Controversial Behavioral Management Techniques for ADHD - Research Paper Example

? Controversial Behavioral Management Techniques for ADHD Research Paper of Introduction who have been diagnosed of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) generally represent a visible and quite challenging group in many schools in the United States. A huge number of these children are taking medication for their so-called ‘disorder’. Whether or not people consider ADHD as a real medical condition, the fact is that students diagnosed with ADHD create serious dilemmas for their teachers and schools. The issue is further complicated by the uncertainty and misperception that continues to characterize ADHD. Students with ADHD are distinguished by their continuous problematic behavior despite the broad array of established behavior management techniques applied to handle them. Often these students are believed to be ‘unmanageable’ (Southall, 2007). As a result, this belief has become strongly associated with ADHD and clearly makes the condition the weakness of the student. Because of such beliefs several controversial behavioral management techniques for ADHD have been developed. This paper discusses these techniques and their efficacy. The Controversy of ADHD Numerous people are still uncertain about the true nature of ADHD. There are those who think that it is merely a label that justifies the unruly behavior of students who need more rigorous discipline. Within the educational perspective, teachers keep on looking for correct knowledge about ADHD that will help them create classroom management techniques that are effective for students with this condition. Most of ADHD diagnoses come from teachers’ observations, and several of the symptoms of the condition oblige teachers to give a diagnosis, such as “the child often fails to give close attention to details or make careless mistakes in schoolwork, work, or other activities” (Munden & Arcelus, 1999, 15), “often avoids, dislikes, or is reluctant to engage in tasks that require sustained mental effort” (Munden & Arcelus, 1999, 15), and so on. Teachers are normally the main source of ADHD diagnosis. Hence, the diagnosis comprises considerable amount of inevitable subjectivity or bias, which exposes it to conflicting descriptions of what is regarded ‘normal’ behavior (Hornby, Howard, & Atkinson, 2013). When children with ADHD go to school, they are affected by the teachers’ method or techniques, as well as the school’s viewpoint about behavioral management. It is widely recognized that ADHD seldom arises alone; it is frequently complemented by comorbid disorders, like learning disabilities or oppositional defiant disorder. Sooner or later, this behavior could result in deviant behavioral patterns (Hornby et al., 2013). In numerous instances, the delinquent behavior is simply bothersome or possibly makes the teacher annoyed. The initial idea could be “I’ve got to punish this behavior to stop it” (Flick, 2010, 101). This is where controversial behavioral management techniques for ADHD come in. The first is corporal punishment or physical punishment. This technique does lead to inhibition of a problematic behavior, but it does not eliminate it. The student discontinues the behavior but relapses to it eventually. The punishing teacher actually embodies the behavior s/he wants to get rid of. The student gets the message that physical punishment is an effective way of coping with problems such as this (Flick, 2010). It is also necessary to mention that corporal punishment is normally used long after the student shows the problematic behavior. The main point is it is unwise to exercise corporal punishment in school. Simply put, it is completely unsuccessful in managing behavior issues, and it is useless with ADHD. Studies report detrimental consequences of exercising physical punishment (Southall, 2007). A particular type of punishment less harsh than corporal punishment is the verbal scolding. This implies that the student is verbally reprimanded for showing improper behavior. This technique is controversial, and outcomes are varied, particularly with children who have ADHD (Munden & Arcelus, 1999). Due to these varied outcomes and the fact that the scolding is possibly damaging to the student, it is not a suggested techniques. Utmost important should be given to positive reinforcement for all behavioral management techniques for ADHD. Nevertheless, at times improper behavior should be handled with punishment measures. Two methods can be applied to the school context: ignoring and removal of a benefit. Ignoring can be exercised for less severe misconduct; removal of a benefit is exercised with more severe bad behavior (Flick, 2010). When a behavior is bothersome or slightly unruly, the first technique used by most teachers is ignoring. The teacher will determine immediately if the behavior is related to attentional problem, because it will exacerbate at first when ignored. Noticing the behavior or reprimanding it only worsens the problem. However, when a teacher chooses to ignore a problematic behavior, it should be persistently ignored until it eventually disappears (Southall, 2007). To notice a behavior after ignoring it at first will encourage the student to become stubborn, and worsen the behavior. Hence, the problematic behavior will aggravate, and continue even more. Basically, the child is clueless when the teacher will deal with it; hence, frustration-tolerance is developed (Flick, 2010, 104). Teachers should be capable of predicting or estimating how intense the behavior is and its duration. The time-out technique, just like ignoring, detaches the child from possible positive reinforcement; in the method of ignoring, privilege is suppressed from the student (Flick, 2010). According to several studies, children with ADHD dislike time-out. They find it mind-numbing and tiresome; many request a different punishment instead of time-out. Moreover, children with ADHD want time-out to end immediately (Flick, 2010). These two forms of punishment—ignoring and time-out—are controversial behavioral management techniques for ADHD because they can make the problem behavior worse instead of eliminating or improving it. Teachers without proper training in and knowledge of these two techniques may do more harm than good. Behaviors that are irritating, rude, or troublesome to the child or to others are obviously undesirable and improper. The dilemma for numerous teachers is to get rid of these improper behaviors in a way that will be advantageous for the student and others. Although this may seem easy, it is usually confounded by misperceptions, inaccurate knowledge, and stringent, uncompromising perspectives of behavioral management or disciplinary actions. Researchers and clinical practitioners have reported extensively the finding that corporal punishment is evidently ineffective for most students and particularly not for those with ADHD (Southall, 2007). Nevertheless, according to Munden and Arcelus (1999), numerous techniques do function effectively; such as called ‘mild punishments’. In numerous educational institutions across the globe, an identification of ADHD is not able to provide further support and assistance in schools. In fact in some, the simple indication of ‘attentional difficulties’ can work to disregard or omit a student from valuable educational assistance programs. For students who can be identified as such, studies have revealed that support facilitates management and the problems of the student in school become defined in the concept of ‘abnormal’ or delinquency, resulting in labels and placements for behavioral conditions (Hornby et al., 2013). Nevertheless, as shown in the United States, when ADHD is classified under a disability type entitled to support programs in schools, prevalence of medication and diagnosis climbs sharply. How this controversial response to ADHD in education institutions that aspire to be inclusive can take place is complicated. Conclusions Teachers usually have the same opinion of the behaviors that have to be addressed. It is crucial to remember that different types of punishment should be carried out with great care. Unfortunately, ineffective forms of punishment are frequently used by teachers to deal with students with ADHD. Too much attention has been paid to addressing problematic behavior, while litte attention is given to which behaviors teachers prefer or desire. Punishment does not communicate to the child what is ‘appropriate’, only what is ‘inappropriate’. Hence, positive reinforcement is vital for the success of students with ADHD. References Flick, G. (2010). Managing ADHD in the K-8 Classroom: A Teacher’s Guide. London: SAGE. Hornby, G., Howard, J., & Atkinson, M. (2013). Controversial Issues in Special Education. UK: Routledge. Munden, A. & Arcelus, J. (1999). The ADHD Handbook: A Handbook for Parents and Professionals on Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Southall, A. (2007). The Other Side of ADHD: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Exposed and Explained. UK: Radcliffe Publishing. Read More