The I'm OK, You're OK Classroom

<= /span>

The I’m OK, You’re OK Classroom

<= /span>

Exchange of Named = Hello Greeting

Exercises in Public Education Classrooms

<= /span>

Franklin H. Ernst Jr., M.D.

<= /span>

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-font-weigh= t: bold'>

<= /span>

<= /span>

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman"'>

= <= o:p>

“Doctor, they are teaching themselves now.”

“I know. It has happened that way in other classrooms, too.R= 21;

&= nbsp; In the fall of 1971, with the sanction of school administration, and assistanc= e of two teachers who recruited fellow faculty members for this class, writer ta= ught an eight-week course to 12 members of the high school faculty out of 100 of= a local high school. The course was taught in writer’s office. The stated reason for the course w= as to prevent the expected annual spring campus riot for the fourth year running. Titled “Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers” (TACT), this co= urse included the ingredients of an introductory course in Transactional Analysi= s. By then, the exchange of named hellos between parties had been established = as the essence of an “I’m OK, You’re OK” encounter.

&= nbsp; For riot control purposes, one avenue of approach was to reduce and control the animosity between parties. Ri= ots are based on stirring participants into looking at each other as belonging = to one of two groups who were in opposition, as both parties being crusaders f= or “the right” and in opposition to each other, “the wrong”, ie each other. = Each of the parties will have adopted the position “I Am OK and You are Not-OK.” Obviously ther= e is a shortage of “You are OKs” being given out during riots.

&= nbsp; The cornerstone of this Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers course for those attending teachers who met with their classroom students was to give each other in that classroom a “Hello” by name each day, write down each other’s first and last n= ame. They were to do this in their respective classrooms for at least seven successive weeks, and to the end of the school year if school circumstances permitted. =

&= nbsp; To demonstrate this procedure, it was carried out in the first meeting of the Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers class, at the writer’s office, as an opening exercise. The writer included himself in the exercise. This particular exercise of exchanging first and last name hellos with each other and everyone in the class was repeated at the start of each of the se= ven remaining class sessions in writer’s office.

&= nbsp; Within one week of starting the TACT course, classroom students knew who belonged = in their classroom and who was absent on a given day. Within three weeks, it was hard fo= r a person to be on campus without someone else in sight of him knowing if he belonged there, or not, and if he did, who the person was by name. Accountability of on-campus indivi= duals (faculty and students) went way up. Students began to have an increasing sense of pride in their school, respect for their teachers, and pleasure in attending their classes. Classroom invaders and on campus r= iot promoters found it impossible to recruit for the planned “annual spri= ng riot.”

Result: No = Annual Spring Riot. [i]=

TEACHING INSTRUCT= ION IN THIS 8 WEEK CLASS FOCUSED ON:

1. HELLOES gi= ven with the person’s NAME, both spoken and written, the Howdy diagram.

2. The PAC (Parent-Adult-Child) diagram. Differentiating between feelings, reasoning and self-governing (protection of integrity, Parent) teachings and how to diagram these p= arts of personality and especially behaviors as faculty and students in the clas= s of these faculty members saw PAC.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

3. The principles of their soci= al dynamics with each other and how to both graphically represent in the OK Co= rral what had happened to them in any particular event, and socially to better regulate their behavior, i.e. get-on-with (GOW) or get-away-from (GAF) or get-rid-of (GRO) or get-nowhere-with (GNW).

By the end of the course these students knew what they were doing and they liked school.=

“Your feelings you have, = can cause you to say and do the thing you do.

By changing the things you say = and do, you can change your feelings, too.”

(Anon)

VALUE OF A NAMED = HELLO

&= nbsp; The value of a named hello is Good Will, is “You are OK”, and is FI= VE TIMES the value of a HELLO ALONE without a name.

&= nbsp; In the April, 1962 “Transactional Analysis Bulletin,” David Kupfer reported a comparative value of one unit for a hello received, five units f= or a named hello and ten units of positive stroking value for a hello from a celebrity. = [ii] Based on these values for receivin= g a named hello, each student in one of the “Organized Pandemonium” classes received 150 units of positive stroking (30 hellos by name, times a value of 5 for each) on arrival in his class. Where else in a day or in a week could someone, let alone a student, have expected so much concentrated, unconditional, good will stroking comin= g to himself within one hour. =

&= nbsp; Yes! You might almost say, the students= in those particular classes got “high” in the experience of so much good will coming their way. Teachers, too?= Yes! But these “highs” were self-regulated. The writing of names by each st= udent on his own notepad, as he went from classmate to classmate to classmate, was known by writer ahead of time as the element that would ultimately lead to a calming, reasoning effect among people (students) in the classroom. Students became “reasonable,” manifested quality of personal so= cial control.

&= nbsp; “Positive stroking” is a = free “you are OK.” The exchange of free named hellos equals the exch= ange of free OK’s, or “I am OK and You are OK.” = = [iii]<= /a>

THE TACT CLASS HE= LLO EXERCISE

&= nbsp; This exercise in this Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers class had 2 parts. The first was the exch= ange of a named hello by each person in the classroom with every other person in= the room. This included each stud= ent exchanging a named hello with the teacher, too.

&= nbsp; The second part, each person in the room make a name seating diagram of his particular classroom showing first and last names of each person there and indicating in writing the exchange of named hellos between himself and anot= her person there. It was recommen= ded that one circle around the name of a person could stand for giving the named hello to the other person and a second, a concentric circle, around the wri= tten name could stand for the named hello coming back to the particular person f= rom that same person. Among other things, this was a way for each class member = to tally his personal progress in exchanging greetings in this classroom exercise. “Keep track o= f the named hellos you give” and the named hellos given back to you.

PARTICIPATING FAC= ULTY PERMISSION AND PROTECTION

&= nbsp; When it was decided in 1971 to teach this course to the faculty at the high scho= ol we knew, more had to be done than just pass out flyers to some school teach= ers that said “Come learn RIOT P= REVENTION.” The goal of the class was to prevent the annual high school riot.

&= nbsp; While the teachers would need to be taught what to do, and given permission to do it in the classroom, there was more these facu= lty members would need. In order = to be successful in teaching a course on “riot control” in the classr= oom, these faculty members would need effective, potent personal and professional protection from the local school board and administration. The classrooms of these particular faculty members would become noisy, compared to the classroom next door. The next door teacher would be sur= e to talk in the faculty room about the difference of noise level and ask what w= as happening in these classes. Classroom students would come out of the particular classrooms, onto= the campus grounds, into the school hallways saying, doing unexpected and diffe= rent things than previously exhibited. For example, students regularly were seen= naming their teachers, fellow stu= dents brightly smiling and happy. O= ther teachers and students would be sure to report these to each other and paren= ts of their students.

