Sei sulla pagina 1di 10

Managing the Learning Environment: Student Behaviour

Introduction
The ability of teachers to establish and maintain a learning environment in
which the social, cognitive, behavioural and emotional needs of students
are met is crucial. According to Williams (2012), classroom management
along with methodological skills and knowledge of curriculum content
constitute the fundamental pillars of effective teaching and learning.
Effective classroom management is associated with enhanced student
outcomes (both educational achievement and the development of
morality and social values), as well as increased teacher self-efficacy and
job satisfaction (Williams 2012, Sullivan et al. 2014). This essay will
present the approaches this teacher will take in her future career to
manage learning environments, particularly with regards to encouraging
productive behaviours and managing unproductive behaviours. The term
unproductive is used here to describe a range of behaviours that militate
against learning (such as non-compliance and inattentiveness). The major
theory underpinning the construction of a safe, conducive and productive
learning environment is the 4S Conceptual Framework by Williams (2012)
which is of comprised four dynamic, flexible and interconnected domains:
setting, systems, student and self. The key principle of Williams
framework is that the learning environment and therefore students
behaviours are attributable to several contextual factors, hence in any
situation, a teacher needs to consider these domains, instead of simply
locating the problem and the responsibility for the behaviour within the
student alone (Sullivan et al. 2014, Williams 2012). In the words of Curwin
(1992, p. xiii):
It is what students do under the conditions they are in, not who they
are, that puts them [behaviourally] at risk.

Guiding principles and rationale

EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

The complexity of classroom management both necessitates and signifies


the importance of having a range of strategies, from prevention to
intervention, to approach student behaviour. The fundamental principle
underlying this approach is that student dignity is the keystone of
effective classroom management. The approach also significantly draws
on the following guiding principles (University of South Australia 2016):
i.

Self-regulation develops learner capacity, and is preferable to

ii.

external control.
Learning environments that are predictable, and that involve and
engage students through quality curricula best support pro-social

iii.

behaviours.
Power-with and power-to relationships between teachers and their
students are most supportive of pro-social behaviours.

These guiding principles lay the foundation for providing students with the
three universal human needs required for optimal functioning as identified
by Deci and Ryan (1990): autonomy, competence and relatedness. This
supports the creation of a safe, positive learning environment and an
optimum community of support that leads to positive student behaviour
and consequently, learning (Good and Brophy 2008).
Approach to promoting productive behaviours (prevention)
This teacher believes that the ability to promote productive behaviour and
therefore prevent unproductive behaviour depends on the teachers
capacity to build a classroom community, establish rules and routines, and
maintain student engagement. The growing diversity of the population in
Australia and therefore in schools and classrooms necessitates the
establishment of a classroom community in which everyone feels valued,
supported, and a sense of belonging. The concept of the classroom as a
community integrates the student, self and setting domains of Williams
4S Framework. Students need to feel a sense of security so that they are
able to be themselves, communicate openly and effectively, take risks,
and ask for support or help when necessary this is fundamental to the
EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

development of healthy, respectful and positive relationships, and also


increases student involvement and participation, allowing for growth and
exploration (Sapon-Shevin 2010, Watkins 2005, Lyons, Ford and ArthurKelly 2011). In a classroom community, students view their peers as
accomplices, which encourages them to work together to achieve shared
goals, increasing intrinsic motivation in students and concurrently
reducing exclusion and competition (Lyons, Ford and Arthur-Kelly 2011,
Sapon-Shevin 2010, Watkins 2005). Thus, a supportive, inclusive and
cooperative community will allow the class to function smoothly,
decreasing

student

misbehaviour

and

eliminating

the

need

for

intervention (Bohn, Roehrig and Pressley 2004).


Engagement is a key construct in managing learning environments. Corno
and Mandinach (2004) defined engagement as volitional aptitude; a
combination of cognitive, affective and conative (related to purposive
striving) factors. The link between student engagement, behaviours and
educational outcomes is well-established (Sullivan et al. 2014, Angus et al.
2009, Bohn, Roehrig and Pressley 2004, Good and Brophy 2008). Teachers
must implement pedagogical approaches that make learning attractive to
the students by demonstrating enthusiasm in the classroom, creating a
sense of interest and anticipation, and ensuring that the classroom is
arranged to facilitate the activity at hand (Charles 1999, Good and Brophy
2008). Since engagement is essential to purposive learning, and bearing
in mind the 4s Framework, this teacher will endeavour to provide for
students different Iearning styles by tailoring the curriculum to address
the needs and abilities of all students when developing teaching and
learning programs (Angus et al. 2009, Charles 1999, Good and Brophy
2008). Additionally, this teacher will encourage different ways of thinking
to build on her students strengths, interests and objectives and keep
them engaged (Charles 1999).
Standards for behaviour and routines in the classroom are important
elements of the systems domain of Williams 4s Framework. Bohn, Roehrig
and Pressley (2004) found that classrooms were better organized and
EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

