COLOROSO’S THREE CLASSIFICATION OF TEACHERS
- BRICKWALL
- JELLYFISH
- BACKBONE
The 'Brick-wall’ teachers are:
- Strict
- Demands that students follow the rules without questioning
- No exceptions
- Teacher are in control of the environment
- Threatens and bribes students
- Uses humiliation
The jellyfish teachers:
- Have no clear rules and punishments
- Changes rewards and punishments
- Not consistent with the classroom management
- Allows chaos in the environment
- Fake threats
- Allows random second chances
The backbone teachers:
- Set up behavior rules from the start
- Consistent
- Follows through
- Have structure with flexibility
- Gives strong support
THE PHILOSOPHY UNDERPINNING OF THE MODEL
- STUDENT CENTEREDNESS
- SELF DISCIPLINE
- DISCIPLINE TAUGHT
Student centeredness
Student-centered learning is based on the constructivist theories of education campaigned by psychologist Jean Piaget. Piaget theorized that children construct knowledge and meaning through new experiences and interactions, as opposed to rote memorization. The teacher acts as a scaffolder in the learning process and in the disciplining process, the children are expected to be treated the way they will like their own children to be treated.
Self - discipline
This is a cognitive process, one that is present for self-regulating behavior in pursuit of personal goals. This executive process allows students to restrain themselves from impulsive responses in behavior, favoring a more appropriate type of behavior. In the end, through inner discipline, students will believe that they are worth it.
Discipline taught
Glasser (1992) professes that when his theory is applied to classroom discipline practices, students can behave as they choose, they are not forced to do so. He also states that an educator's role in discipline should be one of continuous help to students, in assisting them to make better choices of behavior. If it works and leaves a child’s dignity and my own dignity intact do it.
DISCIPLINE VERSUS PUNISHMENT
CRITIQUE OF THE MODEL (INNER DISCIPLINE)
- CHALLENGES WITH STUBBORN STUDENTS
- THE SYSTEM CAN BE EASILY MANIPULATED
- NATURAL CONSEQUENCES MAY NOT ALWAYS BE ADEQUATE
- TOO SLOW OF A PROCESS
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
Advantages
- Easy to implement
- Promotes self discipline
- Instills responsibility in the student.
- Contributes to the student’s sense of positive power over his or her own life.
- Allows the student chances to make decisions.
- Provides opportunities for student to learn from his or her successes and mistakes.
- Does not provoke conflict in the way that punishment can.
The process of discipline does four things punishment cannot do:
• Show students what they should have done
• Give them ownership of the problem
• Gives them the options for problem solving
• Leave their dignity intact
DISADVANTAGES
- This system is easy for a student to manipulate.
- For a student lacking self-discipline or morals, natural consequences may not be adequate.
- This model will not work for an indifferent student who will not take responsibility for his or her own problems.
- In certain situations, a student may respond more favourably to direct orders.
- This model does not offer solutions for disruptions.
- This model assists in long-term learning and may be too slow of a process to resolve in-class disruptions. Some believe inner disciple applies more to parenting rather than teaching
- May be challenging to implement when students disagree about who owns a problem.
APPLICATION TO THE CLASSROOM
- Create simple and clearly defined rules
-
Implement creative, constructive, and responsible activities.
- Show students what they have done wrong.
- Give students as much ownership of the problem as they are able to handle.
- Incorporate natural or real – world consequences.
- Provide options for solving the problem.
EXAMPLE:
With a case of talking during independent practice, instead of the teacher scolding the student for irrelevant talking during independent practice, his peers begin to tell him he is disturbing them. This shows students what they should have done.
The student now realizes that he is not only breaking the rule but he has now upset some of his classmates. It gives them as much ownership of the problem as they are able to handle.
The student now has the option to continue talking or keep quiet and work on his independent practice. It gives them options for solving the problem. The teacher did not embarrass the student in front of the other students. The teacher allowed natural consequences to influence the student's decision making. His consequences for talking were reasonable, simple valuable, and practical. The student now understands that talking during independent practice disturbs others. It leaves their dignity intact.
SUMMARY
Success with Inner Discipline requires a certain kind of person. Brickwall or jellyfish teachers will experience difficulties as they try to implement this model due to their inconsistency, controlling and restrictive nature. Inner Discipline is best when practiced by a backbone teacher.
- Emphasizes democracy
- Advocate creative, constructive, and responsible activity
- Has simply and clearly defined rules
- Uses natural consequences or real - world consequences
- Help students develop Inner Discipline
The model is realistic and focuses on how teacher can help students develop Inner Discipline and self-worth. The model is understandable and easy to follow. We agree with Coloroso, that there are three types of teachers the backbone being the most appropriate one especially for the time that we are living in. Teachers should be more like the backbone teacher acting as a scaffolder instead of being a brickwall or jellyfish who are not fit for the classroom environment.
If natural consequences are not life threatening, Coloroso suggests letting students experience them. If the natural consequence is non-existent or would be inappropriate, Coloroso recommends that the teacher consider reasonable consequences. This discipline is ideal for younger students. Inner Discipline is effective when implemented at a young age.
REFERENCES
Coloroso, B. (2005, April). A Bully’s Bystanders Are Never Innocent. Education digest , 49-51.
Coloroso, B. (2011, February 7). An exclusive interview with bullying expert. Barbara Coloroso. [Interview with Jewish Family Children’s Services].
Charles,C.M (2013) Building Classroom Discipline Pearson New International Pearson.
Glasser, W. (1999). Choice theory: a new psychology of personal freedom. 1st HarperPerennial ed. New York: HarperPerennial.
RUBRIC FOR GROUP ASSIGNMENT
Group Members:
Model/Theory __________________________________________________