&= nbsp; SO! We:

1) secured the OK o= f the school principal and the district school superintendent to

2) give a graded co= urse to the attending teachers after which we were in a position to <= /span>

3) award those who = passed the course some college credit, i.e. academic recognition toward their annu= al requirement of “continuing teacher education” through an affiliation writer had with a local college. Both the principal and the School District Superintendent of Education were notified of the probable increased classroom noise levels in the particular classrooms being taught by one of = the select TACT faculty member teachers being taught, taught how to achieve good classroom morals. =

&= nbsp; NOW, the faculty members taking the course, which required the faculty students carry out specific activities with their classroom students, were protected when carrying out their “homework assignments”, including introducing the TACT material they taught week by week to at least one of t= heir high school class periods.

&= nbsp; The weekly homework assignments for these faculty members were the riot control measures. These “homewo= rk assignments” were “to teach their high school class students wh= at they had just been taught.”

&= nbsp; The TACT homework assignments were exercises that were designed to control riots. The core aspects of wh= at these teachers had been taught by instruction in the TACT class, week by we= ek, became central to carrying out instructive teaching. By reducing student questions and/= or “participative” exercises, potential mischief was reduced.

&= nbsp; The only participative activity and technique carried out by the TACT teacher w= as one - THE daily class-opening exchange of na= med hello exercise around the room by each one of those in the classroom and ea= ch recording his hellos, given and received, i.e. responsibility for classroom personal behavior.

&= nbsp; The objective of the writer was to reduce the use of and reliance on any other participative learning technique exercises in either the TACT class or in t= he public school classroom. Beyo= nd some handshakes, on occasion, physical touching was not encouraged (nor discouraged except by personal example).&n= bsp; These teachers were, after all, hired primarily and paid by the scho= ol district to teach specific subject material in a pre-programmed and sequenc= ed manner. The school district did not restrict a teacher from improving the efficiency of learning (“better grades”) by his students. The o= nly condition given by the District Superintendent was control the amount of no= ise in the classroom.

&= nbsp; Protection for using and teaching these procedures, in the public school setting, came from the person in power, the person with primary authority over and responsibility for the school, the Office of the Superintendent of the Scho= ol District. Protection came whe= n the authority of the school district backed a well founded set of instructions = for faculty developed by a recognized authority in the field of behavioral scie= nce (writer), and backed his teaching staff. They, the attending faculty teachi= ng staff, were motivated, with the School Superintendent, “for a good jo= b to be well done.”

&= nbsp; The fact that it took “only” 12% (12 out of 100 faculty) to start the social contagion of t= he exchange of named hellos, giving free OK’s, to those in a closed (sch= ool campus) demonstrated the power of a well taught set of social tools with personal rewards. At sometime in the day, at least 25% of the student body = did attend at least one of the five periods taught by these TACT teachers. Subjects these teachers nominally = taught in high school included biology, chemistry, physical education, history, geometry, English and Social Studies.

FIRST TACT CLASS = WAS NOISY, BUT ORDERLY

&= nbsp; The first Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers class, held in the writer’s office, WAS a NOISY, BUT ORDERLY meeting. The high school teachers became “noisy,” laughing and talking to each other, as was expected, for their first named hello exchanges. For the most part, their greetings extended well beyond the simple, verbal, named hello exchanges.&nbs= p;

&= nbsp; Again as expected, this initial class exercise took up the larger portion of the first class meeting. As this = first “Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers” class began to settle down, writer went around to each attending teacher member and got a = look at the seating chart drawn by each of the individuals. After the faculty members had sett= led back down in this classroom, the individual’s were each asked for a b= rief report of their just concluded experience during the exercise.

&= nbsp; “There are three people here I didn’t know by name before. Most of the people here are friendly, even you Doc.”

&= nbsp; Next, an outline of the next seven sessions was presented, handed out with dates, times, and location. Office s= taff were introduced and instructions about bathroom use, office areas were give= n. Class members were told about the availability of college credit, cost to t= hem for the college processing the class credit and course requirements for cre= dit. They were told that the school pri= ncipal and school district Superintendent of Education had given written approval = for the course. They were told that attendance and completion of their “homework” exercises within that selected class, would allow th= em to get college credit if the individual high school teacher wanted it. College credit course requirements= would include grading them on completion of certain elements during this eight we= ek course including their attendance, completion of “homework assignment= s” of teaching some of what they learned in their selected daily classes, and reports they would give in the writer’s weekly after school “classroom” about carrying out these homework assignments. Recommended reading included “Games People Play” by E Berne MD, “Transactional Analysi= s in Psychotherapy” by E Berne MD, “I’m OK, You’re OK= 221; by TA Harris MD and “The Handbook of Listening, Transactional Analysi= s of the Listening Activity” by FH Ernst Jr. MD. They were told that the local store carried these books for sale.

THE HOWDY CLASSRO= OM EXERCISE AS TAUGHT IN TACT CLASS

&= nbsp; The teacher-students in the author’s first class session were taught that this “Hello” classroom exercise had four elements: <= /span>

1) Each class member saying hello by name to each one of his classmates is carried out in order = to get a named hello said back to himself.&nb= sp; If a class member did not know the name of the person he was saying hello to, then a simple procedure was to say to that other person: “My name is (Philip Drew). Tell m= e your name so I can say it to you.” (“Tell me your name so that I can fulfill the teacher’s classroom assignment”, ostensibly to be in compliance with the teacher “mandate” to the class member.)

2) Draw a seating c= hart of the classroom with both the first and last names of each person in the c= lass room.

3) Make a record of= the exchange of named hellos by marking one circle for giving the other person = his name with a hello and a second (concentric) circle for the named hello given back to the other person.

4) And then these classroom teachers were then told to collect their students’ named he= llo seating diagram charts, look at them to see how they were doing. Check out = the charts to make sure the classroom students were carrying out the exercise, = to check student handwriting and spelling of the names of their classmates. And then return student charts to them at the end of each class. Do this daily = for the coming week. <= /o:p>

THE FIRST “HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT”

&= nbsp; The first “homework assignment” for the coming week was to select o= ne of the classes they teach each day and have the students of that class exch= ange named hellos with each other. Have the high school classroom students say h= ello by name to each other student member of that class, including the teacher. = Each student and teacher was to make (draw) a first and last name seating diagra= m of the classroom showing the location of every member of the class, and on that seating diagram each student was to record the giving of a named hello to t= hat person and also record his own getting back a named hello from that other person.

&= nbsp; One response to writer from these faculty members was: “Oh, just like you= had us do at the start of this class.”&n= bsp;

&= nbsp; “Yes, exactly. And carry out that e= xercise in that same class on every day for the coming week.”