students educational outcomes more evident at midyear when teachers


established effective classroom management at the beginning of the year.
Therefore, the standards for behaviour should be developed carefully at
the start of the academic year based on principles and values that will
foster a quality learning environment, and should take into consideration
the mutual rights of everyone with regards to health and safety, property
damage and loss, educational purpose, and disruption of students
learning (McDonald 2013, Good and Brophy 2008). These standards need
to be constructed in collaboration with the students so they develop a
sense of responsibility for their own learning and behaviour (McDonald
2013). It is imperative that every student understands the rationale for
each standard to ensure they are not viewed as unjust or exceedingly
bureaucratic (Good and Brophy 2008). Students awareness of their
teachers expectations of them also helps to foster self-regulating
behaviours (McDonald 2013, Bohn, Roehrig and Pressley 2004). The
agreed upon standards for behaviour should then be written in a clear,
concise and positive manner, signed by the students to indicate their
understanding of and commitment to abiding by them, and displayed in
the classroom to be used for preventive reviews or when behaviour
problems arise (Curwin and Mendler 1992, McDonald 2013, Good and
Brophy 2008). Similarly, classroom routines for everyday procedures and
transitions should be reinforced at the beginning of the year, as a high
proportion of unproductive behaviour arises from student ambiguity about
how to proceed or what to do when they need help or have completed the
given task (Good and Brophy 2008, Larivee 2009). The implementation of
structured activities allows the class to run smoothly and effectively,
thereby increasing teacher availability for students (Good and Brophy
2008).

For

younger

students,

initially

displaying,

role-playing

and

reviewing specific behaviours may help their understanding of the


standards and routines (Good and Brophy 2008).
Approach to managing unproductive behaviours (intervention)

EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

While it is important to respond to violations of established classroom


standards or routines, it is necessary to bear in mind that the ultimate
objective is to create an environment in which students remain productive
owing to their own sense of responsibility and respect for the classroom
community (Woolfolk Hoy and Weinstein 2006). As Charles (1999, p. 200)
suggests:
Responsibility; not obedience, Is the goal of discipline.
Since this process is controlled internally, a systematic, democratic
approach

founded

on

treating

students

with

respect

and

equity,

preserving their sense of self-value, and restoring hope should be


implemented (Charles 1999, McDonald 2013). It is the responsibility of
teachers to guide their students in developing autonomy and directing
their actions through internal control and self-regulation (McDonald 2013).
Teachers should respond thoughtfully, professionally and promptly using
effective communication and a problem-solving approach, as this has
been shown to be effective in helping students to develop selfmanagement skills (Jones 2011). Williams (2012) ICDAR (identify,
consider, decide, act and reinforce) behavioural transaction hierarchy
provides a practical guide to responding to behavioural problems in the
classroom. When acting in response to unproductive behaviours, Williams
(2012) recommends a graded intervention approach, beginning with least
disruptive non-verbal techniques, then progressing to low disruption
techniques by using general verbals or task verbals and if required,
specific focus techniques, which involve transaction verbals.
When using an intervention strategy, the clarity and effectiveness of
communication is crucial to minimise interference effects and to
strengthen

interpersonal

relationships

between

teachers

and

their

students (Lyons, Ford and Arthur-Kelly 2011). Practical strategies that


enhance effective communication include active listening, asserting, Imessaging, open questioning and negotiating (Lyons, Ford and ArthurKelly

2011).

These

strategies

allow

the

teacher

to

demonstrate

attentiveness, care and respect towards the students (Lyons, Ford and
EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

Arthur-Kelly 2011). They also provide teachers with the opportunity to


identify their feelings and express how students behaviour is affecting
them, and students the opportunity to understand and appreciate the
perspectives of others, which is especially important when responding to
students who are consistently unproductive, as they often lack social
cognition skills (Larivee 2009, Jones and Jones 2010). According to Sullivan
(2016), the concept of power in the learning environment can have either
positive or negative connotations, depending on how it is applied in the
interpersonal sphere. Power-with and power-to are desirable in the
classroom as power-with helps establish collective autonomy and assists
with building a strong community, while power-to increases students
sense of self-efficacy, thus increasing their motivation and promoting
productive behaviour (Sullivan 2016). These strategies for effective
communication encourage positive power relations between the teacher
and students, and promotes referent power (Sullivan 2016).
The literature reveals that punitive measures fail to address underlying
problems or provide behavioural support to help students develop
responsibility and pro-social skills (McDonald 2013). Punitive methods do
not produce the desired behaviours or teach students alternative ways in
which to respond, instead they aggravate feelings of anger or frustration
and increase violent behaviours in students (Jones 2011, Roberts and
Morotti 2000). Under certain circumstances however, consequences may
be necessary to emphasize the importance of adhering to the standards
and rules in place. Linda Alberts (1996) four Rs of consequences model
states that a consequence should be reasonable, related to the specific
behaviour, reliably enforced, and respectful to the student (McDonald
2013). This power-with approach enables the teacher to assert their right
to maintain a conducive learning environment while giving the student the
opportunity to consider for themselves the elements of the problem and
to find a solution through reasoning, a sense of responsibility and
consideration of the other students; it encourages self-regulation and
maintains the students dignity (Charles 1999, Larivee 2009). Curwin and
Mendler (1988) also emphasize the importance of not tying specific
EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

