“I would be a hypocrite if I said I didn’t shout at pupils. I do, but I try to limit these instances to the times when I really need to make a point quickly.” (Dixie, 2007: 62)
2.2 - Approaches to Behaviour Management
There are a variety of approaches to classroom and behaviour management. It would be unrealistic to assume any one approach can be applied in all schools and in all situations. Furthermore, it seems astute to point out that focusing exclusively on one approach may be an inefficient strategy. As a consequence, in the aforementioned schools, the utilisation of more than one approach to classroom and behaviour management has been observed.
Utilising more than one approach may provide a good balance, as well as create flexibility, of classroom and behaviour management. The application of varying approaches seems ultimately effective across a wide range of pupil ability levels and social backgrounds.
Some of the most commonly discussed approaches are ‘assertive discipline’ (Canter and Canter, 2001) which is linked with ‘tactical control’ (Dixie, 2007). Further approaches are ‘positive behaviour management’ which is also known as ‘behaviourism’ (Rogers, 2007), which is linked with ‘cognitive-behaviourism’ (Porter, 2006) and ‘neo-alderian theory’ (Porter, 2006).
2.3 - Assertive Discipline
Assertive discipline is a concept of classroom and behaviour management developed in 1976 (Canter and Canter, 2001). Assertive discipline works on the principle of being proactive in classroom and behaviour management.
“Proactive teachers don’t wait for poor behaviour to occur before developing a plan of action. They determine ahead of time the corrective actions they will use when students are disruptive. They also plan how to positively support students for appropriate behaviour. Finally, they teach their students how they expect them to behave.” (Canter and Canter, 2001: 16)
When teachers have pre-planned corrective actions, it helps to ensure consistency (and thus fairness) when carrying out positive forms of discipline. Moreover, it is an OFSTED requirement that schools have their own behaviour policies, as is the case within the schools observed, in which the pupils are familiar with school rules and discipline escalation. This creates the concept of choice. Essentially stating ‘you know the kind of behaviour and maturity we expect of you. Moreover, you know the consequences for poor behaviour. Thus, if you choose to break school policy, you are choosing the consequences’. This passes the responsibility of behaviour to the students. This supports the proactive approach as pupils know what is expected of them before entering the classroom.
A good example of a proactive approach has been observed in the first secondary school (TP1), which has adopted a strict uniform policy. This is put to great effect at the start of the lesson. By getting the students to line up outside the classroom, their uniform can be checked by the teacher as they enter the learning environment. Any infractions are casually corrected in a way that seems natural and non-confrontational.
“The enforcement of the uniform policy prior to entering the classroom shows the pupils, in a relaxed and friendly manner, that I am observing discipline. I find this effective as it makes the pupils conscious and aware that I am doing this and helps prevent them from being disruptive.” (Teacher A, TP1)
In support of the assertive approach is the idea of tactical control (Dixie, 2007). A focus is made on the early stages of the academic year, the ‘establishment phase’. It is highlighted that the charisma of teacher does help gain motivation within the pupils and create interest. However, it is proposed that a strict, consistent and agreed disciplinary consequence creates a routine to which the students find easy to adhere to.
“It’s all down to the way these teachers have established their rules and routines with their classes in the initial stages of the year.” (Dixie, 2007: 7)
Proposed strategies for tactical control include the careful application of body language, eye contact, voice and gesture (Dixie, 2007). These aspects can be thought through prior to lessons: what to wear, how to stand, etc. Where body language is concerned, a straight confident posture adopted by the teacher (whereas the pupils are usually seated) gives the impression of control. Utilising the space in the classroom, thus closing the proximity to the students, gives the impression of power and makes pupils more submissive. On the contrary, this could have the desired effect of making the student feel uncomfortable. It could be concluded to use this technique when approaching areas of the class where disruption has occurred, deliberately making the pupils aware of your presence. Eye contact aids in the inclusion of pupils into the lesson, effectively distracting them from misbehaviour.
When speaking to the pupils, it is advised to avoid shouting where possible. Essentially, one who shouts seemingly isn’t in control of the situation. A quiet voice can be deemed non assertive. However, tactful use of lowering the voice can have a positive discipline effect on a student if that student was expecting a more confrontational response. A ‘confident and well-modulated’ voice tone, although difficult to maintain, works best (Dixie, 2007: 62). This was observed to have great effective in a primary school (PP1) in a year 6 class.
“Miss ‘S’, what are the class rules about talking when I’m talking?” (Teacher B, PP1)
The pupils then proceeded to listen quietly to the teacher. This strategy was implemented consistently during the observation period. This reinforces the strategy of routine in addition to reminding the rest of the class the rules for talking.
