A Pound of Prevention: Teacher\u27s Guide to Behavior Problems

They come to school with one big urge: to be liked by the other children, to find a place they can fit in. It is not a question of being in or out; IN they have to be. Children have only one choice: to be in on something good or to be in on something bad. No child can stand to be ignored. It feels better to be noticed for swearing, or for mistakes, or for forgetting, or for silliness, than not to be noticed at all

Laughing when you shouldn't Being "good" among the Batek of Peninsular Malaysia

Batek people describe their many laughter taboos with utmost seriousness, and in ethical terms of good and bad. Despite this, people often get it wrong—sometimes laughing all the more when the taboos forbid it. Because laughter can be ambiguous and impossible to control, being wrong can be accepted without the need for discussion or reflection. People thus act autonomously while holding deeply shared ethical orientations. Here, ethics can be both culturally predefined and shaped by individuals, as when it comes to laughter people draw on individual and shared concerns in an ad hoc, flexible manner. Laughter's tangled contradictions thus demonstrate that people's understandings of being “good” are mutually implicated with their understandings of what it means to be a person in relation to others

Effective home-school relations : illustrated by hal doremus

vii, 264 hal. : il.; 22 cm

Discipline;

Mode of access: Internet

Defendant-juror similarity and mock joror judgments

It was hypothesized that joror-defendant similarity would lead to greater leniency toward a criminal defendant when the evidence against that defendant was weak or inconclusive; but when evidence was strong, it was expected that this relationship would be reversed. In Study 1, religious similarity was found to be simply and positively related to evaluation of the defendant and leniency, a relationship unaffected by the strength of evidence. This pattern of results was attributed to (a) insufficiently strong evidence against the defendant and (b) the lack of anticipated jury deliberation, problems addressed in Study 2. In that study, when evidence was strong against the defendant, juror-defendant racial similarity did increase the likelihood of conviction, but only when jurors anticipated being in the racial minority in their jury. Implications of the findings for psychological theory and for voir dire were discussed.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/45313/1/10979_2005_Article_BF01499374.pd