&= nbsp; They were told this would take up most, if not all, of the classroom time in the particular class during the first few days of the coming week. This first “Transactional An= alysis for Classroom Teachers” class was concluded by passing out copies of = the agenda and homework assignments for each of the eight weekly class sessions= .

CLASSROOM HOWDY DIAGRAM

Sample classroom seating diagram showing named hello exchanges charted.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

The above names are pseudonyms. Writer has not intentionally used the names of any persons known to himself= .

TACT CLASS HOMEWO= RK ASSIGNMENTS / CLASS AGENDA

&= nbsp; Each of the eight Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teacher classes started w= ith each person in the room saying hello by name to each other person, including writer. This was followed by = each member of the TACT class giving a brief report on carrying out his homework= assignment for the past week. The first = class closed with a description of next week’s homework assignment.

&= nbsp; During the second TACT class session these teacher students were told there would = be a total of 1000 points possible for the eight week course. 750 points minimum would be required to pass. A description of course work was handed out show= ing: class week, date, subject matter, assignments, possible points assigned for carrying out specific classroom exercises, and points for carrying out spec= ific homework tasks.

&= nbsp; Homework assignments were given at the conclusion of each class. Every homework assignment included each teacher carrying out the exchange named hello exer= cise in their respective high school classrooms every day.

&= nbsp;

CRUCIAL TO RIOT CONTROL

&= nbsp; Within one week of starting this course, classroom students knew who belonged in t= heir classroom and who was absent on a given day. Within three weeks, it was hard fo= r a person to be on the campus without someone else in sight of him knowing if = he belonged there or not, and if he did, who the person was by name. Accountability of on-campus indivi= duals (faculty and students) went way up. It was shown that morale and pride went up among the faculty and the students when the exchange of named hello exercise was used. In this particular High School, it became safe again to walk in the hallways between classes. People now knew who belonged and who was a stranger, who w= as accountable. Students began to have an increasing sense of pride in their school, respect for their teachers, and pleasure in attending their classes. Classroom invaders a= nd on campus riot promoters found it impossible to recruit for the planned “annual spring riot.”

Result: No = Annual Spring Riot.

&= nbsp; Students knew who belonged on the high school campus and who did not. Students knew who belonged in the hallways a= nd who did not. Students knew who belonged in the rest rooms and who did not. =

THE TACT COURSE TEACHINGS PROMOTED CLASSROOM, HALLWAY AND CAMPUS ORDERLINESS

&= nbsp; The teacher job on campus included maintaining orderliness, in the classroom, in the halls (“no running in the halls”), and generally on campus. The job of maintaining order on campus in some high schools has become a separate, non-teacher, “campus patrolman” job.

With the (new) abundance of “You are OK” stro= kes coming to self and fellow students, with personal named hellos, the amount = of hallway rowdiness, did as expected, decrease, to almost disappear, with the general decrease of need to carry a “chip on the shoulder” or “be conceited” (aloof) in order to gain recognition of fellow students.

RESULTS OF PROTEC= TED PERMISSION TO STUDENTS

&= nbsp; The student in his “Organized Pandemonium” class (“say hello = by name to every other person in this class and make a named classroom seating diagram of the classroom”) was given a protected permission to do, wh= at he wanted to do but expected to be rebuffed by peers if he tried it on his = own, ie find out the fellow student’s name so he could say hello to him and establish a friendly relationship. The expectation of many a “shy” student is instead to be explicitly or implicitly told “Mind your own business”, ie to be rebuffed (usually a self fulfilling expectation). The protection came from the teach= er “requirement” for “shy guy” to find out the name and say hello by name to his fellow students he otherwise would have expected to have rebuffed him if he dared to ask his classmates their names on his own. Coincidentally (maybe also unexpectedly), being told he IS OK himself. An example of being given permission to do something (being told to do somethi= ng) without protection would be, “Go jump in the lake!”<= /span>

ORGANIZED PANDEMO= NIUM AFTER HELLO IN THE TACT CLASSROOMS

&= nbsp; In the second “Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers” class session, in writer’s office, each attending high school faculty member gave a report on his experiences with this named hello exchange in his/her school classroom. =

&= nbsp; There were about thirty students and one teacher per class. Each teacher had star= ted each class session of the self-selected, same class period with this exerci= se daily for the preceding five class days.&n= bsp; Most of the teachers asked the students to turn in their seating diagrams and charted exchange of hellos in order to check that the classroom student had done it, and then returned it to the respective class members of that same class period. One teacher, in big smiling awe, refe= rred to these first sessions of named hello exchanges in his classroom as “ORGANIZED PANDEMONIUM!”&n= bsp; = [iv] ^, = [v]

&= nbsp; At least half of the TACT attending faculty had carried out this exercise in t= wo or more of their daily teaching class periods and some (at least two) had d= one it with all five of their teaching periods during the preceding week. Writer did not keep a written reco= rd of how many class periods each faculty member was carrying out this “organized pandemonium” classroom exercise. Conservatively it was estimated th= ere had been a minimum of 24 classes among the twelve high school teachers in w= hich this exercise was carried out on a daily basis for at least the eight week interval over which these classes had been held. [vi]

CLASSROOM “ORGANIZED PANDEMONIUM!”

&= nbsp; Yes it was! Organized! None of the students asked, or was= asked to leave the classroom during their classroom hour. Disorderly behavior was at a minim= um, if at all. Boisterous? Perhaps! Disorderly? No! Taunting by student to student was minimal, if present. Students kept track of where their= own seats were. And at the request of the teacher, before the end of the class period, students turned in their name seating drawings in to the teacher. T= he teacher checked off the student’s doing the exercise and returned the drawing to each student. No other class instruction took place in the initi= al sessions of exchanging named hellos. No other classroom homework assignments were given by the faculty teachers to their classroom students on these fir= st days. Named hello exchanges and making seating charts continued every day of class. Other classroom instruction and homework assignments were put on hold for the first few days after the “named hello” exercises was initiated in the particular teacher’s classroom. This opening class exercise took place every day for the balance of the eight week course give= n to the TACT students, in the writer’s office. Thus, the faculty members = of the TACT class fulfilled their homework assignments from the first TACT class.

