Dave had taught high school English for about 10 years when he first learned about internal control psychology. In courses he had taken both as an undergraduate and as a graduate student, the emphasis was on external motivation and how to “make” kids succeed by using the right blend of rewards and punishment. When Dave got his first teaching position, his supervisors appeared more interested in his ability to control the class than in his ability to teach students. As long as there weren't behavior problems in his classes, Dave was considered a good teacher.

Having always been interested in psychology and motivation, Dave enrolled in a workshop about internal motivation and immediately saw that he could use the concepts to teach literature. It was a natural, easy fit. Because of his keen interest in motivation, Dave especially enjoyed learning about the basic needs that drive our behavior.

Dave quickly integrated internal control psychology into his teaching of literature and found that students developed more insightful comments once equipped with an understanding of how fictional characters, like real people, are motivated from the inside out. Dave and his students engaged in substantive conversation about the needs that motivated the characters they encountered and the conflicting wants that created dramatic tension in a story. Hawthorne's The Scarlet Letter provided an opportunity for in-depth exploration of motivation because Roger Chillingworth, Arthur Dimmesdale, and Hester Prynne are fully developed characters with conflicting wants and motivations. Dave's students learned that being motivated from the inside out means that we behave based on the perceptions we create, regardless of whether those perceptions are accurate or not. Shakespeare's Romeo takes his own life because he thinks that Juliet is dead. The fact that she is alive is irrelevant, because in Romeo's head, his beloved bride is gone. Students discovered that we are driven from within even when our perceptions are tragically flawed.

Weaving the ideas of internal control and motivation into his lessons helped Dave become a more effective teacher. He found it exciting to watch students argue about what motivated characters and whether their actions were responsible or irresponsible. Even though he didn't use the ideas of internal control psychology to manage disruption, Dave's students seemed appreciably more focused and attentive. He was certain this was because their discussions about internal motivation made the class more relevant and engaging.

Well before Dave began to learn about internal motivation, he had a reputation as a demanding but fair teacher. Students knew he expected a lot from them. In turn, he gave them his best—day after day, year after year. Of course, there were occasional problems, but most of Dave's students worked hard and were successful.

Addressing Students' Need for Belonging

Initially, becoming well-acquainted with internal control psychology gave Dave a frame of reference to enhance his teaching of literature. After a few months, he expanded his application of internal control psychology. He started to think about the basic needs of individual students, particularly those who were not high achievers. Megan, a student with a strong need for belonging, was Dave's first case. She was a nice kid and never intentionally disrespectful, but she frequently needed to be spoken to for off-task behavior in class—often after arriving late, something that occurred regularly.

Virtually every time Megan got into difficulty, it was related to her need for belonging. She was the quintessential social butterfly. Almost every class has one. She was late to class because she was chatting with friends. She was too social in class when Dave was attempting to teach, interfering with his need for competence. Dave knew Megan was a nice girl who would almost assuredly grow into a successful adult. She was intelligent and personable. The problem was that her need for belonging compromised her academic performance. Dave knew from conversations with his colleagues that Megan's behavior was similar in her other classes.

Dave developed a goal: to help Megan meet her need for belonging in his class by doing what he asked so she would be happy and academically productive. Dave intentionally created opportunities for Megan to utilize her strong interpersonal skills. She began to thrive. The telling point was that she no longer came to class late. Once Megan discovered, consciously or not, that she was able to satisfy her need for belonging in class, there was no compelling reason to remain in the hall. A few simple strategies helped Dave succeed with Megan and helped him use the ideas of internal motivation as a management tool and not only a way to teach literature. Specifically, Dave offered Megan the job of distributing materials for their daily lessons. This needed to be done at the beginning of class, so Megan could only do the job if she were on time. Since she got to “meet and greet” virtually every classmate as they prepared to work, she got her daily “belonging fix.” As a result, Megan was able to focus and produce academically, something that she found almost impossible when Dave didn't intentionally create an environment where she could behave socially in an appropriate way.

Providing Options

Dave knew he never would have been successful if he weren't able to positively connect with his students. They knew he was demanding. They also knew he genuinely liked them and wanted them to do well. That was what made it work. Josh had a strong need for freedom and would rather fail than do what he was “made” to do. As soon as Dave provided him with options, Josh became an engaged, productive student. By helping Josh discover responsible ways to satisfy his need for autonomy, Dave became a better teacher. Dave needed to be clear about his goals and expectations. For each lesson, Dave told all students the same thing: “This is what you need to know and be able to do when we're finished. I have come up with one way for you to be successful. If you want to figure out another way that demonstrates you know what you're supposed to know and can apply the knowledge, I'm willing to consider your idea.” With his strong need for autonomy, Josh thrived. He was a creative, divergent thinker, and he frequently discovered alternative ways to learn what Dave was trying to teach. For example, at the conclusion of a short story unit, Dave asked the students to write an analysis of four characters from the stories they had read. An avid musician and songwriter, Josh chose to create a compact disc of original music and lyrics depicting the conflicts, decisions, and consequences of characters from the short stories. The fact that Josh was given options diminished his need to always do things “his way.” Josh's creative, divergent learning style became an asset to the class.

