- Information
- AI Chat
D095 Models of Classroom Management
Managing Engaging Learning Environments (D095)
Western Governors University
Recommended for you
Preview text
36
ifficulty managing behavior in the classroom is frequently cited as a source of frustration for teachers and a common reason why new teachers leave the profession (Ingersoll 2001, 2003). Concerted atten- tion to issues of classroom management is important to the health of education; attention to these issues at the middle and secondary education level are especially important, given that many of the strategies and meth- ods of managing behavior in the elementary school years are perceived to become less effective with older populations of students. A cohesive and thoughtfully constructed personal philosophy of classroom management can provide the foundation from which teachers make classroom man- agement decisions and respond to instances of student misbehavior. In this article, we describe the major tenets of three well-established models of classroom management: Assertive Discipline, Logical Conse- quences, and Teacher Effectiveness Training. In addi- tion to the description, an example of applying each model to a behavior management situation in a sec- ondary classroom is supplied.
Classroom Management Models
Assertive Discipline The Assertive Discipline classroom management model was initially developed by Lee Canter in the 1970s and then expanded based on Marlene Canter’s work with children with behavioral problems (Canter 1979). Although this approach is often characterized as focusing primarily on rewards and punishments, the Canters actually place great emphasis on “catching stu- dents being good” and then providing appropriate
feedback and reinforcement (Canter and Canter 2001). This approach was developed to train teachers specifi- cally to manage behavior in a classroom setting and is based on the idea that teachers have a right to teach in a well-managed classroom and students have the right to learn in a controlled environment. The premise of Assertive Discipline is that teachers should establish a systematic discipline plan prior to the start of the school year and then communicate expectations and consequences to the students imme- diately. Having a preconceived, systematic plan permits a teacher to be consistent with behavioral expectations and to apply praises and consequences to all students in a fair and reliable manner. The four main compo- nents of the Assertive Discipline model include the teacher establishing: (1) a set of consistent, firm, and fair rules; (2) a predetermined set of positive conse- quences for adhering to the rules; (3) a prearranged set of negative consequences to be applied when rules are not followed; and (4) a plan to implement the model with students (Canter and Canter 2001). The Canters hold that an effective behavior management program is fueled by informed student choices. Students are aware of teacher expectations and what will occur when they choose to meet those expectations and, conversely, what will occur when they choose not to adhere to the established classroom rules (Canter 1989). In the Classroom The Assertive Discipline model can be applied to any classroom situation with any grade level of students. In utilizing this approach, teachers must determine the expectations and consequences that are appropriate for the subject area and age of the students they serve. For
Models of Classroom
Management as Applied to the
Secondary Classroom
KIMBER W. MALMGREN, BEVERLY J. TREZEK, and PETER V. PAUL
Kimber W. Malmgren is an associate professor at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. Beverly J. Trezek is an assistant professor at DePaul University. Peter V. Paul is a professor and director at Ohio State University.
D
Vol. 79, No. 1 Models of Classroom Management 37
example, there are specific expectations that apply to par- ticular subject areas; this would be the case with a high school science class. In this situation, the teacher could utilize the Assertive Discipline model to establish expec- tations for lab procedures (such as: safety glasses must be worn when using the Bunsen burner; procedures must be followed to utilize scalpels during dissection; care for the microscope and slides must be considered). Regardless of age or expectation, students require positive feedback on whether expectations are being met or consequences need to be applied. Teachers must develop consequences that are appropriate based on the classroom situation and age of the stu- dents. For example, although missing five minutes of recess can easily be applied to students in an ele- mentary setting, teachers of middle and high school age students must find consequences that are applic- able to their setting, such as serving a five-minute detention after school or assisting with cleaning the lab during lunch.