‘The 4 R’s’, a concept discussed in the classroom management section of the EPS module, further supports this - these concepts being rights, responsibility, rules and routines (Williams, 2008). By democratically deciding a disciplinary procedure with the students, it shows the teacher is willing to listen and builds a rapport and trust with the pupils. These are essential traits for good communication, thus aiding in facilitating and/or directing learning.
“Finally, they teach their students how they expect them to behave.” (Canter and Canter, 2001: 16)
The final part of this statement links in with other forms of behaviour management. Assertive discipline does consider behavioural response: showing disapproval towards misbehaviour, thus setting limits, and communicating your pleasure to the students for exemplary behaviour. Teaching pupils how to behave cannot be wholly proactive. Discipline may have to be instilled reactively in a calm and appropriate manner as to avoid unnecessary confrontation. This is a good example of how effective classroom and behaviour management is difficult to apply using a singular approach.
2.4 – Behaviourism and Cognitive Behaviourism
The concepts of behaviourism and cognitive-behaviourism now come to the fore. These approaches to classroom and behaviour management are more reactive to exemplary behaviour and misbehaviour than the more proactive concept of assertive discipline. Essentially, behaviourism uses the principle of corrective management utilising the strategies associated with positive discipline.
“Behaviour is controlled by the response it receives (its consequence). Thus if you want to increase the rate of behaviour, you must follow it with a reinforcing consequence; whereas, if you want to reduce its rate, you must follow it with a punishing consequence.” (Porter, 2006: 47)
As discussed earlier, assertive discipline will include a reactive response to behavioural issues. However, behaviourism identifies the stimuli that cause the disruptive behaviour allowing the teacher to reduce or eliminate them. Such stimuli may include pupils engaging each other and thus disrupting one another. A good strategy to counter this would be to move one of the pupils to another part of the classroom. The more assertive teacher will use a seating plan for the group, generating a form of order within the class. The task instructions may be unclear or unsuitable to said pupils’ learning style creating frustration within the student therefore leading to disinterest. Taking visual, oral and kinaesthetic instructions into account provides a greater chance of understanding the task and circumvents giving too much detail. Pupils who understand their work are more likely to engage with the work.
‘We Are Learning Today’ (WALT) and ‘What I’m Looking For’ (WILF) are examples of assertive approaches that support this prospect of behaviourism. WALT and WILF, being guidelines for the students, inform them of exactly what the teacher wants them to learn.
The focus of behaviourism and cognitive behaviourism is to re-engage the pupils to the task at hand by reducing/removing the abovementioned stimuli. This implies that human behaviour is a response to a stimulus. Cognitive behaviourism was developed as a criticism to behaviourism.
“According to this approach, changing behaviour is not just a case of changing a stimulus or training a child to respond differently, but also of acknowledging and changing the thinking process that goes on behind the response to the stimulus.” (Morgan, 2007: 18)
If misbehaviour does occur in a positive learning environment, teachers who employ this strategy in behaviourism will often ask the pupil questions such as: ‘What is the policy on school uniform?’ or ‘What is the rule regarding talking when I’m talking?’. This behaviourist approach trains the pupil to respond differently when breaching school rules. It makes the pupils consider the behaviour policy prior to expressing themselves in a negative fashion. Therefore utilising positive discipline to get the pupil to reflect on their behaviour, whether the behaviour is good or bad, helps provide alternate responses to behavioural situations. Essentially, this allows the pupil to make a more informed choice regarding their self-control in the future.
I have observed instances of cognitive behaviourism more in primary than secondary school. A possible explanation for this would be that adapting the child at a young age to thinking about their behaviour will help control their behaviour when they move from primary to secondary schools. Positive discipline is seemingly the main strategy applied in the approaches of behaviourism and cognitive behaviourism. Furthermore, positive discipline and cognitive behaviourism is supported by the hypothesis of Neo-Alderian. Neo-Alderian theory is principally altering the decision-making the pupil undergoes when they ‘…select an inappropriate way to reach their legitimate goal of seeking to belong in the group.’ (Porter, 2006: 103)
3.0 – Assertive Discipline in the Learning Support Unit (LSU)
3.1 – Children with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties
Assertive discipline is a useful approach to effective classroom and behaviour management where pupils with emotional and behavioural issues are concerned. Pupils with emotional and behavioural issues also tend to have attendance problems. Such pupils are often referred to the LSU, where they study Maths, English, Science and ICT in a controlled environment. The teaching assistants (TA) and behaviour support assistants (BSA) work with the pupils individually to ascertain where the behavioural issues lie and how best to counteract them. Usually this involves measuring the students’ response to various forms of corrective management and, from then on, using the technique that works the best. Once the pupil shows signs of improvement, they are then considered for re-integration back into class.