Fun Funneled into Productivity

Aaron had the potential to be a professional comic as an adult. Unfortunately, he was using Dave's classroom to practice. Once Dave found ways for Aaron to have fun appropriately within the classroom, Aaron toned his act down, and everyone enjoyed his creativity while simultaneously studying what needed to be learned in English class. Dave worked out an arrangement with Aaron, something that would have been impossible without a positive relationship. First, they acknowledged that they respected each other. Aaron agreed not to interfere with Dave's teaching and Dave agreed to support Aaron in his quest to find the humor in everything. The key was timing. Dave offered Aaron a couple of minutes each day for some humorous commentary. There was, however, one stipulation. Whatever Aaron discussed had to be directly related to what they were studying. Aaron had to impose structure on his creativity, something all successful artists need to do. Just like a sonnet needs to have 14 lines, Aaron needed to harness his creativity. Because he was proud of his creative humor, Aaron chose to entertain only when he had come up with something worthwhile, usually not more than once or twice a week for a couple of minutes. It was always done in a way that did not disrupt. Dave characterized Aaron's portrayal of Rip Van Winkle, waking after a 20-year slumber, as not only hilarious, but also as helping his classmates remember that landmark short story more vividly. Used judiciously, humor enhances learning, something Dave was able to incorporate into his classroom. Aaron became an asset once Dave gave him the opportunity to have fun responsibly within a classroom that maintained high academic expectations.

There were other stories from that year, all illustrating the same theme: Once Dave structured an environment where students could satisfy their needs responsibly, problematic behavior all but disappeared. Even though he didn't have many noncompliant kids, even a couple can taint a classroom, and Dave was glad he had found a way to reach more kids and enjoy his job even more.

Class Meetings Are Need-Satisfying

Another strategy that Dave found especially effective was the use of class meetings. Dave conducted brief meetings two to three times a week. Although they were only 5 to 10 minutes long, they provided an opportunity for students to feel connected, be listened to, and enjoy themselves during class. Sometimes Dave organized meetings that were content-specific, designed to reveal what students already knew about a topic that was going to be introduced. On rare occasions, Dave ran problem-solving meetings to address an issue that was keeping the class from achieving as much as possible. Most often, Dave had open meetings where students discussed issues that they found interesting. These brief meetings effectively engaged Dave's students and helped minimize disruption. By regularly having class meetings, Dave created an environment where learners could meet their needs responsibly.

The Whole Is the Sum of Its Parts, and More

About a year after he first started putting the ideas of internal motivation into practice in his classroom, Dave's district brought in a speaker for one of their professional development days. Jon Erwin, author of The Classroom of Choice (2004), spent the day helping teachers create classroom environments that support student achievement. The fact that Jon had been a high school English teacher made his presentation especially interesting to Dave. One thing stood out, probably because of Dave's strong interest in the basic needs. Erwin said that classes have needs just like individuals, and that the strength of the needs can vary dramatically from class to class. Dave immediately began to think of his own classes that year. As soon as he did, it was apparent that his 6th-period class had a strong need for belonging. They were an incredibly social group. When the lesson required them to work in cooperative groups, they did a fantastic job. They worked diligently while they interacted and they managed to stay on task.

The more Dave thought about the needs from a whole-class perspective, the more intrigued he was. Depending upon the need an activity addressed, Dave could accurately predict if the 6th-period kids were going to be successful. Dave's school operates on a rotating schedule, and it didn't matter if he met this class in the morning, just before lunch, just after lunch, or at the end of the day. They were social and driven by the belonging need all the time. Once Dave made this discovery, the solution was obvious. He structured his teaching style to match the collective learning style of the class based on their strong need for belonging. Almost immediately, on-task behavior increased and achievement improved dramatically.

Dave had another class that was much more driven by the needs for competence and freedom. For the most part, they didn't work especially well when placed in cooperative groups: Their strong need for power led to frequent conflicts. Their need for freedom led them to balk at prescribed roles and limited autonomy. Even though these students generally liked each other, they preferred to work independently most of the time. An occasional cooperative activity worked well, but too much was counterproductive. The solution? Dave identified his objective and created a lesson that was compatible with their preferred need. The “all business” class struggled when given too many cooperative activities, so Dave offered them lots of options and kept things challenging.

