The Dangers of a Single, Behaviourist, Story

Educational settings can be often limited by single, dominant narratives that perpetuate outdated, behaviorist approaches to learning.

 

Adults make off-the-cuff remarks about ākonga that devalue their personal worth and integrity. It happens all too often. It goes something like this: Anthony’s lazy, attention-seeking, manipulative. We’ve heard these unnecessary behaviourist comments before. These comments can be short and sweet (like the example above) or long-winded affairs. Both forms are draining and equally as damaging.

 

If only the educator took the time to drill-down on what was really going on for ākonga and whānau. They would hopefully be enlightened by a new perspective and deeper understanding.

 

I googled an AI perspective on "Dangers of a Single Story in Education" and this is what came up:

 

In education, a "single story" reduces complex groups or individuals to flattened stereotypes. This narrows curricula, limits student potential through low expectations, and fosters critical misunderstandings. By failing to represent diverse human experiences, it stifles empathy and prevents students from seeing themselves reflected in their learning.

 

Ingheim (2025) notes that “when we get caught up in a single story, we forget that other stories exist and lose the ability to see things from other people’s perspectives” (p. 501).

 

 

Promoting a narrow, often inaccurate and incomplete lens on a student is therefore very damaging. Would they like such comments hurled at them? I doubt it.  Ill-informed comments are also contagious. It is what we call negative contagion. Negative comments beget negative comments. They spread like wild-fire! When one person says it, then another person reinforces such a message and it snow-balls from there. Those water-cooler conversations in the staffroom are where single-story negative narratives are purified, reinforced and embellished. However, it doesn’t have to be like this.

 

Although it takes time and effort to enact such change RTLB do have the power to change these negative narratives.

 

I would argue that the first step is having a self awareness that a particular comment is NOT OKAY. Noticing or recognising such comments is the first step. Being attuned to such comments, both written and verbal, is most important.

 

The second step is to be brave and reframe negative language on the spot. Don’t let it gain momentum. An individual’s negative cognitive bias must be challenged in a respectful way. If you don’t challenge, who will?

 

Here is an example of a reframe:

 

"Rather than seeing Anthony’s behaviour as attention-seeking and manipulative, I see it clearly as a nervous system response. He is currently feeling overwhelmed, and the behaviour we see is a frustration response. He’s not in his cortex at this current moment. He’s in his Red Brain-fight response. Capturing his voice when he is calm and back in his cortex is important. We need to see what was going on for him. I am happy to support you with this."

 

However, in our current education landscape, reframing negative kaiako comments is like putting out a wild-fire-where one fire is extinguished, another one seems to light-up in its place. This is especially true when the behaviourist lens has taken a stranglehold as part of embedded school culture. What is required then? There is no easy solution, but to coin a Ross Greene term, working as ‘upstream’ as possible, will help. We need to be proactive (‘early’) in our response.

 

This is where the RTLB Liaison role comes into play. It is a crucial, ever-evolving role.

 

Firstly, RTLB within the liaison role can certainly influence school leadership's narrative with regards to specific ākonga. That is, a student’s frustration response is because of their brain’s stress response. They are operating from their 'red brain' rather than their 'green brain'. They are not been manipulative or attention-seeking!

   

Secondly, RTLB can support SENCO/LSC to write a mana-enhancing request for support (RfS/R4S). RTLB can support school staff to write developmentally and biologically appropriate, inclusive and respectful RfS/R4S. Making time to do this improves outcomes. Sitting down with the referrer means RTLB can challenge any outdated or one-sided narratives that may emerge from kōrero. RTLB can also encourage the referrer to capture authentic ākonga and whānau voice, outlining their current strengths, interests, realities and difficulties. Such an active coaching approach promotes multiple perspectives and helps reduce 'Dangers of a Single Story' thinking.

 

It is also encouraging to hear that RTLB clusters across the motu are now recommending to schools to submit an Assessment of Skills and Unsolved Problems (ASUP) within their individual RfS/R4S. This assessment tool naturally promotes a new lens and language orientation that helps to mitigate the behaviourist single-story response.

"Anthony is having difficulty starting his basic facts sheet during Maths time." Seeing that written down makes me wonder: What is preventing Anthony from starting his basic facts sheet? In other words, what is the unmet expectation happening in this moment? Plan B him (if you don't know what Plan B is see here for more info) and see what falls out of the conversation! Plan B’s are a great way to place ākonga at the centre of conversation, build empathy and is the antithesis of the behaviourist single-story perspective. Conducting a Plan B kōrero helps ākonga feel acknowledged and helps them ‘to be seen’.

 

Moving forward into RTLB casework, the beauty of He Pikorua is that it is a clear pathway that can also help RTLB reduce the dangers of a single story behaviourist mentality. In essence, He Pikorua promotes an inclusive, multi-perspective approach to ākonga needs. It encourages collaborative partnerships where Kohikohi and Āta Whakaaro are opportunities for all within the collaborative team to get together and share and analyse different perspectives. Not one perspective is more important than the other, but all contriubute to understanding ākonga and whānau needs.  Subsequently, ākonga and whānau voice at Tātai should also be at the heart of decisions and next steps.  

 

If you haven’t already done so, I encourage you to peruse He Pikorua reflective questions. Many of these questions help promote the power of multiple-perspectives, which indirectly challenges single story thinking. However, any of these pātai are somewhat redundant if they are not seen through a 'Listening to Understand' lens. This is giving the speaker time and space to respond. 'Listening to Understand' is having an understanding of not only the message that is conveyed, but the emotion behind the words. In essence, it is an empathy-building process.  

 

A word of caution. Just as for ākonga, we need to meet kaiako where they are at. Changing their hearts, minds, and their narrative, is not easy. A one solution or a one-size-fits-all approach will not work. Positive shifts happen in incremental, subtle AND collaborative ways.

 

Crucially, a starting point should be just sitting down with kaiako and listening to understand their needs and reality, including any 'single story' mentality. Be curious, open and non-judgemental. That way, we are not making our own adult assumptions about them but understanding their schema and ways of being. From here, we can start to layer and influence our own schema and ways of being into case work.

 

A next step is RTLB and kaiako collaboratively identifying any descrepancy in schema and ways of being, and then identifying next step actions together in a unified way. Compromising is the key here. That is a willingness to make concessions on practice or points of view. Positive shifts are more likely to happen when both parties are willing to compromise. Next step actions need to be a win for all, even if what kaiako decides doesn’t align fully with your own philosophy: "Anthony, you can embed the "red brain", "green brain" at Te Matua level, as long as I can keep my sticker chart for Johnny".

 

Finally, celebrate any successes, even if it is very small. Remember shifts in kaiako practice around Dangers of a Single Story don’t have to be huge. Also, share the small wins with colleagues as a way to learn with, from and about each other. We simply should not carry this mahi, alone. Collegial support and guidance will help lighten the load.

 

Glossary:

(AI Generated)

 

The "red brain" and "green brain" is a simple metaphor for understanding how our minds react to stress versus calm.

• Red Brain: Your reactive, survival mode. When triggered, it overrides logic, shutting down rational thinking to focus on fight-or-flight.

• Green Brain: Your logical, executive state. It handles reasoning, empathy, and learning, functioning best when you feel completely safe.

 

References

Ingheim, M. (2025). Confronting a Post-Truth World: Narrative Dangers and Pragmatic Alternatives. World Futures, 81(7), 499-507. (PDF) Confronting a Post-Truth World: Narrative Dangers ...

 

Resources:

• Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie: The Danger of a Single Story | TED

• He Pikorua in Action Reflective Questions Access many reflective pātai that can be used in RTLB mahi.