🚀 go-pugleaf

[From Tim Carey (990507.0616)]


>[From Bill Powers (990506.1145 MDT)]


Hi Bill,

Thanks for the reply ....

>If A is controlling B's behavior, then A is (as usual) really controlling
>A's perceptions, and those perceptions are of B's behavior or some direct
>consequence of B's behavior. In order to control his own perceptions of B's
>behavior, A normally has to influence B in such a way that B's actions
>change.

Yep, I understand this and don't have a problem with any of it. In fact, I
agree with it.

>If the child doesn't want to draw the letter that way, the child will
>resist. However, the letter will still be drawn as the teacher wants to see
>it drawn

I also understand this and can I say at this point that I would
categorically call this coercion. Can someone put that on record please. I
have never had a problem with this kind of interaction being called
coercion. Here you have identified that the child doesn't want to draw.

The ONLY problem I have with the current discussions on coercion is that the
current discussion doesn't differentiate between instances where the child
doesn't want to draw and instances where the child wants to draw as well as
he can using the teacher for assistance.

This to me is the difference between a coercive interaction and a
cooperative one and it seems odd that the current PCT definition of coercion
isn't able to discriminate between the two.

>Is that closer to making sense?


Yep, thanks.  Is my confusion made any clearer by the last paragraph.

It might also be of interest to know that when I teach schools about RTP I
_don't_ talk about it as being noncoercive. In fact I have corrected people
when they say it is. I don't have a problem acknowledging that there are
coercive elements at times in RTP. If a kid has disrupted twice and doesn't
want to leave the room he is currently in then coercion is certainly going
to take place. I also know of instances however where kids have told the
person in the room that they disrupted twice _intentionally_ so that they
could get to the room.

I just can't understand that it makes any sense to label both these events
as coercive because overtly they are following the same procedure.

Sorry, that was more long winded than I intended.

Cheers,

Tim