Debra da Silva

#18252191

EDU5CSD Assignment 1, Question 4: Classroom Management

Plan
1. Introduction

The classroom management plan presented is designed for students are in Year 11 and 12,
at a coeducational secondary school. The classroom management model (La Trobe, 2015)
is presented within the context of Glassers (1996, 1997, 1998) choice theory. The three
key elements are the learning environment, preventative measures and solving problems.
The end result is to create a positive learning environment for students, that is inclusive
of difference, where students learn worthwhile content and develop a sense of mastery
and responsibility.
Figure 1. Displayed Classroom Plan

Debra da Silva
#18252191
2. The learning environment
2.1 Theoretical orientation

The approach applied here is the interactive approach (Wolfgang & Glickman, 1980),
which represents that group of theories that suggest that teachers and students need to
negotiate rules and norms, expectations and values together, and that all parties have
rights and responsibilities that must be mutually respected. Proponents of this approach
include Dreikurs (1972; 1990; 2013), Glasser (1996, 1997) and Rogers (2000). Using
Lewis (2008) taxonomy of student behavioural types, this plan is designed to cater for all
students (A, B, C and D) in varying ratios.
In this classroom students feel safe, supported, encouraged, included, engaged and
challenged. Both the teacher and students enter into, and contribute to, a learning process
for mutual benefit. The role of the teacher is to ensure that the students understand that
their behaviours are a choice, and they will face the logical consequences of their actions.
The role of discipline is to work with students and making decisions together to create a
caring community (Kohn, 2006), and there as such there is no place for coercive
discipline in this classroom. Discipline will enable students to make rational rather than
emotional decisions about meeting their needs, without interfering with the needs of
others. The role of the student is to participate fully in making decisions within the
classroom.
2.2 Physical environment

Creating a positive classroom environment starts with examining the physical setting in
which teaching and learning will occur, which needs to be practical as well as interesting
(Lyons, 2013). Evidence-based research demonstrates that good classroom managers
generally have well-developed classroom routines and manage transitions using known
procedures (Brophy, 1986).
The layout presented below allows for whole group discussion, independent work, as
well as small group activities. With the students sitting in a U-shape arrangement, the
teacher can communicate effectively and involve the entire class in the discussion, yet it
will still allow for students to work independently while the teacher is able to move
around behind the desks for monitoring and observation (Groundwater-Smith, Ewing, &

Debra da Silva
#18252191

Le Cornu, 2015; Kounin, 1970). The desks in the middle enable students to cluster for
small group work when needed, and can be removed entirely if warranted.
Figure 1. Classroom Layout

Front of Classroom

3. Preventative measures

Glasser (1998) asserts that students will learn when they know that what they are being
asked to learn and how they are doing it will add quality to their lives. Therefore the
majority of classroom management is indeed planning preventative measures. Dreikurs
(1990; 2013) notion of logical consequences focuses on preventing discipline problems
by developing positive relationships and avoiding issues in the first place.
3.1 Classrooms need to be interesting

Glasser (1998) believes that disruptive behaviour arises because schoolwork does not
meet students needs. This leads to failure and, in turn, students view of themselves as
failures leads to apathy, delinquency and withdrawal from school and home. Curricula
needs to be useful for students, and students will be motivated to do high quality work
only when it meets their needs. In order to motivate students to learn, you will need to

Debra da Silva
#18252191

have respect for their interest and teach them more about what they want to know,
incorporate your own interests into teaching, explain why you are teaching the given
content and help students to realise why it is important now or in the future.
3.3 The role of the teacher

The role of the teacher is to build caring relationships with the students so that they gain
the strength to take responsibility for themselves. This involves adopting a lead
management approach combines what they students need with what has been asked of
them, resulting in them becoming self-driven. The teachers role is to show students how
doing high quality work will add to their quality of life, either now or in the future. In
order to achieve this, the teacher must first demonstrate self-efficacy (Dembo & Gibson,
1985; Fuller & Brown, 1975; Lewis, 2008) which can be challenging for a graduate
teacher.
3.4 Expectations of the students

It is vital that the classroom is supportive of the attempts of students to learn, and that the
learning objectives are meaningful and at a level of difficulty that is appropriate to each
student. (Lyons, 2013). It is essential that when a student makes a mistake, they are
supported and encouraged to learn from their error. A feature that I have observed in this
class occurs when the student discounts their own efforts without verifying if they were
correct or not. In many cases that I have observed, the student was often correct, or at
least close to being correct when they opted out of the task assuming themselves to have
made an error. This indicates that the student has low self-efficacy beliefs, and while this
has a longer-term solution, it must first be addressed by not permitting such negative selftalk. As Dreikurs (1998) noted teachers should look for the assets in their students.
Supporting this is the most important classroom strategy: to have high expectations. A
major part of these high expectations are codified in the classroom plan that is displayed,
as there is an underlying assumption that not only should all students meet these
standards, but also that they can meet these standards.