&= nbsp; The students of these TACT teachers were aware their high school class homework= was being carried out as a “legitimate” way to postpone other class instruction and homework assignments. But, within less than two weeks (after students and teacher h= ad started initiating class sessions with the complete exchange of named hellos and making a name seating diagram and record of exchanged hellos to get bet= ter acquainted and onto friendly terms with each other) the classes began to readily settle down at teacher’s request, after a half hour or so. And within a few more wee= ks this opening exercise was taking less than 10 minutes at the start of the particular class period. [vii]<= /a> Each class, though, started with a complete exchange of named hellos, the making of a named seating diagram, and recording of exchanged named hellos = to get (better) acquainted and onto friendly terms with each other.=

SETTING A LIMIT ON VISTING TIME

&= nbsp; Each teacher set his own limit on visiting time at the start of his class. Tardi= ness and in-class mischief stopped. Students refocused onto class instructional material.

&= nbsp; By the end of the second week of beginning classes with the named hello exerci= se, most of the teachers had began to limit the interval for these exchanges. T= he first half hour or less became the norm without student complaint. Tardiness stopped. Ridiculing, jeering, sneering and belittling of one student to another in the classroom came way down. Mischief and in-class vandalism stopped. Absenteeism was redu= ced to one fifth, or less, of what it had been before. By reports, several of the teachers continued this exercise through the balance of that school year. No disorderly pandemoniums (riots)= broke out on the campus that year, or in any succeeding year as of 2009 that have come to writer’s attention. Writer’s office is within 5 blocks of the high school and has = been continuously, for the past 55 plus years.

TEACHER GRADING OF DAILY STUDENT HELLO EXERCISE

&= nbsp; Most of the teachers asked the students to turn in their HOWDY DIAGRAMS in order= to verify that the individual students had carried out his classroom exercise. Classroom student handwriting, name spelling, degree of following instructi= ons were all gradable if the teacher wanted to. These name seating charts were then returned to the students before they left the classroom.<= /p>

&= nbsp; The following fictional example of seating chart represents “Philip Drew’s” diagram with first and last names including the teacher= in his geometry class. This exam= ple occurred one year later. Some of the teachers were still using this exercis= e a year later.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

&= nbsp; The classroom seating chart by Philip Drew, on 11/10/1972, shows he gave and received back named hellos in class including teacher, except for not giving Samuel his name and Les helloed him without a “Philip” after he helloed Les. The chart showed= he knew the spelling of and names of his classmates.

&= nbsp; Again and ahead of time, Mrs. Tobias requested and obtained permission from the principal to go ahead with this exercise. The principal gave his OK: “Just keep the noise (in your classroom) down as much as you can.”

&= nbsp; Starting early in the semester, Mrs. Tobias told her class students she wanted them = to write down, learn, and know each others names. Further she said she wanted them t= o say hello to each other by name at the start of each period and tally on their = own seating charts the exchanges of hellos they gave and received back. By doing this and letting her see = their charts each day she would give them some credit toward their semester grades. She added that she mi= ght also give them a quiz once in a while to see how they were doing with learn= ing the names and correct spelling of fellow student names.

499 STUDENTS REAC= HED, ONE HOLD OUT - - FOR ONE WEEK

(5 days of getting a daily named hellos from 29 fellow classmates, plus teache= rs)

&= nbsp; Of the more than 500 students involved in the classes taught by these teachers, only one female student, Adele, started out by refusing to give her name to= her classmates. She gave an unnamed hello back to the handful she already knew. Adele held out for abou= t a week. The few who did know he= r name passed her name on to others in her classes who asked them. The rest of the class began to give Adele her name. Those who ask= ed for help with her name had as their Adult purpose, “to complete my own cl= ass assignment of saying the required hello by name to her” and writing h= er name down on “my seating charts” (a “requirement” f= rom the teacher.) By the fourth d= ay all classmates had begun giving her a “Hi Adele.”

&= nbsp; Adele’s hold-out began to melt by the end of the first week and was gone by the end= of the second week. By the third week she had become an active participant in = the exchange of named hellos and writing names down and showing her charts to teacher as requested before leaving her classroom. She also became “much friendlier” according to her teacher, who was attending the writer’s TACT class.

&= nbsp; In another setting, a kindergarten, the class teacher, named Mrs. Curtin, poin= ted out a shy Chinese girl in the class, Shoo Lin. [viii]= Teacher mentioned that this girl h= ad begun to come out of her shell. Shoo Lin had started the school year being physically round-faced and plumpish, two coats and a sweater on at all times. She would stay almost motionless a= nd expressionless until spoken to, sitting in her place in class after arrivin= g, never volunteering for anything, rarely talking when spoken to. Since Mrs. Curtin had begun to hav= e the students exchange, carry out this named hello exercise three times a week a= few months earlier, Shoo Lin had shortly become a participant AND from the start knew the other students names. During this particular exercise writer witnessed and reported here, = he saw her give a recognizable smile about a dozen times. She was now hanging up her two coa= ts after arrival and was wearing only her sweater during class.

&= nbsp; Another student, Dennis, in the early days of this kindergarten class was hyperacti= ve, going from one place in the room to another, rarely seated for a full 30 seconds, making noise, interrupting others in conversation, etc. Mrs. Curtin described him as a real “Dennis the Menace,” at the beginning of the class year. As seen in the classroom on the particular visit of this writer, Dennis was composed, orderly, waiting his = turn in class activities.

&= nbsp; His teacher reported that the mother of Dennis had told her that now her son, w= hen out shopping with her, knew and said hello to many more people by name than= she was aware he knew and many more than she knew. For example at one store he introd= uced her to the mother of one of his classmates and told that this other mother = was a nearby neighbor of theirs. =

CLASSROOM EFFICIE= NCY

&= nbsp; The teacher of a high school class has to learn and know the 60 names of his 30 students. Each student can le= arn and know names of each of the other 29 students (58 names) plus teacherR= 17;s 2 names. Therefore, there are= 30 “other” people in a classroom (60 other names) each person can learn and know. And there were 31 people in that room. This means there is a possible combined (perfect) awareness of 1,860 names in that classroom (31 persons times 2 names per person) for a 100% score.

&= nbsp; In fact the combined name awareness in a public school classroom is usually le= ss than 30%. This means the effi= ciency in these “usual” classes is less than 30%. It is much harder to learn in a cl= ass if you do not know who those are you are with, what to expect from them, let a= lone expect some manner of good will from them.= Who knows? The public = school classroom student doesn’t. There may be more ill will against you than good will in the particu= lar classroom settings, where you don’t know their names.

&= nbsp; Once a student had attended two sessions of this particular style of classroom e= xperience he/she kept on coming and both in the near term and longer term also began = to mobilize some others of his acquaintances into awareness of this class activity. Enthusiasm for scho= ol attendance came up as a result of the mutual exchanges of named helloes.