consequences to specific behaviours, as each individual student is


different and may need to be treated differently (Charles 1999). The
teacher should also offer assistance to the student or if appropriate,
provide available options to the student and the consequences of each
option, allowing the student to make a choice.

Conclusion
Teachers play unique roles in their classrooms, and managing learning
environments is a complex but core component of teaching. Effective
management of the learning environment is achieved through the
combination of reasonable standards and procedures that respect,
empower and protect the rights of students, and a culturally relevant
pedagogical

approach

that

fosters

self-regulation,

builds

caring

relationships, and allows students to develop as individuals with a sense


of agency within a community of learners. By nurturing students
cognitive, affective and social development and regularly reflecting on
their pedagogical practices, teachers can work towards achieving equity
in the class, rather than equality. This teacher recognizes that her role is
supportive of student dignity, and will integrate her guiding values and
principles into a humanistic perspective of classroom management that
addresses the four domains of Wiliams framework to promote productive
behaviours

and

manage

unproductive

behaviours

in

the

learning

environment.

1993 words

EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

Reference List
Angus, M, McDonald 2013, T, Ormond, C, Rybarcyk, R, Taylor, A &
Winterton, A 2009, Trajectories of classroom behaviour and academic
progress: A study of student engagement with learning, Edith Cowan
University, Mount Lawley, Western Australia.
Bohn, CM, Roehrig, AD & Pressley, M 2004, The first days of school in the
classrooms of two more effective and four less effective primary-grades
teachers, The Elementary School Journal, vol. 104, no. 4, pp. 269-287.
Charles, CM 1999, Richard Curwin and Allen Mendler's Discipline with
Dignity, Building classroom discipline, Longman, New York.
Corno, L & Mandinach, EB 2004, What we have learned about student
engagement in the past twenty years, in DM McInerney & S Van Etten
(eds.), Big Theories Revisited, Information Age Publishing, Inc., Charlotte,
N.C., pp 299-328.
Curwin 1992, Rediscovering hope: Our greatest teaching strategy,
National Educational Service, Bloomington, Ind.
Deci, EL & Ryan, RM 1990, A Motivational Approach to Self: Integration in
Personality in R Dienstbier (ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation,
University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln.
Good, TL & Brophy, JE 2008, Looking in classrooms, 10th edn,
Pearson/Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA.
Jones, VF 2011, Practical classroom management, Pearson, Boston.
Kohn, A 2006, Beyond discipline: From compliance to community, 2nd
edn, Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, Alexandria,
VA.
EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

Larrivee, B 2009, Authentic classroom management, Pearson, Upper


Saddle River, NJ.
Lyons, G, Ford, M & Arthur-Kelly, M 2011, Classroom management:
creating positive learning environments, 3rd edn, Cengage Learning,
South Melbourne, Vic.
McDonald 2013, T 2013, Classroom management: Engaging students in
learning, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne, Vic.
Roberts, WB & Morotti, AA 2000, The Bully as Victim: Understanding Bully
Behaviors To Increase the Effectiveness of Interventions in the Bully-Victim
Dyad, Professional School Counseling, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 148-155.
Sapon-Shevin, M 2010, Because we can change the world: A practical
guide to building cooperative, inclusive classroom communities, 2nd edn,
Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sullivan, A 2016, Power, democracy and leadership: A Theoretical
Framework, University of South Australia, Adelaide, 11 February.
Sullivan, AM, Johnson, B, Owens, LD & Conway, RNF 2014, Punish Them
or Engage Them? Teachers Views of Unproductive Student Behaviours in
the Classroom, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 39, no. 6, pp.
43-56.
Watkins, C 2005, Classrooms as learning communities: What's in it for
schools?, Routledge, London.
Williams 2012, Background Basics, University of South Australia, Adelaide.

EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

Woolfolk Hoy, A & Weinstein, CS 2006, Student and Teacher Perspectives


on Classroom Management, in CM Evertson & CS Weinstein (eds),
Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice and
contemporary issues, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ, pp. 181219.
University of South Australia 2016, Course Outline: Managing Learning
Environments M, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia.

EDUC 5182 SP1 2016

Lesley KONG 100096415

Potrebbero piacerti anche