Debra da Silva
#18252191
3.5 Understanding the rules

A fundamental tenet of Glassers theory is that very few rules are needed, and that a
violation of the rules will not attract penalties but will merely signal that there is a
problem to solve. However few rules there may be, it is still essential to have a clear
understanding of expectations for behaviour.
Beyond this initial phase of engaging in positive experiences, the process I implement is
to start a whole group discussion on expectations and rules, noting down the common
themes. The process is to then break the class into smaller groups with responsibility for
one aspect of the rules. The details presented in the plan highlight that the rules should be
set in a positive tone with the expectation that the students are capable of meeting the
standards, and most importantly should be few in number and simple to recall. A follow
up session would be held to review the final version, give everyone an opportunity for
input. At the end of this process there would be agreement and commitment to the
outcomes as a group.
3.6 Establishing relationships

Not all students come to school with the same level of competence, the same beliefs and
values, the same language, or the same personal history, so the key to creating an
inclusive classroom is to first understand these differences through building relationships
(Lyons, 2013). Over the first few months of working with a group, it is important to find
occasions to tell them I am, what I stand for, what I will and will not ask them to do, and
what I will and will not do for them. By encouraging students in a warm relationship that
accepts them and their right to have their needs satisfied, they will be motivated to learn
and accept responsibility for their actions. Applying the ideas of Alexander (2005, 2008)
creating a genuine interaction with the students involves using carefully structured
extended exchanges, building understanding through accumulation, and the students own
words, ideas and speculation.
4. Solving problems

The focus of this plan is to avoid coercive discipline, which is often punitive in nature,
creates ongoing hostilities, and does not effectively solve the problem. By offering a high
quality positive environment, most of the cases of disruptive behaviour can be avoided.

Debra da Silva
#18252191

This will involve ongoing management can be done through weekly class meetings to
discuss and resolve problems. Beyond this ongoing management, there are two phases of
problem solving within this plan.
4.1 You solve the problem

On occasions where students do behave disruptively, there is a need to take steps without
using coercion. Referring back to Kohn (2006) punishment reduces a students
motivation to learn and their willingness to take responsibility for their actions, and
causes them to focus on way in which to outwit their controller. The steps outlined are
designed to guide the student to solve the problem for themselves:
1. Communicate that the students disruption is their problem, and that I am
confident that they now how to respond.
2. Listen to the disruptive behaviour and solve the problem that it signals.
3. Provide time out from the situation, as students cannot solve problems until they
cool off, so they must withdraw if they cannot calm down immediately. This may
be a time out facility either within the classroom if practical, or within the school
if available. When students make an effort to solve their problem and attempt to
work it out, then they can go back into the class.
4.2 We solve the problem together

If this does not work, then other options away from the classroom must be considered,
including to the point where students cannot remain in the school, and this would apply to
the C and D type students identified by Lewis (2008). Guidelines suggested for this stage
involve guiding the student to identify their problem; assessing the behaviour; planning a
new behaviour, and in doing so, take responsibility for that behaviour; and committing to
(and reviewing) the plan. The aim at this stage is to repair the relationship, to enable the
student to change their behaviour so that it meets their emotional needs, but also ensure it
does not violate the needs of others.
5. Conclusion

The classroom management plan presented is based on an interactionist view, and draws
heavily on the techniques proposed by Glasser and Dreikurs. The focus of the plan is to
solves problem (either individually or together), and these are minimised through the

Debra da Silva
#18252191

maintenance of good relationships, providing the students with opportunities to learn

material that interests them, and guiding their behaviour by presenting them with choices
that lead them to accept responsibility. However, the very act of codifying the plan
creates inherent limitations. Namely, that value of the plan rests with its implementation,
and that it should be an evolving process to account for the very dynamic that the
interactionist approach espouses. Therefore a key addition would be to create a feedback
loop within the plan itself, to allow for reflection as it is implemented and as relationships
build.
6. References

Alexander, R. (2005). Dialogical Teaching and the Study of Classroom Talk. Paper
presented at the International Association for Cognitive Education and
Psychology (IACEP) 10th International Conference, University of Durham, UK.
Alexander, R. (2008). Culture, dialogue and learning: Notes on an emerging pedagogy.
Exploring talk in school, 91-114.
Brophy, J. (1986). Teacher influences on student achievement. American Psychologist,
41(10), 1069.
Dembo, M. H., & Gibson, S. (1985). Teachers' sense of efficacy: An important factor in
school improvement. The Elementary School Journal, 173-184.
Dreikurs, R. (1972). Technology of conflict resolution. Journal of Individual Psychology,
28(2), 203-206.
Dreikurs, R., Brunwald, B. B., & Pepper, F. C. (1998). Maintaining Sanity in the
Classroom. Classroom Management Techniques. (2nd ed.): Taylor and Francis, 47
Runway Rd., Levittown, PA 19057;.
Dreikurs, R., & Grey, L. (1990). Logical consequences: Dutton Books.
Dreikurs, R., Grunwald, B. B., & Pepper, F. C. (2013). Maintaining sanity in the
classroom: Classroom management techniques: Taylor & Francis.
Fuller, F., & Brown, O. (1975). Becoming a teacher. Teacher education, 25-52.
Glasser, W. (1996). Then and Now. The Theory of Choice. Learning, 25(3), 20-22.
Glasser, W. (1997). A new look at school failure and school success. Phi Delta Kappan,
78(8), 596.
Glasser, W. (1998). Choice theory. New York: HarperPerennial.

Debra da Silva
#18252191

Glasser, W., & Meagher, J. (1998). Choice theory: A new psychology of personal
freedom: HarperCollinsPublishers.
Groundwater-Smith, S., Ewing, R., & Le Cornu, R. (2015). Teaching: Challenges and
Dilemmas (5th ed.). South Melbourne: Cengage.
Kohn, A. (2006). Beyond discipline: From compliance to community: ASCD.
Kounin, J. (1970). Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Lewis, R. (2008). The developmental management approach to classroom behaviour:
Responding to individual needs: Aust Council for Ed Research.
Lyons, G. (2013). Classroom management : creating positive learning environments (4th
edition.. ed.): South Melbourne, Vic. Cengage Learning.
Rogers, B. (2000). Behaviour management: a whole-school approach: Sage.
Wolfgang, C. H., & Glickman, C. D. (1980). Solving discipline problems: Strategies for
classroom teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.