Of particular int= erest to author was the student fascination with:

1) learning how to introduce self, meet and get the other person’s name, and become acquainted by name with so very many more people on his own campus of 2000 students. The student learnin= g of the subject matter taught by the class teachers took place within the stude= nts own “I am OK AND You are OK Corral”, AND, as a result, out of h= is organized pandemonium class where mostly he gained personal confidence in himself, that if he timed the introducing of himself reasonably well, the n= ew person was also glad to meet and get to meet those others also around him by name. He found out how to int= roduce himself to someone new and that the new-to-him person quite regularly also enjoyed exchanging names for future reference and hellos for now.

2) gaining some bas= ic understanding of how the behaviors of each other could become more understandable (the PAC diagram). Learn some basic information which he cou= ld act on (information becoming knowledge), about how the behaviors of self and the other person were understandable (the PAC diagram).

3) learning how each individual found he could better regulate his own behavior to more often achieve a desired outcome with another person while the particular event was going on , how the OK Corral diagr= am really works. How he could better regulate his own behavior to more often achieve a desired outcome with another person while the particular event was going on as understandable in the OK Corral.

&= nbsp; You don’t need to belong to a club, gang or special group. All you need is Names, Hellos, Stacked circles, OK Corral, initiative (assigned or otherwis= e). Everyone was a member of the school group (school classroom class).

&= nbsp; Some teachers and students began to call an occasional other to “get your = head on straight” if the other student in the classroom was getting argumentative or rowdy in class.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

&= nbsp; Author knew from the outset that writing (the names down) would of itself lead to Adult behavior. There was thi= s to keep in mind, a person is unlikely to be simultaneously angry or tearful (“Child behavior” as defined by these students) and to also be writing (“Adult behavior”) at the same time.

&= nbsp; This event of teaching classroom teachers in eight sessions (no more than 12 hou= rs total time) the basics leading to (1) good school morale and (2) quality educational achievement by teacher= s and students was a singularly outstanding experience which demonstrated bot= h an efficient, and effective method of teaching teachers, AND High School campu= s, Riot Control.

&= nbsp; Once a student had attended a few sessions of this particular know your (neighbo= r) classmate by name and hello to him, this particular student will keep on co= ming to class, and both in the near term and also longer term, begin to mobilize others of his acquaintances into awareness of this class activity.

&= nbsp; Enthusiasm for school attendance and the ADA (average daily attendance) improved follo= wing the classroom introduction of a mutual daily named hello exchanges as a required classroom exercise. =

STUDENTS PLEASURE= ABLY ANTICIPATE ATTENDING THEIR HIGH SCHOOL CLASSES

&= nbsp; Each time one of the students went to his particular “Hello” class he could count on being well received by each of his classmates. He was also prepared to give (posi= tive) greetings back to each of his classmates, as well as his teacher.

&= nbsp; As might be expected, this good will toward each other did not stop at the classroom door. It extended o= ut into the hallways and throughout the campus, wherever and whenever one of t= hem saw his fellow classmate on campus, or later in town.

&= nbsp; If a fellow classmate was talking to another friend on campus, but not in one = of the “howdy” classes, when another from his “howdy” class did pass by the passer-by, he would again extend another good will “hi.” The odds we= re good, that one or the other of the previously talking pair would comment ab= out the passer-by and the class where the passing greeter had met him, AND also mention the particular classr= oom activity itself.

&= nbsp; The buzz about the “Howdy Classes” had started on campus.

IN-CLASS ADULT SOCIAL CONTROL OF PERSONAL BEHAVIORS BY EACH STUDENT

&= nbsp; Author knew at the outset of this Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers course taught to the original group of teachers that the student activity of writing names down on a piece of paper would of itself lead = to, bring about personal in-class Adult behavior of the individual students= .= = [ix]

&= nbsp; To keep in mind: a person is unlikely to be simultaneously angry, tearful, entertaining and/or entertained (“Child behavior” as defined by these students) AND also to be writing (“Adult behavior”) at the same time. Yes, during the conversations with= each other in the first days of name exchanges, the noise level in the classroom would pick way up. But each time the student would write down the two names= of the classmates just talked to, and seat location of the one he was talking = to, his own behavior would be moderated by his own reasoning, methodical, albeit enthusiastic Adult. The place became a place of the business of learning, albeit enthusiastic learning, referred to by one of the twelve TACT teacher-students as “ORGANIZED PANDEMONIUM !”

RESULT: IMPROVED CLASSROOM MORALE

&= nbsp; Morale among teachers in the teacher’s faculty room improved. Some of the teachers, noting the improved student morale and orderliness on teacher request, in the selected class, began extending this daily opening class exercise to the remainder of their class teaching periods during that particular school semester. Although writer did not specifically survey each teacher about the numbers of classes in which each teacher of the 12 teache= rs had introduced this opening “howdy” exercise into his/her class= es, it became clear that it was being carried out in more than 24 classes (ie averaging more than two classes per teacher). More than 24 classes times 30 pupi= ls per class comes out to more than 720 student hours per day. Assuming some of the students were= in more than one of the classes of these 12 teachers in a day, the estimate of= 500 students was arrived at who were directly involved in the activity and teachings initiated by writer’s initial class of 12 classroom teacher= s. = [x]

EASIER TO LEARN I= N A FRIENDLY SETTING

&= nbsp; It’s a whole lot easier to learn in a friendly setting than in an uncertain setting. With friends and peo= ple who are known being around, a person has “allies”, sources from whom information could be gotten, could be corrected by a friend if he hear= d a part of the lesson wrong. A p= erson is far more likely to be a friend if you know his name and use it, and he k= nows yours and says it to you when he sees you, far more likely to have good will toward you than not when you give him his name (in a hello).

&= nbsp; Good neighbors policy: give them a hello, learn their names, give them their nam= es, get a hello back, get a named hello back.

“MY CLASSES= TEACH THEMSELVES”

THE STUDENTS ARE TEACHING THEMSELVES NOW

&= nbsp; One of the science teachers in the latter half of the TACT course (week #6) volunteered to writer: “Now my high school chemistry classes teach themselves.” She was referring to her improved pleasure and ease in teaching her chemistry class, the accelerated rate at which her students “caught on” to what there was to learn.

&= nbsp; Another teacher quickly volunteered a smiling “Yeah, mine, too.”

&= nbsp; This heuristic (self teaching) effect of the eight session Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers course taught to these twelve teachers was the second most important finding. The same instructional information they learned at = the writer’s office was in turn easily taught to the students in their hi= gh school classes the next day in class. The most important finding was that t= he school became “RIOT PROOF.”&nb= sp; Students began to look forward to school and to their classes. [xi]

THE USUAL COMBINE= D NAME AWARENESS IN ANY PUBLIC SECONDARY SCHOOL CLASS ROOM IS LESS THAN 25%

&= nbsp; In fact the combined name awareness in a public school classroom is routinely = less than 25%, and not unusually 15%. This means the efficiency in these classes is less than 25%. It is much harder to learn in a cl= ass if you do not know those you are with, what to expect from them, let alone exp= ect some manner of good will from them. Who knows? The usual s= tudent does not! There may be more i= ll will against you, the identified individual student (let alone unawareness of yo= u) than good will in the particular classroom setting. When someone says hello= to you with your first name you have as good a single indicator as there is for estimating that personal good/ill will toward you that there is in a present social situation.

