"BUILDING CLASSROOM DISCIPLINE"   Term Paper ID:18820 Click to get this paper

Essay Subject: (C.M. Charles). Reviews work on eight models of discipline in elementary & secondary classrooms.... More...

6 Pages / 1350 Words 1 sources, 14 Citations, MLA Format $24.00 Return to List of Papers

Paper Abstract: (C.M. Charles). Reviews work on eight models of discipline in elementary & secondary classrooms. Paper Introduction: The textbook, Building Classroom Discipline, by C. M. Charles, provides an overview and discussion of eight models of discipline most prominently favored for use in elementary and secondary classrooms today. This paper selects three of those models (Cantor, Jones, and Glasser) for a comparison and contrast of three aspects of discipline (rules, consequences, and positive reinforcement) and concludes with a summary of the positive and negative elements of these models with suggestions for selecting a personal classroom management plan. The first aspect of effective discipline is rules. All the models put forth that rules are essential to an orderly classroom and that students of all ages must know what the rules are from the first day of the class meeting. Lee Cantor's method, also called assertive discipline, simply states that the teacher Text of the Paper: The entire text of the paper is shown below. However, the text is somewhat scrambled. We want to give you as much information as we possibly can about our papers and essays, but we cannot give them away for free. In the text below you will find that while disordered, many of the phrases are essentially intact. From this text you will be able to get a solid sense of the writing style, the concepts addressed, and the sources used in the research paper. Cantor's method seems slightlymore immediately punitive. Lacking a school system-wide model, it is up to eachteacher to select methods that fit that teacher's values, personality andstyle. Astrongly humanistic educator might feel more comfortable with the Jonesmodel. Building Classroom Discipline: From Models to Practice. He suggests an orderly sequence ofconsequences that are easy to enforce--name on the board, check mark by thename, visit to the principals office, the student phones home with anexplanation for the misbehavior, and the student is suspended from theclassroom (112-113). He said that if students areexpected to be well-behaved and to work, they must "believe that if they dosome work, they will be able to satisfy their needs enough so that it makessense to keep working" (119). M. William Glasser, a Los Angeles psychiatrist, was first a chemicalengineer, but later turned to psychology and then to psychiatry. 3rd ed. Theteacher then can directly ask the students what they wish to accomplishwith the misbehavior and immediately a mutually agreeable solution isformulated. The choices and possiblevariations are many. His procedures arerooted in psychology and aim to help the students support their own selfcontrol. Jones details that the incentive must be somethingthat the student really values, that for most students, receiving a badgeor being first in line does not compete strongly with the joys of talkingor daydreaming. It is not a full-blown system like Cantor's that would requiretotal usage. The first aspect of effective discipline is rules. Cantor, Jones, and Glasser concur on the importance of positivereinforcement of good behavior in their discipline models. Cantoradvocates simple verbal comments, such as, "I like that." He suggests asystem of positive consequences, which may include personal attention,positive notes to the parents, special awards, special privileges, materialrewards, group rewards, and home rewards in cooperation with the parents(113-114). An interesting feature of Jones, model combines consequences and rewards.The class agrees on a group award (special event or period of free time),and any individuals misbehavior is timed with a stopwatch, and the amountof time is deducted from the group reward. Jones, model, fashioned after years of observation of naturally goodteachers, stresses heavily that it is the teacher's body language andbehavior that effectively regulates student conduct. William Glasser considers classroom rules to be essential. The textbook, Building Classroom Discipline, by C. Jones would eliminate traditional seating in rows and favors,instead, an arrangement of several shallow semicircles with plenty ofwalking space between so that the teacher may quickly be at the side of anystudent. The teacher canidentify the student's mistaken goal based on how the teacher feels inrespect to the behavior--annoyed, threatened, hurt, or powerless. They both move quickly to teacherverbal response at the first infraction. Criticssay it is too militant. Jones is quite different in relying veryheavily on the teacher's alertness to all that happens in the room and onemphatic body language. Glasser, like Cantor, goesquickly into action at the first misbehavior. Lee Cantor's method, also called assertive discipline,simply states that the teacher decides what behaviors are expected from thestudents, takes the list of rules to the principal for approval andsupport, discusses the rules with the students at the first class meeting,asks them to write the rules and consequences on a sheet of paper, andrequests that the parents read and sign the paper. The Jones model carries out the emphasis on teacher body language forrewards in the form of smiles, humorous facial expressions, and thumbs uphand signals (91-93). These verbalreminders are given with a firm tone of voice, use of the student's name,eye contact, physical gesture, or the broken record technique (insistentrepetition of the original message) (11 -111). Each of these discipline models, overall, has its strengths andweaknesses. Glasser believes that rules should always reinforce themain idea that students are in school to study and to learn. Jones' model does not. The Dreikers model enhances