Dave believes students learn best when given time to process what they have been learning, creating internal meaning. With a class that is especially social, he may ask students to turn to their neighbor and take two minutes to discuss what they have been learning. If he's worried that students might drift off task, he'll have them write something first and then share for just a minute with a partner. That subtle shift works wonders. With less social, more task-oriented classes, Dave may ask them to write for several minutes. These students often learn more by processing independently. Classes with a big need for freedom might be offered a choice of writing or drawing about what they have been studying and then having the option of engaging in a one-minute conversation with a neighbor. In each case, Dave gets what he wants: students reflecting on the material they have encountered and creating meaning for themselves. By structuring activities in multiple ways, Dave has expanded the number of learners he can effectively teach.

Over time, Dave became skilled at identifying if his classes were skewed toward a particular need. Most are pretty balanced, but every year he has one or two classes that have a decided preference for one or two need areas. For every unit, Dave has developed learning activities compatible with each need area. When he has a big “belonging” class, he gives them numerous belonging activities. When he has a “freedom” class, the learning objectives remain the same, but Dave uses lots of freedom-based activities. His students are more successful because he creates an environment that matches the need profile of the class as a whole. Dave's accommodations never compromise the learning expectations. If his goal is to determine if a student has read a particular story or novel, he might be satisfied with a conversation that demonstrates that students have successfully completed the task. On the other hand, if the learning goal involves putting together a series of well-developed written paragraphs, then having a conversation about the story is not acceptable. Whatever Dave sanctions appropriately addresses his objectives.

Dave has been intentionally constructing his classroom based on the need-strength of the group for some time now. Some of his colleagues have told him that they think he is “giving in” by teaching to match the need-strength of his classes. “Part of growing up is learning how to adapt to the demands of the environment,” they tell him. “The world doesn't adapt for us. We thrive when we learn to adapt to the environment.” When confronted by their reasoning, Dave reminds himself that these colleagues are looking at things from an external orientation. As someone committed to internal motivation, Dave takes an inside-out approach. He asks himself what he wants as a teacher. He is the teacher he wants to be when he creates a need-satisfying environment. He doesn't think he's “giving in” to his students. “It's not a competition. It's a cooperative venture,” he says. Of course, classes where power and freedom are the dominant needs sometimes include students with a high need for belonging, just as classes characterized by a high need for connecting typically have a few students who are less social and who work better independently. Individualizing lessons and providing differentiated instruction allows Dave to structure learning environments that are need-satisfying for all students in his classes.

Dave's approach, based on fostering and nurturing internal motivation and the desire to succeed academically, allows his students to be more successful. As a teacher, that's what matters to him. By intentionally giving his classes, as well as individual students, what they need, he is a better teacher.

Commentary

Dave initially applied internal control psychology to his teaching of literature. Discussing the internal pictures of characters in literature and the needs that drive them represents a natural application of internal control psychology in the classroom. Students in history classes can study historical figures using the same process. In fact, you can apply internal control psychology to any subject that involves human interaction and competing goals.

As Dave became more familiar with internal control psychology, he began to consider the unwanted behavior that occasionally compromised his classroom. Knowing that all behavior is purposeful and designed to satisfy needs, Dave set about discovering what need was being met by disruptive behavior. He then created opportunities for his students to meet their needs by participating in activities he sanctioned and that enhanced learning. Soon Dave had virtually eliminated unwanted behavior, and his students were both happier and more academically productive.

Classes, like individual students, differ in terms of need-strength. Dave found that some classes need more connections, some need more freedom, and some are more driven by pure achievement. He structured his teaching to match the style of each class. While he delivered the same content and maintained the same expectations, Dave developed flexible ways to teach that matched the need profile of each class. By developing flexibility, Dave added a creative dimension to his teaching style that helped him be more successful with more classes. And by attending to the specific need-strengths of individual students, he maximized the chances of all students being involved and productive in his classroom.

What You Can Do

• If you teach a subject that involves human interaction like English or social studies, discuss the internal pictures and drives of the characters with your students. These discussions will help the characters seem more “real,” and the students will become more engaged in learning.
• Pay attention to the strength of your students' needs. In most classrooms, there are a few students who have especially strong needs in one or two areas. Find ways to help them satisfy their needs by doing what you ask. They will be less disruptive and more academically productive.
• Consider your class as a whole and determine if it has a particular need area that is especially strong. Deliver instruction to match the style and “personality” of your class, regardless of whether it is more belonging-driven, freedom-driven, or competence-driven. When your instruction matches what the class needs, they will be more engaged and more productive.
• Conduct class meetings frequently. Meetings can be brief. They can focus on academic content, problematic behavior, or issues of interest. Class meetings are need-satisfying because students feel connected, listened to, and free.
• Match your teaching to the style of the class. Higher standards are more likely to be achieved when you provide instruction that is compatible with the personality of your learners.