3.2 – Applying Assertive Discipline
The teachers who work within the LSU tend to be more lenient with misbehaviour than if the student was in class. The ‘minor’ infractions are often overlooked in order to focus on the more important issues of their behaviour. The suggestion is, work on the larger issues, reintegrate them into the class and the teacher can cope with the smaller concerns. The principle is to reduce the burden on the teacher so they can focus on the whole class.
“If a student is wearing white trainers for instance, this isn’t a concern. We see it as an achievement the pupil has attended the LSU lessons.” (TA, TP1)
It is common for poor behaviour and emotional issues to affect the attendance of the pupils. Assertive discipline therefore can be used effectively to help solve this and improve the behaviour of the student. As assertive discipline considers pre-empting poor behaviour, the TAs who work with the pupils individually gain an invaluable insight into how the children conduct themselves in both a good and poor manner. The proactive principle of assertive discipline allows the environment to be adjusted to cater for the individual needs of the pupil.
For instance, if a pupil is more disruptive when working in a group, then the staff will prepare a lesson that focuses on individual work. This eliminates the stimulus in advance. Other strategies may include the number of lessons the student has to undergo in a day. Some pupils struggle to concentrate for more than four lessons, so the teaching assistants may only plan three lessons, or alternatively give a free period between lessons complementing their attention span.
Discussed earlier, creating a welcoming and comfortable environment is a key principle of assertive discipline. As the schools observed utilise assertive discipline, in conjunction with behaviourism, this provides consistency through the LSU and the classes thus aiding reintegration. However, an issue that will arise will be the corrective actions to misbehaviour. Negative discipline does not work as well as positive discipline as it is more confrontational and more personal to that student. Therefore, positive discipline is favoured with these students. A delicate balance must be provided between supportive feedback and corrective actions (Canter and Canter, 2001: 139). To reduce the quantity of corrective actions, applying assertive discipline prior to class does this.
The other value of assertive discipline is the teamwork that exists between the LSU department and the subject teachers. If the teaching assistants and teachers’ corrective managements contrast, this can create confusion and perhaps frustrate the pupil leading to disruptiveness. Therefore, assertive discipline rules and routines create a familiarity to the student in both environments. Furthermore, if two adults correct behaviour in the same pre-planned way, it suggests to the student this is the accepted form of behaviour.
4.0 – Personal Priorities: Balancing Approaches
Prior to this essay, I considered myself more of an assertive teacher. I want to pre-plan lessons that are motivating and engage the pupils. However, this is making the assumption that all pupils will conform to my style of teaching. Researching into behaviourism has informed me immensely the benefits of positive discipline and strategies I can employ in corrective management. One particular area I will focus on is my personal attributes, which also coincides with my quality standards. I have begun to consider my posture, expression and tone of voice. I feel I will encourage and reward pupils, but I’m beginning to understand that this will become more difficult in the long term. The EPS lecture on classroom management (Williams, 2008) was invaluable in this regard and it also introduced the concept of ‘the five W’s’, which are: What did you do? Why did you do it? What rule did it break? What would be a better choice next time? Finally, what can I do to help?
These five questions, associated with cognitive behaviourism, will be put into practice in my lessons. Realising the importance of implementing this in a non-confrontational manner, I will have my class carry out their assigned task and quietly pull the student to one side and ask them these questions. This will help correct their behaviour as well as produce an alternative way of thinking through their behaviour. I am aware this will not happen immediately and that I will have to be patient.
One of the earliest impressions I can instil on my classes is my professionalism, through which my posture, expression and tone of voice are vital. I will endeavour to wear a suit and tie whilst maintaining a straight and confident posture. This will give the impression of my control over the class. My expression, both facial and body language, is usually positive and I can use this tactfully to express disappointment in poor behaviour without actually having to verbally express it. This strategy is the same with regards to my tone of voice. I have already found I communicate with students in a neutral and confident tone. This will give me the option to lower my voice or raise it if need be to achieve the desired affect.
In conclusion, I find myself adjusting from an assertive approach to a combination of this and cognitive-behaviourism. Furthermore, I will enforce the uniform policy to make pupils aware I am observing discipline. I will use formative assessment to engage students that supports access for learning. I will also work closely with the LSU as every child matters.
Word Count: 3295.
Bibliography
Canter, Lee and Canter, Marlene (2001) Assertive Discipline – Positive Behavior Management for Today’s Classroom. Third Edition. Canter & Associates, Inc.
Dixie, Gererd (2007) Managing Your Classroom. Second Edition. Continuum International Publishing Group.
Morgan, Jill (2007) The Teaching Assistant’s Guide to Managing Behaviour. Continuum International Publishing Group.
Porter, Louise (2006) Behaviour In Schools – Theory and Practice for Teachers. Second Edition. Open University Press.
Rogers, Bill (2007) Behaviour Management – A Whole-School Approach. Second Edition. Paul Chapman Publishing.