SCHOOL FACULTY WE= RE TAUGHT PAC

&= nbsp; School faculty were taught Parent-Adult-Child which they taught, this PAC concept = and evident set of facts, TO THEIR STUDENTS in their classes WHO THEN IN TURN TAUGHT this PAC diagram and set of personality facts to their classroom students who then taught this PAC facts to friends on campus and other places - ACCURATELY. What was taught on the “fourth generation down” was clear and correctly instructed and= was “duplicated.”

&= nbsp; No teacher who took this TACT course, nor any of these teacher’s 30 classroom students per class had any objection on learning that each one of= the members had three different categories of behavior which were called their = Parent, Adult and Child. A few days a= fter author had been teaching the faculty members about teaching about the “rebel Child” some of the faculty members would occasional ask a disruptive student “Is that your rebel Child?” These high school teachers had been taught not to worry or argue if a student denied it was; that fellow student-peer-pressure would take care of it. And when put in the form of a ques= tion, what’s to be insulted about? This was followed on occasion by some fellow students in class “calling” the disrupter on his “rebel Child” activi= ties before teacher’s question if the fellow-student question was “y= our Adult?” As back up, tea= chers began to recognize they could reinforce the Adult of the potential disrupte= r on an appropriate occasion when it was his Adult. Tell him “That sounds = like your Adult!”

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

STUDENTS BEGAN TO KNOWLEDGEABLY TEACH PARENT-ADULT-CHILD TO OTHERS ON CAMPUS

&= nbsp; The faculty members attending the original TACT class learned about Parent, Adu= lt and Child in the second of eight classes.&= nbsp; Once they, the teachers and students, learned about PAC with diagram= , it became their knowledge. They = acted upon it. (“Knowledge is= action based upon what one knows”, E. Berne “Intuition Studies”)

&= nbsp; The job of the teacher was to teach students.&= nbsp; They did. They accurat= ely taught the meaning of the PAC diagram in their classes as a part of their “homework assignment” from this writer. They taught it so well, that their students could knowledgeably and accurately teach the same subject to frien= ds, other students and even family members. In some instances the teachings cou= ld be seen with reproducible results on these fourth generation down levels fr= om this course teacher, the writer.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

&= nbsp; Students were very receptive to PAC ideas and its symbol (stacked circles); and receptive to representing social transactions with a pair of arrows going between a pair of stacked circles. Students promptly began teaching PAC (the symbol representing a real person) to fellow students, friends AND to family with no adverse results reported by the teachers. The amount of both pleasu= re and readiness to learn about themselves and understand each other was impressive. After all, one of the most fascinating of all subjects to learn about, if made understandable, (in school or anywhere) is how people are “put together” and how they work with each other. This diagram = was taught by the teachers to the (TACT high school) students in their classroo= m in a 15 minute lecture to the students. Students began to use the diagram with= in the same classroom with each other.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

THE GET-ON-WITH CLASSROOM AND CAMPUS

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

Get-On-With comes from I am OK = and You are OK. When I am OK and You are OK we have a Get-On-With.

&= nbsp; The OK Corral was taught in the school classrooms by the High School teachers of the high school students. The students immediately began to accurately iden= tify the social dynamics involved when they had

a Get-On-With experience on cam= pus (“It came from an I’m OK and You’re OK”),

a Get-Away-From (“I wasn’t OK and he was OK”),

a Get-Nowhere-With experience (“I wasn’t OK and he wasn’t OK with me, either”), <= o:p>

or a Get-Rid-Of experience (= 220;I was OK and he was not OK!”). [xii]<= /a>^, = [xiii]=

&= nbsp; These high school teachers immediately put what they had just learned into action. They taught what they had been taught by this writer. And they, the students who had just been taught by the faculty students of this method were found within a few days, to be correctly teaching to a “third generation= 221; of students what this writer had only a week before taught to the first generation (the faculty members).

THE OK CORRAL AS TAUGHT IN THE TACT CLASS

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

The OK Corral was also taught to the TACT Class and in turn those teachers taught it to their students in the high school classrooms.

The OK CORRAL DIAGRAM AS TAUGHT IN HIGH SCHOOL CLASSES

THE BASICS OF GAM= ES WERE SUCCESSFULLY TAUGHT

&= nbsp; The basics of games people play were successfully taught by these twelve teache= rs in their own high school classrooms. Students of the Transactional Analysis= for Classroom Teachers could and did knowledgeably teach about games, for examp= le, to priests. These ideas are easily taught by students to other people. = [xiv]<= /a>^, = [xv]

&= nbsp; In one of the TACT classes for High School faculty members this author taught = the basics of how people fill their time with each other (“structure time” with each other) with examples, ie withdrawal, rituals, pastime= s, activities (such as work and homework), games, and intimacy.

&= nbsp; “Homework assignments” for these 12 high school faculty members who were in this “RIOT PREVENTION COURSE” included:

1) telling their hi= gh school class about attending a lecture on the “Games People Play,R= 21; and to introduce the definition of a game to their selected High School cla= ss. Tell them “a Game is a repetitive way of talking to another person that has a concealed motive, ulterior transactions, a gimmick, and a payoff.” Examples given to the TACT class included: “Why don̵= 7;t you, … Yes but… ”, “Ain’t it awful”, and “I’m Only Trying to Help You.” [xvi]<= /a>

2) Another “homework assignment” for these faculty members attending was to personally observe and note, write down, what looked like a game in their classroom between students and report it back to the TACT class.

3) Another “homework assignment” was to identify two separate instances of students personally observed behavior. Then ask a student if he was playing= a game. The assignment also ask= ed that the TACT teacher/student accept his classroom student’s response= as fact. The TACT class member w= as also asked to make a personal note of the student’s behavior, the student’s response, and to later report these two separate instances = back to the TACT class and instructor.

&= nbsp; Games are a series of serial social transactions which all people indulge in. A student’s in-class game co= uld be disruptive to another person’s current social program, for example the particular TACT teacher’s class program. It was taught, however, that a gam= e (of itself) is neither good nor bad; that a game is a game is a game, that “good” and “bad” are (Parent) opinions in response,= eg to a game. <= /span>

READING SKILLS, R= EADING “GAMES PEOPLE PLAY” =

&= nbsp; The members of Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers class were informed and passed the information along to their friends and students about where = to go in town for copies of the references, to either purchase them or obtain = them at the community public library. The librarian told this writer that the library did stock these books and, that in fact, they had 20 copies of each reference he listed for his H= igh School faculty class. All the copies of each were almost routinely checked = out.

