Kim Payne 1 -- Noticing What Works

Crispin and I have been reading Winnie-the-Pooh and House at Pooh Corner again and again. I've enjoyed reading The Tao of Pooh for myself. I find I can offer a lot when I allow myself to be like Pooh, when I allow myself to allow. I notice my tendency to be like Rabbit or Owl (I remember being proud of how long my parent meetings would go and having the egotism to compare myself to a Bill Clinton State of the Union address; this impulse from my Rabbit Brain of that era seems foreign compared to the fluff between the ears I am welcoming now). Recently at our school I heard--and not for the first time--how Waldorf education is easy for the children but really really really hard for the parents. I would love to help Waldorf education flow easily for parents. AND I notice my own proclivity to make it complicated, my sense of guilt if I keep things short and hold back the erudition I once I knew little enough to believe I had.

So this winter/spring, I try to be on the path of writing shorter pieces that all seem to say the same thing. If this fails to appease, perhaps if you ate gobs of honey, that would satisfy.

I've worked with Kim Payne on Social Inclusion and Simplicity Parenting in Baltimore and New Hampshire. Amidst all his esoteric erudition, some simple moments stand out for me. We were discussing an electric situation, in which 7th grade girls were vicious toward another 7th grade girl who wasn't "cool." In working with one of the tormentors (separately), Kim was able to help her realize that although the less cool girl, like, really annoyed her and made her have to roll her eyes, she, like, really only rolled her eyes, like, 8 times of 10, or whatever. Kim helped this ostensible bully realize that, in fact, 2 times out of 10, she was able to interact with this other girl--the supposed target of her loathing--with tolerance, perhaps even acceptance. He encouraged the potential tormentor to work to 3 times out of 10 of acceptance (no teasing, eye rolling, and soforth); then checked in with her in a few days and moved it up to 4 or 5. Soon the once bully realized that everything worked better and flowed better if she tolerated the other girl (who had once been her best friend) , and they became friends again. This was a success story, and I took from it Kim's general recommendation: notice what works, and build from there (no matter how slight). Follow and focus upon the solution.

Jerry and Esther Hicks, in conveying wisdom from the spiritual world,--as they encourage us to attend to the solution rather than the problem--give us the metaphor of the buffet. When we go to a buffet, we choose the food that we enjoy and want to try and eat it. We don't lament or go into hysterics or give our attention to the food in the buffet we choose not to eat. We don't start yelling at the omelette chef because he has the gall to have those mushrooms we don't like there. They encourage us to look at what life gives us in the same way, to deliberately focus our attention on that which produces good feeling thoughts, which will attract more of the same.

Waldorf kindergarten teachers--from the first ones in Stuttgart to the likes of Rahima Baldwin Dancy and Barbara Patterson--notice the importance and effectiveness of stating the positive ("Let's stay on dry land" rather than "Don't go in that puddle") in guiding young children; they take their cue from Rudolf Steiner, who noted that young children DON'T register the "don't" in a phrase such as "Don't run" or "Don't hit," but instead register the verb "run" or "hit." (A parent informed that contemporary brain research backs this up).

In the social interactions of young children, it is tempting to get caught up in the charged moments--the hitting, the grabbing, the pushing, and the like. I am always asking how we can--while having a picture of love and wellness that includes physical and emotional safety--give our attention and energy to the abundant moments of cooperative and tolerant interactions. How we can build from this stream of wellness flowing here rather than pushing against a river of unwanted there.

At times I pause and wonder if this smacks too much of Skinner and Pavlov. "Reward" (with attention) that which you want to increase its frequency (give stimulus to achieve the desired response). But why wonder if it is "too much"? Why do spiritual streams and material streams need be in opposition? For Steiner and other spiritual seekers, the physical is the leading edge of the spiritual, the physical is spiritual. I appreciate so much some of tools (that is, spiritual insights) I received in my public school teaching--we called it "planned ignoring" when I taught public school. We also played a game of the "mystery helper" in which I as teacher chose a child a random. If that child's behavior or performance was prosocial, the whole class received a reward with a description of the activity that merited it. If that child's behavior did not, there was no mention of it.