student self-esteem throughdemocratic classroom management, but it is weak in lack of specificinformation about what to do when students defy teachers. He identifiesfour mistaken goals that are sought, usually in sequential order, if astudent does not receive the recognition required--attention getting, powerseeking, revenge seeking, and displaying inadequacy. A forward-thinking teacher, aiming for long term success insociety, might favor the Glasser model. Hismethod centers more on the necessity of meeting student needs forbelonging, power, freedom, and fun, which are their own intrinsic rewards(128). The students are askedto repeat orally what is expected and what will happen if the rules arebroken (114-115). Conversely, it is powerful and effective inquickly eliminating negative behavior. The threemodels elaborate considerably on the best methods for teacher response toviolation of the rules. Also, rulesshould be evaluated constantly, and when they are no longer useful, theyshould be discarded or changed (122). However, it would require administrative support forsuccess (12 -121). Jones does not suggest any particular method of setting up rules, buthe does mention that behavior limits are specified in the class rules (91). The Cantor method has been cited as overly harsh, particularlyfor primary-aged pupils. All the modelsput forth that rules are essential to an orderly classroom and thatstudents of all ages must know what the rules are from the first day of theclass meeting. Glasser's methods may conflict with many traditional organizationalmethods. The Jones system requires great teacher knowledge of self,alertness, and sensitivity to all individual and group happenings withinthe room. These interactionsshould be calm, nonthreatening, and business-like. A further advantage is that no expensive training isrequired. The Glasser and Cantormodels are more structured at this step. The incentive should have educational value, such as freetime to explore interests within an accepted range of available activities. Frederic H. Charles,provides an overview and discussion of eight models of discipline mostprominently favored for use in elementary and secondary classrooms today.This paper selects three of those models (Cantor, Jones, and Glasser) for acomparison and contrast of three aspects of discipline (rules,consequences, and positive reinforcement) and concludes with a summary ofthe positive and negative elements of these models with suggestions forselecting a personal classroom management plan. The teacher may precede this discipline schedule witha verbal hint in the form of questions, demands, or messages. These selections require deliberate self-examination andcontemplation of the real aims of classroom activities. Glasser and Cantor's methodsexplicitly delineate rule-setting modes. Decisions about effective discipline choices are personal and must bein harmony with the educational philosophy of the parents andadministrators. He believesthat the rules should be established by the teachers and students togetherand that they should be appropriate to the age, ability and other variablesof the students. Cantorand Jones' incentive methods are rather detailed in contrast to Glasser's.The Glasser model does not specifically mention rewards of any kind. Cantor and Associates, a California-basedorganization, maintains a heavy schedule of training workshops for hundredsof thousands of parents, teachers, and administrators nationwide. An externallyresults-oriented instructor might prefer the efficiency of Cantor. Jones developed his model from his years of researchwhile he served on the faculties of UCLA Medical Center and the Universityof Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry (89). New York: Longman.----------------------- 8 Advantages of the Jones model would include preservation ofstudent dignity, increased possibilities for humane, conflict-freeclassrooms, and the feasibility of gradual incorporation of new teacherbehavior. Glasser's model directs the students' attentionto their own actions and encourages ownership of the actions, but notnecessarily in a negative way. He favors team learning in student groups of about four studentsso that pupils do not become overly dependent upon the teacher, and theGlasser Circle problem solving discussion groups help students learn togovern themselves. The intent is to getthe student back on track as quickly as possible. A fourth model, originated by Rudolf Dreikers, merits discussion.The Dreikers model is based on the idea that all students want recognition,and most behavior results from their attempts to get it. This model offers much hope for students of all typesof backgrounds. Heemphasizes reality therapy and a complete reworking of the classroomenvironment that will meet student needs. Works CitedCharles, C.M. His model calls for a valuejudgment on the part of the student ("Is what you are doing good for you orthe class?") and suggests alternative behaviors for new choices. He favors specificssuch as a direct focus on the eyes of the student, physical proximity,facial expressions, and hand signals--palm out or a finger snap (91-93).These teacher behaviors allow the student to save face and preventescalation to pupil defiance and revenge. Thestudents are always allowed to make new choices and are seriously held totheir commitments for specific behaviors (124-125). The second aspect of discipline, consequences of misbehavior, is whatmost commonly comes to mind when one thinks of discipline. The model requires teacher trainingand a great deal of practice in learning the assertive verbal techniqueswhich characterize this style. This, understandably, drawsstrong peer pressure toward correction of the misbehavior (96-97). Cantor's assertive discipline goes immediatelyinto action at the first infraction. If this paper is not what you are looking for, you can search again: Search for: or Click here to request an essay written just for you.