I learned this when I joined the National Guard at twenty-two years of age. I had recently graduated from college and had already been accepted into graduate school. Thus, I enlisted for extended reserve duty in the military rather than serve two years active duty. I was immediately packed on a bus for Fort Ord, California, to undergo a six-month basic training and Army administrative course. Contrary to the recruiting posters, this exciting new career opportunity was not a matter of personal choice; it was selected for me. Nevertheless, I spent the next half year learning the fascinating world of military forms, typing, and filing. It bored me nearly out of my mind.

  One hundred and eighty-three days later I returned to the local National Guard unit with this newly acquired knowledge available for usage. Surprisingly, I was not welcomed back with much enthusiasm. That’s because I was a private and everyone knows privates are stupid. I was outranked by practically the whole world—so it stood to reason there was thickness between my ears. Everybody from the privates-first-class to the colonel anticipated ignorant behavior from me. To my amazement, their expectation proved accurate.

  My first assignment after those months of office training was to type a simple letter in two copies. After twenty-five minutes of concentrated effort, I realized the carbon paper, used in those days, was upside down. Reverse lettering was smudged all over the back of the main copy, which did not ingratiate me with the sergeant. Similar complex procedures, like remembering regulations and procedures, were strangely difficult to perform. Looking back, it is clear that my performance was consistent with my image.

  I then went into a tough graduate school program and earned a Ph.D. with a 3.91 grade average. Self-image was the difference.

  Likewise, many children who fail in school are merely doing what they think others expect of them. Our reputation with our peers is a very influential force in our lives. This is especially true of slow learners, who represent one-quarter of all students. Perhaps your child is one of them.

  In the next chapter, we’ll follow the footprints of the third type of child for whom academic discipline seems so difficult. Stay tuned.

  QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS

  Q If age is such a poor factor to use in determining the start of the first grade, why is it applied so universally in our country?

  A Because it is so convenient. Parents can plan for the definite beginning of school when their child turns six. School officials can survey their districts and know how many first-graders they will have the following year. If an eight-year-old moves into the district in October, the administrator knows the child belongs in second grade, and so on. The use of chronological age as a criterion for school entrance is great for everybody—except the late bloomer.

  Q What causes a child to be a slow learner?

  A There are many hereditary, environmental, and physical factors which contribute to one’s intellect, and it is difficult to isolate the particular influences. Accumulating evidence seems to indicate that some slow learning and even borderline retardation are caused by a lack of intellectual stimulation in the child’s very early years. There appears to be a critical period during the first three to four years when the potential for intellectual growth must be seized. There are enzyme systems in the brain that must be activated during this brief window. If the opportunity is missed, the child may never reach his capacity.

  Children who grow up in deprived circumstances are more likely to be slow learners. They may not have heard adult language regularly. They have not been provided with interesting books and puzzles to occupy their sensory apparatus. They have not been taken to the zoo, the airport, or other exciting places. They have not received daily training and guidance from adults. This lack of stimulation may inhibit the brain from developing properly.

  The effect of early stimulation on living brains has been studied in several fascinating animal experiments. In one, researchers divided litter-mate rats into two identical groups. The first group was given maximum stimulation during the first few months of life. These rats were kept in well-lighted cages, surrounded by interesting paddle wheels and other toys. They were handled regularly and allowed to explore outside their cages. They were subjected to learning experiences and then rewarded for remembering. The second group lived the opposite kind of existence. These rats crouched in dimly lit, drab, uninteresting cages. They were not handled or stimulated in any way, and were not permitted outside their cages. Both groups were fed identical food.

  At 105 days of age, all the rats were sacrificed to permit examination of their neurological apparatus. The researchers were surprised to find that the high stimulation rats had brains that differed in several important ways: (1) the cortex (the thinking part of the brain) was thicker and wi
der; (2) the blood supply was much more abundant; (3) the enzymes necessary for learning were more sophisticated. The researchers concluded that high stimulation experienced during the first group’s early lives had resulted in more advanced and complex brains.

  It is always risky to apply conclusions from animal research directly to humans, but the same kinds of changes probably occur in the brains of highly stimulated children. If parents want their children to be capable, they should begin by talking to them at length while they are still babies. Interesting mobiles and winking-blinking toys should be arranged around the crib. From then on through the toddler years, learning activities should be programmed regularly.

  Of course, parents must understand the difference between stimulation and pressure. Providing books for a three-year-old is stimulating. Ridiculing and threatening him because he can’t read them is pressuring. Imposing unreachable expectations can have a damaging effect on children.

  If early stimulation is as important as it now appears, then the lack thereof may be a leading cause of slow learning and even mild retardation. It is imperative that parents take the time and invest their resources in their children. The necessity for providing rich, edifying experiences for young children has never been so obvious as it is today.

  Q I’ve read that it’s possible to teach four-year-olds to read. Should I be working on this with my child?

  A If a youngster is particularly sharp and can learn to read without feeling undue adult pressure, it might be advantageous to teach him this skill. But that’s a much bigger “if” than most people realize. Few parents can work with their own children without showing frustration over natural failures. It’s like teaching your wife to drive: risky at best, disastrous at worst.

  Besides this limitation, learning should be programmed at the age when it is most needed. Why invest unending effort in teaching a child to read when he has not yet learned to cross the street, tie his shoes, count to ten, or answer the telephone? It seems foolish to get panicky over preschool reading, as such.