Partial Book List:

“Games People Play” by Eric Berne, M.D.

“Transactional Analysis in Psychotherapy” by Eric Berne, M.D.

“I’m OK, You’re OK” by Thomas A. Harris, M.D.

“The Handbook= of Listening, Transactional Analysis of the Listening Activity”

by FH Ernst Jr., M.D.

“The Game Diagram” by FH Ernst Jr., M.D.

These books are still readily available today, in 2009.

TACT CLASS ATTEND= ANCE

&= nbsp; For the first “Transactional Analysis For Classroom Teachers” class session, 20 members of the high school faculty showed up, of whom three of = them did not know either the first or last name of four or more of their fellow faculty members two months into the start of the school year. That is, they= did not know fellow faculty member names until after the first time this exerci= se was carried out in the private office of this professional, this author. Two of the teachers did not show u= p for the (voluntary) second class of the series. Another four were tentative about = the “organized pandemonium” that confronted them in their school classrooms, although very enthusiastic. Two other teachers were bordering on being disruptive in the TACT course in the writer’s office. By the fourth of these eight class= sessions, this TACT class of faculty members had settled down to the 12 who graduated= and also received college credit for their attendance. <= /span>Writer did not ask about those 8 who dropped out before class session #4 started. = 12 out of 20 who came “cold turkey” with a promise of earning coll= ege credit for attending, was a good percentage. This was certainly higher than= the hoped for 50% of initial show ups. Don’t forget, each one of those 20 came to and into the office of a psychiatrist in town, who had “patients” coming to him who “needed” to see a psychiatrist. When they told their friends, how did their friends respond to them?

OBJECTIONS TO THE I’M OK, YOU’RE OK CLASSROOM ?

&= nbsp; Quite obviously, at least to the author, those who might lose a job if this method became relatively standard in schools would be opposed by the institution of such a program by the campus unions in their school district. Lose a job? There would be far fewer teaching assistants required in a school district, what with 30 students and one tea= cher per classroom voluntarily each managing their own behaviors and learning of teaching the instructional material without appreciable problem. Thirty pupils per classroom teache= r is a desirable ratio. Fewer studen= ts per teacher in order to give each student more “attention.” This is= not necessarily a good idea. It r= eadily lends itself to increasing the “dependency needs” of a student, slow down his rate of learning to promote the time with the assistant assig= ned to him. The National Education Association is the biggest and richest union in the USA.

THERE CERTAINLY W= ERE OBJECTIONS TO THIS COURSE

&= nbsp; Writer was never invited back. The exchange of named hellos, among students in their classrooms, as a teacher sponsored classroom exercise, were completely discontinued altogether. It was abandoned. It was no longer allowed or sanctioned by school administration, or school district superintendent. Classes no longer were teaching themselves, let alone stude= nt on their own being allowed to exchange named hellos among each other. Withi= n a few years the expulsions of students from school, for student conduct not tolerated in school, climbed back up to where it had been before this “Anti-riot Course” was taught to the 12 classroom teachers, and= for them to teach in their classes.

&= nbsp; School SAT scores stopped climbing, started another set of declines as advertised = in the local newspaper. All teac= hing of this TACT information had apparently vanished by the fourth school year following the successful riot control, even after this anti-riot course was very successfully taught to 12% of the school faculty with school wide academic and school campus advantages.= Within four school years, the students who participated with pride in their school affairs, because it was their school, had graduated.

&= nbsp; It is not this writer’s job to speculate on school administration reasons about what he saw and heard. Writer’s job is to report what he did and saw. This is to say: Schools, Churches = and Hospitals all have very complex, complicated organizational structures, ie = they are compound and complex organizations. [xvii]= By 1973, one year after the conclusion of the school year in which the undeniable successes from the Transactional Analysis for Classroom Teachers course had been amply demonstrated to the California Public School system, = the International Transactional Analysis Association Board of Directors passed a resolution prohibiting and condemning the “illegitimate teaching of Transactional Analysis courses.”&nbs= p; Legitimate teaching was defined as that carried out (only) by advanc= ed, dues paying members of the ITAA who had completed training at one of the International Transactional Analysis Association’s approved “schools” of training. [xviii] It was apparent such a resolution, either directly or indirectly, may well = have been contributory to any other School District Superintendent or elected Co= unty Superintendent of Education shying away from approving any further teaching= of Transactional Analysis by school teachers in any manner remotely resembling this TACT course given by author, where the information/knowledge about voluntary personal self regulation was so readily and effortlessly taught throughout the school. The TACT course was given to only 12% of the high sc= hool faculty teachers and students of these 12 teachers of this major California community high school. <= /o:p>

&= nbsp; Then too, a teacher who did carry out even the daily “organized pandemonium” (named hello exchange) exercise in his classroom would h= ave had, by school definition, a “noisy classroom.” The sound-proofing of rooms with d= ouble walls on either side where adjacent rooms are located, is relatively inexpensive for a school district, taking into account the school district “liquid assets” reserve fund shown in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Rep= ort (CAFR). To date, however, wri= ter has not heard of any move by any school district to install sound proofing walls to take care of the “noisy room” objections. Thus the single most energizing-of-learning exercise in the history of (compulsory) public education (in the USA) languishes.

&= nbsp; Without sound proofed wall, other teachers, the school administration, and local un= ion steward teachers are readily able to keep relatively good track of what is going on in each teacher’s classroom and would hear about any “objectionable activities” like the “organized pandemonium” exchanged named hellos exercises in the classroom of a particular teacher. As noted elsewhere, on occasion, however, a student or teacher has reported to writer their personal satisfaction at improved learning when using the “compulsory daily named hello classroom exercise” and the clari= ty of benefit from that activity; secured the permission of his principal to go through with the “organized pandemonium” classroom exercise per= iodically (named hello exchanges among all students in the particular classroom and making a written classroom seating diagrams by each class member).

THE EFFECTIVENESS= AND EFFICIENCY OF THE I’M OK, YOU’RE OK CLASSROOM

&= nbsp; Teaching classroom teachers in eight sessions (12 hours of class time) the basics of transactional analysis, leading to both good school morale and quality regu= lar high school educational achievement was a singularly outstanding experience= . It demonstrated both an efficient and an effective method of teaching teachers. It’s a whole = lot easier for teachers to teach and students to learn in a friendly setting ar= ound the people you know by name than in an uncertain setting around people you don’t know, who might assault you, ie be riotous in behavior at you.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> With “friends” (known = by name) around himself, a person has “allies”, sources from whom information can be gotten, from whom he can be corrected if he heard a part= of the lesson wrong. A person is= far more likely to be a friend if you know and say his name to him, far more li= kely to show/have good will back to you than not.

