I
N THE PREVIOUS CHAPTERS you reexamined research-based guidelines for preventing and dealing with classroom management problems, especially as they relate to twenty-first-century classrooms. As you develop skill in implementing these guidelines, you should review and expand your reper- toire to include specific student-centered through teacher-centered strategies (models, systems) for dealing with different types of students and behavior problems.Studying this range of strategies will help you put into perspective the rec- ommendations in the previous chapters so that you can deepen your profes- sional understanding regarding not only what works, but also why it should work.
You also read that classroom management theory is based on learning the- ory. The major learning theories are behavioral, cognitive, and constructivist.
“Even though theorists argue which model is the best, most excellent teachers apply all . . . approaches as appropriate” (Woolfolk, 2004, p. 313). Woolfolk goes on to say that instead of debating the virtues of each approach,
consider their contributions to understanding learning and improving teach- ing. Don’t feel that you must choose the “best” approach—there is no such thing. . . . Different views of learning can be used together to create productive learning environments for the diverse students you will teach (emphasis mine).
Behavioral theory helps us understand the role of cues in setting the stage for behaviors and the role of consequences and practice in encouraging or dis- couraging behaviors. But much of humans’ lives and learning is more than behaviors. Language and higher-order thinking require complex information
processing and memory—something the cognitive models of the thinker-as- computer have helped us understand. And what about the person as a creator and constructor of knowledge, not just a processor of information? Here, con- structivist perspectives have much to offer.
I like to think of the three main learning theories . . . as pillars for teaching.
Students must first understand and make sense of the material (constructivist);
then they must remember what they have understood (cognitive-information processing); and then they must practice and apply (behavioral) their new skills and understanding to make them more fluid and automatic—a permanent part of their repertoires. Failure to attend to any part of the process means lower- quality learning (Woolfolk, 2008, pp. 398–99).
Churchward (2009) raises the point that experts in the field of discipline often disagree. He cites as an example, the student-centered Teacher Effec- tiveness Training approach of Thomas Gordon (1974) with the more teacher- centered Assertiveness Training approach of Lee Canter (1992, 2001).
Assuming that both of them are correct, Churchward (2009) suggests that they may not be talking about the same students. He believes that just as we would not teach all students the same way in different subject areas, we should not set up the same discipline systems that treat all students the same.
Based on the stages of moral development offered by Kohlberg (1981), Churchward proposes four stages of discipline:
Stage 1: The power (recalcitrant behavior) stage in which might makes right. Students at this stage require a lot of attention and are frequently defi- ant, refusing to follow directions. By age four or five students usually progress beyond this stage. However, some older students may still function at this level.
Stage 2: The reward/punishment (self-serving behavior) stage. In this
“what’s in it for me” stage, students behave because there is a reward that they can receive, such as candy, a sticker, or free time, or behave properly because they do not like what may happen to them if they don’t behave (scolding, withholding a reward, isolation). By eight or nine years of age most students tend to move beyond this stage.
Stage 3: Interpersonal discipline (mutual interpersonal) stage. At this level students are concerned with “how can I please you?” They behave because they are asked to, want to be liked, and care what others think of them. This stage is representative of most students in middle/junior high school.
Stage 4: Social order (self-discipline) stage. Students who reach this level have a sense of right and wrong. They can be left alone and still complete tasks. Many middle/junior high school students function at this level occasionally, however,
few do so consistently. Although most students do not usually function at this stage, they are close enough to it to understand it.
All people work their way through these stages of moral development (stages of discipline). When you can identify the stage in which the student is functioning, you can then help that student move on to the next level.
Churchward (2009) believes that it is a mistake to attempt to force a stu- dent to skip stages. Demanding that a Stage 1 student behave like a Stage 4 student is not a reasonable expectation and will, therefore, lead to frustration.
Helping students work through the four stages is all the more reason that the teacher should possess and use many different strategies.
Currently, some strategies based on behavior theory may be out of favor.
However, even these strategies can be adjusted to include several contempo- rary classroom management attributes. When these opportunities occur, they will be emphasized.
In a major study on classroom management, the Classroom Strategy Study conducted by Brophy (1996), the conclusion of the research was that not only did effective teachers have a set of different classroom management skills and strategies, but these teachers also used different strategies matched to the needs of different types of students.
Yet, it has been debated among classroom management experts whether or not teachers should use an eclectic approach when applying these systems or stay with a single system (cf. Wolfgang [1999] with Tauber [1999, 2007]).
After you have read part 2, you may be on your way to deciding this question for yourself.
A strategy, also known as a system or model, has two basic parts—theory and practice. The theory describes the concepts and principles that explain why the strategy should work. Theory, however, reaches its full potential only when it can be put into practice in the classroom. After you understand the theory, you will learn how to apply it using the coaching rubric for that strat- egy. The amount of practice with the rubric will determine eventually how well you learned the strategy.
As you go through each strategy, you should be asking yourself the fol- lowing questions: For whom would the strategy be most appropriate? What behaviors could best be developed with this strategy? And under what condi- tions, or when would the strategy be best applied? Also consider how contem- porary classroom management practices would be reflected in each strategy, and if not, how it could be adjusted to include desired twenty-first-century classroom characteristics.
It is important to understand that any strategy you implement with your class should not conflict with your philosophy of discipline or your personality.
Attempting to do so would lead to a halfhearted approach, one without con- viction, and it would be perceived as such by the students.
Before you continue reading this chapter, it may be helpful for you to have a philosophy/personality check. Answer yes, no, or sometimes to the following.
Do you believe that . . .
you know what is best for your students?
in a disagreement with a student, one of you should win?
students should be praised (rewarded)?
you should control the environment?
you should impose discipline procedures?
your students have free will?
you should encourage students?
students have the innate ability to solve their own problems?
your function is that of a facilitator?
you are assertive?
you are easy-going (laissez-faire)?
When you complete this part, you will go back to these beliefs to see if the strategies you favor support your beliefs. As you study each strategy, keep in mind the following continuum:
Gordon→→Dreikurs→→Glasser→→Canter & Canter→→Skinner
At one end of this continuum is the humanist approach (Gordon); at the other end is the behaviorist approach (Skinner).
Humanist Student-centered Student power Noninterventionist Facilitating
Nurturing
Behaviorist Teacher-centered Teacher power Interventionist Directing Controlling
Wolfgang (2005) describes the humanist-through-behaviorist approaches as a power continuum of basic discipline philosophies reflecting the action a teacher could take, from the minimum to the maximum. He further identi- fied these actions in the same order (minimum to maximum) as: Relation- ship-Listening; Confronting-Contracting; and Rules and Consequences.