Logical Consequences A second popular model of classroom management is articulated by Rudolf Dreikurs (1968). This model is based on earlier work by German psychiatrist Alfred Adler, and relies on the notion that students’ misbe- havior is an outgrowth of their unmet needs. One of the underlying assumptions of the model is that all stu- dents desire and need social recognition. When this need is not fulfilled, students exhibit a hierarchy of misbehaviors based on what Dreikurs refers to as “mis- taken goals” (Dreikurs, Grunwald, and Pepper 1998, 13). Dreikurs holds that when a student’s need for recognition is unmet, that student will first display attention-seeking behaviors. If those behaviors do not result in the desired recognition, the student will attempt to engage teachers in power struggles. If this bid for power still leaves the student without the desired recognition, the student may focus on issues of fairness and attempts to exact revenge. If this behavior is unsuccessful, the student may finally resort to “dis- plays of inadequacy” (Dreikurs, Grunwald, and Pepper 1998, 24–25) where he or she appears to simply give up and disengage. Where the Assertive Discipline model of classroom management emphasizes the importance of teacher- imposed structure in the classroom, the Driekurs model emphasizes the importance of assisting stu- dents in meeting their innate need to gain recogni- tion and acceptance. Even when a teacher strives to establish a classroom where all students feel recog- nized and accepted, it is likely that some misbehavior will occur. In those cases, Dreikurs advocates for the application of logical consequences (Dreikurs and Grey 1968), which are consequences that have a clear and logical connection to the misbehavior and have
been discussed and agreed upon with the student before applied. An example of a logical consequence for a student who disrupts others during class might be that the student will be isolated from the group until he or she agrees to rejoin the group without dis- ruption. A logical consequence is different from a natural consequence in that natural consequences occur without teacher planning or discussion with the student. Although logical consequences should be clearly related to the misbehavior, they also require active planning and conscious application. Although the use of logical consequences to respond to misbehavior is an important element of Dreikurs’ model, the real strength of the model lies in its emphasis on preventing misbehavior. Although this emphasis on prevention is a common thread among all the models described here, Dreikurs’ model is unique in that prevention is based on devel- oping positive relationships with students so that they can feel accepted. In the Classroom The principles espoused by Dreikurs can be applied in many middle and high school classroom situations. For example, during a high school English class, a stu- dent may be sitting at his desk listening to music while wearing headphones. If the teacher demands that the student remove the headphones and turn off the music, the student may respond by smiling at the teacher and refusing to follow directions. Additional demands by the teacher may result in continued defi- ance and increased silliness on the part of the student. In this case, the teacher has merely fueled the student’s acting out to gain both attention (from peers as well as the teacher) and power. According to Dreikurs, teachers should always avoid power struggles with students. A better approach would be for the teacher to ignore the headphones and try instead to work the student into some sort of lead- ership role, like helping the teacher take roll, proof- reading an answer key, or writing the day’s homework assignment on the overhead. If the student’s mistaken goal is to gain a sense of power, then teachers should look for productive ways to allow that student to feel powerful and consequently valued and recognized. Attempting to “put a student in his place” will only increase that student’s feelings of neglect or inferiority and lead to increased acting out. The distribution of logical consequences can also be applied to the example of the student listening to music on headphones. After class, the teacher could conference with the student about what an appropriate conse- quence for wearing headphones during class might be. One conceivable consequence would be for that student to make up the amount of class time he missed (by not being able to hear the teacher) during lunch time.
Vol. 79, No. 1 Models of Classroom Management 39
Canter, L., and M. Canter. 2001. Assertive discipline: Positive behavior management for today’s classroom. 3rd ed. Seal Beach, CA: Canter. Dreikurs, R. 1968. Psychology in the classroom: A manual for teachers. 2nd ed. New York: Harper and Row. Dreikurs, R., and L. Grey. 1968. A new approach to discipline: Logical consequences. New York: Hawthorne. Dreikurs, R., B. B. Grunwald, and F. C. Pepper. 1998. Maintaining san- ity in the classroom: Classroom management techniques. 2nd ed. Wash- ington, DC: Taylor and Francis.
Edwards, C. H. 2004. Classroom discipline and management. 4th ed. New York: John Wiley and Sons. Gordon, T. 1977. T.E.: Teacher effectiveness training. New York: David McCay. Ingersoll, R. M. 2001. Teacher turnover, teacher shortages, and the orga- nization of schools. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Pol- icy, University of Washington. Ingersoll, R. M., and T. M. Smith. 2003. The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational Leadership 60 (8): 30–33.
D095 Models of Classroom Management
Course: Managing Engaging Learning Environments (D095)
University: Western Governors University
