Theoretical�approaches of Classroom Management by mopyfyfy

VIEWS: 8,602 PAGES: 6

									Theoretical approaches of Classroom Management
Introduction To be successful in teaching activities, classroom management takes a vital part, so that teachers should have a well-planned discipline approach before their teaching practice. The classroom management plan requires understanding of different classroom management theories and consideration of their own beliefs of student’s development. (Edwards and Watts, 2004) Students’ development theories and classroom management models could fit into three categories according to how much relative freedom is given to students and how strong the power of control is applied by teachers, which are teacher-directed approach, collaborative approach and student-directed approach. (Balson, 1982) Models in each theoretical approach are in the form below.

Teacher’s Control Behavior Modification Assertive Discipline Teacher-directed Approach

Relative Power ——— Mixed ——— Discipline Models Democratic Discipline Choice Theory Positive Behavior Leadership Collaborative Approach Theoretical Bases

Student’s Autonomy Teacher Effectiveness Training Responsible Thinking Process Pain Student-directed Approach

Teacher-directed Approach Theory Teacher-directed theory believes that human behaviors can be promoted or reinforced by the environment stimulates, so that children’s behaviors can be changed under the influence of environment conditions, such as rewards, encouragements, consequences and punishments. Therefore, teachers give students little autonomy because they do not believe that students are able to self-monitor or self-regulate adequately. Hence, teachers should adjust the external conditions to achieve expected behaviors only. (Martin and Pear, 1992) Model Demonstration in practice One of the famous discipline models based on the teacher-directed theory is assertive discipline

model, which gives teachers a system to set up their expectations and rules, avoid negative behaviors by negative consequences and reinforce preferred behaviors through rewards or encouragements. There are a few steps to apply assertive discipline model to classroom management problems. (Canter, 1976) Establishing positive student-teacher relationships is the first step. Teachers need to establish good relationship with students based on mutual trust and respect in order to make sure their expectations are met. (Canter, 1996) Hence, teachers could attend kinds of students’ activities, such as sports events and drama plays and so on, and praise their achievements in these activities to promote a better relationship. The next step is to clarify rules and expectations. Rules in class are mostly based on teacher’s needs, and they need to be clearly specified and explained. A short list of rules is preferable rather than long one since it is easier for students to understand, remember and follow. (Canter and Canter, 1992) The following step is to track misbehaviors, which is to make sure their demands are met after they clarified their rules and expectations. Through the step, students would know that their behaviors are monitored and examined. All following rewards and consequences are provided based on the observation as well. (Edwards and Watts, 2004) The three steps above is the basis of the assertive discipline model. Next is to use consequences to enforce boundaries. With advance preparation, the discipline hierarchy could be set up to differentiate severity of misbehaviors. (Canter and Canter, 1992) Consequences or punishments could become more and more serious when students continue to misbehave. Besides negative consequences, positive consequences also need to be applied to encourage desirable behaviors. Frequently supplying negative consequences will increase the tense and depression in classroom, while praise, rewards and encouragements will ease the tense and depression. However, the canters claimed that rewards can not replace punishments, and a balance between positive and negative consequences are needed in the assertive discipline system. (Canter and Canter, 1992) The last but not the least, establishing strong parent support is very important. Parents play a vital role in helping teachers maintain good classroom discipline. A successful teacher-parent communication could also show parents that teachers are really interested in helping their kids. (Edwards and Watts, 2004)

Collaborative Approach Theory Collaborative theory assumes that children’s behaviors are influenced from both inner and outer factors, and the purpose of their behaviors is always to satisfy some needs. Students would like to control their own life to meet their needs, so that they are able to achieve responsible self-determination, if teachers could offer appropriate guidance. In other words, teachers have to

teach students how to be responsible and allow them to gain more self-control over their behaviors. (Glasser, 1984) Model Demonstration in practice William Glasser’s choice theory is a famous model based on the collaborative theory. It explains why and how all human beings behave that all behaviors are driven by five basic needs, survival, belonging, power, fun and freedom. Teachers, therefore, need to teach students how to control their behavior in a way that they can satisfy their needs, and meanwhile, they do not deprive others to satisfy theirs. (Charles, 2002) In practice, choice theory includes significant prevention components. Glasser (1969) suggested three types of classroom meetings to prevent discipline problem - social-problem-solving meetings, open-ended meetings and educational diagnosis meetings. Social-problem-solving meetings are focused on class. It encourages students to solve discipline problems from class expectations. The behaviors that the class finds unacceptable are listed through collective discussions. Here, students gain a chance to make decisions to create their own classroom circumstance based on sufficient information which is provided by teachers. It is a way to maximum the satisfaction in class. Students are also welcomed to contribute on the rule formulations, consequently, students would feel more obligations to the class issues, and the classroom rules would make more sense to them as it also contains their own determinations. Open-ended meetings are used to support regular curriculum, in which students could ask questions relevant to their learning circumstance. Also, it encourages students advise on the class operations in order to promote a more enjoyable and productive learning environment. Educational diagnosis meetings are for students to evaluate their academic achievements and find out the blind side of their knowledge. Teachers should offer quality teaching and activate students’ genuine motivation by locating their needs and interests. Encouraging students go through a process of self-evaluation, improvement and repetition could achieve a better work quality and protect their self-esteem as well. (Glasser, 1993) When class rule are broken, Glasser (1993) suggested that teachers’ intervention should not be punitive, but make logic sense to students. Although negative consequences would be applied when the classroom rules are breached, students are encouraged to accept and consider these consequences as reasonable outcomes for contravening rules rather than pure punishments.