&= nbsp; In the early years at conferences of the International Transactional Analysis Association there were periodic reports of teaching the PACs in private sma= ll groups, especially by David Kupfer M.D., as reported in various issues of t= he “Transactional Analysis Bulletin” between 1962 and 1968. = [xix]<= /a> Within a couple of years there were reports of teaching PAC and the OK Corral in public schools by several teac= hers eg. by Connie Wittig, a school teacher in Ohio. Wittig reported teaching both the stacked (PAC) circles and the OK Corral to her beginning elementary grade students in the early 1970s with marked benefit in student self-governing ability. [xx]

REACTION OF THE ITAA BOARD OF DIRECTORS

&= nbsp; In 1973, the Board of Directors of the International Transactional Analysis Association apparently initiated measures to make it “illegal for any= one to teach Transactional Analysis” who was not a dues paying, “recognized”, advanced member of the International Transactional Analysis Association. Legal sanctions were supposedly to be initiated against those who did it without permission of ITAA headquarters office.&nb= sp; ITAA members who violated these new Board rulings regarding “i= llegal teaching” of this information were to be referred to the “Ethics Committee” of the ITAA.

&= nbsp; What would be the point of joining or staying in a club that promised to punish = you for using the club’s product, or information. In this case, it was knowledge per Eric Berne MD and as Dr. Berne said: “… informati= on learned is owned by the person who has the knowledge.” Information th= at is intended to be used much like the Roman letters of the phonetic Alphabet cannot be trademarked. If information transmitted by phonetic letters of the alphabet, such as these you are reading now, would supposedly be the basis = for referral to the Ethics Committee of the Board of Directors of the Internati= onal Transactional Analysis Association, then all writings would be subject to review. Teaching PAC, like teaching it to your mother or father, unless you= had a Ph.D, MSSW, M.D., or Ed.D.,. would be subject to review. Threats by information restricting organizations, such as referral to that Committee, = or being sued for some perceived infraction of trademark, are contrary to freedom. (See the 1974 ITAA Directory, page 3:

“ ‘Sanctions’ against use of ‘transactional analysis’: for ‘unethical, harmful, bizarr= e or otherwise illegitimate uses of transactional analysis’.”) Come = on now ! ? = [xxi]<= /a>

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

&= nbsp; This really was actively discussed in meetings writer witnessed. And the writer,= as one of the very earliest of ERIC BERNE’s students, was not “allowed” to attend before the “rules” were “passed.”

&= nbsp; If PAC stacked circles is a diagram used in transactional analysis, then what = is the OK Corral? What is the OK Corral about? It is information and knowledge= in the public domain of public use as is the phonetic Roman (letter) alphabet.= The symbols can be misused, if that is a person’s use. “Misuse of t= he Roman (letter / phonetic) Alphabet” was not referred to an ethics committee for sanctions. Nor is misuse of the number systems, Arithmetic.

<= span style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:150%'>

A SEA OF UNKNOWN FACES IN PUBLIC SCHO= OLS

&= nbsp; In elementary school, the student spends his days in the same classroom, gets a chance to become familiar with the teacher and the expected behaviors of classmates in the same room over a period of weeks, whether he knows all th= eir names or not. The next step a= fter elementary school involves the pre-adolescent student being moved hour by h= our, from one room of classmates and teacher and their behaviors, to another room with different behaviors to get acquainted with, from one set of people to = be confronted with to another, hour by hour, in the so-called “education process.” In such a set= ting, it becomes easier to adversely influence anybody the student in view of his level of uncertainty about what to expect from his classmate neighbors. His anxiety is elevated. Certainly as one becomes lost in e= ver larger masses of people with hardly one in a particular setting that you kn= ow, a basic level of anxiety rises in any normal person, let alone a young pers= on, a child. “Who is the (potential) friend?” “Who is there around you to call on if accosted, abused, bulli= ed or otherwise frightened?”

&= nbsp; Having ever larger numbers of (unknown) individuals to contend with every few years while at the same time being educated (learning?) is a distraction to the learning process. The busines= s of moving to another room setting, teacher, and another set of people hour aft= er hour can be taxing, let alone disruptive as the sea of new (unknown) faces = in direct contact with the person grows and grows, let alone be distracted by legalized in-house pornography (“sex education”) and confrontat= ions with situational values teachings at odds with the values about right and w= rong taught at home.

&= nbsp; Thus the desire grows in a student to find someone he can sit with, talk with, w= ho seems to accept himself. The = social predators and the “termite organizations” know about this. It makes it easier to “befriend” (con) an unsuspecting young person. So a student finds a “buddy.” This bud= dy may already be in contact with one of the “just a little older peers̶= 1; who knows the ropes better and seems more secure in his person.

&= nbsp; The “termite” recruiting program includes fairly sophisticated psychological manipulations to attract the particular student into “looking at,” “coming to one of our group meetings after school at a friend’s house,” whether led by a “friendR= 21; or someone slightly older whom he has already met. Once “hooked,” the particular student can be led through a series of steps including studying peers and dishing out peer pressure. He will learn how to be “cool” under peer pressure. He will be taught some simple meas= ures for dealing with, countering the rules of one or both his parents, “to get them off your back,” if that’s the initial complaint of a recruit.

&= nbsp; The “termite” goal is to ultimately produce an entity whose personal values, personal ethics, principles and standards will no longer be operati= ve; to produce an entity who can carry out actions contrary to those values and home teachings he had before, when he used to become embarrassed, feel asha= med, felt bad, guilty or having some other internally painful experience as a re= sult of carrying out the suggested assignment of a “controller” lead= er.

&= nbsp; The second set of advantages of becoming a termite are described as: “fee= ling like you are getting to be an insider.”

&= nbsp; The personally painful results from violating another person's trust, loyalty or confidence are considered liabilities in a termite entity. Lifelong continuing “termite” education courses will be the hallmark of a life of continuing termite-hood. Ther= e is no such thing as retirement from being a termite. For one thing, it becomes complete= ly addicting to be able to violate early values, to get training in order to n= ot feel bad afterward, i.e. in order to not feel so much that “I am not-OK.”

TO “RESPECT AUTHORITY”

This diagram shows the behavior= s in the successful teaching, learning setting, where the learning person respec= ts the authority of the knowledgeable teacher (facts being taught by that teac= her) coming from the teaching person.