Student-directed Approach Theory The student-directed theory believes that children are capable for complete rational self-regulations, since the “blueprint” of their future has already in them. Students would grow up naturally and teacher’s role in this process is to promote their self-growth by providing conditions.


Model Demonstration in practice A well-known model of the theory is the teacher effectiveness training model, which believes that students will make correct decisions and solve problems with the assistance from parents and teachers. Besides, punishments are not going to stop students’ contrary to regulations. In contrast, the punitive punishment would cause aggression in children. (Gordon, 1989) The teacher effectiveness training model is relied on good connection between teachers and students, which is based on good communication. Applying the teacher effectiveness training model to solve discipline problems, first of all, the problem ownership has to be located. If student’s behavior causes problems for the student only, the student owns the problem; if student’s behavior causes no problem for either teacher or the student, no one owns problem; if student’s behavior causes problems for teacher or other students, teacher owns the problem. (Gordon, 1976) When teachers own the problem, they should deal with students’ misbehaviors in a positive, non-adversarial manner. Usually, teachers may minimize or eliminate the behavior problems by modifying the physical or psychological environment. Besides, sending student a confrontive I-message to clarify the problem, its effect and teacher’s feeling is also a method to gain the student’s cooperation and support. When a student responses the I-message in a resisting way, teacher need to shift gears from an assertive position to a listening position to reach an acceptable solution by considering the student’s needs and feeling. In addition, Gordon (1976) suggested that, if a conflict occurs in the classroom, trying to find a no-lose method of conflict resolution is much better than a win-lose one. When students own the problem, they need a way to release the distressful feelings and emotions, so that, as a teacher, just listening to their problems will help a lot, which exhibits a posture of willingness to help to the student. Some body movements, facial expressions and door openers could show your positive attitude and promote the conversation. Furthermore, teachers should avoid expressions such as giving order, warning, preaching, analyzing, lecturing and criticizing, since these expressions will restrain student’s willingness of talking, which will block the communication road between teacher and student. (Gordon, 1989) There are also some explicit strategies regarding the prevention of discipline problems. Firstly, preventing I-message could be used to modify the possible misbehaviors later and receive desirable future support and cooperation from the students. Then, in order to achieve a safe, efficient and harmony classroom, rules of the class should be set up by both teacher and student through discussions, which is much like the way to obtain no-lose conflict resolution. Besides, Gordon (1989) suggested teacher to share the power and decision making with students to manage the class with the anticipation of students. Consequently students will have more confidence and self-esteem in the class, and they are required to behave more responsibly. Discussion The strengths and limitations of the example models - assertive discipline model, choice theory and the teacher effectiveness training model - are listed in the following table, in which the advantages and disadvantages of each approaches would be located as well. (Edwards and Watts,

2004) Discipline Model Advantages     Simple for application Focus on teacher’s desire Parents and administrators are involved in discipline process  Disadvantages Inhibition of student’s self-regulation Punishments may cause consequences such as embarrassing, rebellion or revenge Underlying the causes of discipline problems Difficult for students to experience true sense of autonomy if the outside influences are too strong Difficult for teachers to show respectful behavior if students keep challenging them Time consuming Time consuming Not applicable in emergency or dangerous situations Over reliance on student’s willingness

Assertive Discipline (Teacher-directed)

   Choice Theory (Collaborative)  Developing effective teacher-student relationship Promotion of self-autonomy and self-determination to meet student’s need High-lighting the teacher’s need Promotion of honest communication Encouraging self-discipline Forming good teacher-student relationship


 Teacher Effectiveness Training (Student-directed)   

   

The three approaches are essentially different in the cognition of students. The teacher-directed theory does not believe that students are able to self-regulate, so the strategies emphasize on the teacher’s desire and neglect student’s needs. The student-directed theory believes student’s self-regulation, so its strategies highlight the student’s willingness, but impair teacher’s interventions. The collaborative theory believes that student’s self-regulation must be guided by teachers, so that strategies of collaborative theory are trying to balance both of their needs. Hence, in practice, factors such as the age group of students and school learning environment could be considered to find a suitable classroom management plan.


References Balson, Maurice. (1982). Understanding classroom behavior. Melbourne: Australian Council for Educational Research. Canter, L. (1976). Assertive Discipline: A take-charge approach for today’s educator. Seal Beach, CA: Lee Cater & Associates. Canter, L. (1996). First the Rapport —Then the Rules, Learning, 24(5), pp. 12-14. Charles, C.M. (2002) Building Classroom Discipline. (7th Ed.), Boston : Allyn and Bacon. Edwards, C., & Watts, V. (2004). Classroom discipline and management: An Australasian perspective. Milton, Old: John Wiley & Sons. Glasser, W. (1969). Schools Without Failure, New York: Harper & Row. Glasser, W. (1984). Control Theory: A New Explanation of How We Control Our Lives, New York: Harper & Row. Glasser, W. (1993). The Quality School Teacher, New York: Harper Collins. Gordon, T. (1976). P.E.T. in action. New York: Bantam Books. Gordon, T. (1989). Discipline that works: Promoting self-discipline in children. New York: Random House. Martin, G & Pear, J. (1992). Behavior Modification: What It Is and How to Do It. (4th Ed.), Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.


To top