Debra

da Silva

#18252191

EDU5CSD Assignment 1

Question 1
If you were the teacher in this class, what student behaviour would concern
you the most? Why?

Applying the framework of Dreikurs (1998; 1990) to seek out a needs-based explanation
for why students are motivated to misbehave, and recognising the orderly and purposeful
nature of this behaviour, the most concerning behaviour observed is withdrawal. An
initial response might suggest that some students are seeking attention, as demonstrated
when the teacher is repeatedly interrupted by a student calling out, while the teacher
responds repeatedly with annoyance, and in return the students stop, but then resume the
behaviour later.
However, closer analysis as the video progresses reveals the most concerning behaviour
is withdrawal. There are numerous examples of students displaying a sense of inadequacy
and frustration. The teacher repeatedly uses phrases such as Do you want to watch?
Because you dont seem to have got it and is repeatedly met with I cant do it from the
students. At one stage, a girl suggests, I dont know? If I do it wrong dont correct me.
This student is so discouraged and in need of positive reinforcement that they have a
stated preference to be lied to, which is concerning.
As a result of the teacher not recognising the withdrawal of the students, he continues to
reinforce the problem with little encouragement and little focus on the social nature of the
behaviour, and eventually gives up himself and makes little effort. Failing to recognise
that misbehaviour seeks to achieve social recognition and self-determination (Lyons,
2013), the teacher persists in working one on one with students, and excluding most of
the group. There are numerous examples of the teacher attempting to instruct parts of the
group from a seated position, on a piece of paper that nobody can easily see or
understand. This is set against a background of a class that is off-task, evidenced by
students getting up and wandering around the classroom, and by the generally high level
of noise that you can observe in the background.

Debra da Silva

#18252191

Question 2
What steps could be taken by the teacher to more effectively engage
students?

The first step to more effectively engage the students centres on raising the teachers self
efficacy: when teachers lack self-efficacy, they view their resources as inadequate to deal
with the situation they confront, they feel incompetent and unable to cope (Dembo &
Gibson, 1985; Fuller & Brown, 1975; Lewis, 2008) However, teachers may not have the
training to recognise complex motives for behaving in certain ways, and may make naive
judgements (Lyons, 2013). In this case, the teacher has only been teaching for five
months, and with limited time in the classroom may be self-conscious and unable to
articulate and implement his espoused beliefs effectively. Increasing self-efficacy will
also aid the transition from the use of coercive power to referent power (Erchul & Raven,
1997; French & Bertram; Raven, 1974, 1993).
Using Kounin (1970) as a framework, the key focus for the teacher should be to avoid
disruption, keep the lesson flowing, keep the students interested and accountable for their
learning, and ensure that the students feel monitored. Evidence-based research
demonstrates that good classroom managers generally have well-developed classroom
routines and manage transitions using known procedures (Brophy, 1986, 2013; Marzano
& Pickering, 2003; Simonsen, Fairbanks, Briesch, Myers, & Sugai, 2008). A routine or
procedure (with associated cues and prompts) for gaining student attention for instruction
is probably the most important and usually the first to be established by good classroom
managers. Specifically, the teacher should not start giving instruction until all of the
students involved are attending to you silently and without other distractions (Ames &
Archer, 1988).
A common finding in the research is that good classroom managers routinely (visually)
scan the class to praise students who are on task and identify potential causes of
disruption. Good teachers practice withitness and overlap (Copeland, 1987; Irving &
Martin, 1982; Kounin, 1967; Kounin & Doyle, 1975). When desk work is required
effective teachers routinely move about the whole room. Leinhardt, Weidman and
Hammond (1987) demonstrated that when established routines were allowed to

Debra da Silva

#18252191

disintegrate, students did not respond quickly or consistently to cues, and as a result, time
and fluidity were lost for both the teacher and the student. This is clearly evident
throughout this case in both lessons.

Question 3
Which particular classroom management model might best be applied in
this context? What are the main features of a classroom environment you
would want to create to foster holistic wellbeing in this context?

A number of different approaches to managing the classroom have been developed based
on different philosophies of teaching and its processes. Using Wolfgang and Glickmans
(1980) Teacher Behaviour Continuum, the approach best suited to this case would be the
interactive approach, 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 and Meagher (1998) and
Rogers (2000).
Within this approach, a key feature of this classroom would be to foster the
understanding that students make choices about their behaviour, and the logical
consequences of this behaviour. Drawing upon Glasser and Meaghers (1998) focus on
student responsibility, the teacher could reframe his initial interactions with the students
at the start of the lesson. For example, when the students enter the class late, and then
dont have the correct materials the teacher needs to ensure that the students understand
that, as this is their choice, they will face the logical consequences of their actions (e.g.
missing out on important information), rather than holding up the rest of the class and
satisfying the goal of their behaviour (attention and power).
The second key feature would be to build a positive learning environment, where good
teaching takes into account different levels of learner proficiency. One of the most
complex challenges for teachers is to effectively address the range of skills, interests and
knowledge in the classroom (Lyons, 2013 p. 72). 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. Tasks need to

Debra da Silva

#18252191

be achievable so that students experience success, and this success needs to be based on
the belief that the effort put into learning will be rewarded.
The third key feature is to build relationships. Applying the ideas of Alexander (2005,
2008) the teacher needs to create a genuine interaction with the students, using carefully
structured extended exchanges, building understanding through accumulation, and
childrens own words, ideas and speculation. This creates a communication model of
dialogical teaching (or scaffolded dialogue), a process in which both the teacher and the
students contribute to the learning process. However, as collaborative relationships take
time to develop, a key element of this classroom would be having a permanent and
regular teacher (Rogers, 2003).

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.
Ames, C., & Archer, J. (1988). Achievement goals in the classroom: Students' learning
strategies and motivation processes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(3),
260.
Brophy, J. (1986). Teacher influences on student achievement. American Psychologist,
41(10), 1069.
Brophy, J. (2013). Motivating students to learn: Routledge.
Copeland, W. D. (1987). Classroom management and student teachers cognitive
abilities: A relationship. American Educational Research Journal, 24(2), 219-236.
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;.

Debra da Silva

#18252191

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.
Erchul, W. P., & Raven, B. H. (1997). Social power in school consultation: A
contemporary view of French and Raven's bases of power model. Journal of
School Psychology, 35(2), 137-171.
French, J., & Bertram, H. Raven (1959),The Bases of Social Power,. Studies in social
power, 150-167.
Fuller, F., & Brown, O. (1975). Becoming a teacher. Teacher education, 25-52.
Glasser, W., & Meagher, J. (1998). Choice theory: A new psychology of personal
freedom: HarperCollinsPublishers.
Irving, O., & Martin, J. (1982). Withitness: The confusing variable. American
Educational Research Journal, 19(2), 313-319.
Kounin, J. (1967). An analysis of teachers' managerial techniques. Psychology in the
Schools, 4(3), 221-227.
Kounin, J. (1970). Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston.
Kounin, J., & Doyle, P. (1975). Degree of continuity of a lesson's signal system and the
task involvement of children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 67(2), 159-164.
doi: 10.1037/h0076999
Leinhardt, G., Weidman, C., & Hammond, K. (1987). Introduction and integration of
classroom routines by expert teachers. Curriculum Inquiry, 17(2), 135-176.
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.
Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. (2003). Classroom management that works: Researchbased strategies for every teacher: ASCD.
Raven, B. H. (1974). The comparative analysis of power and power preference.
Perspectives on social power, 172-198.
Raven, B. H. (1993). The bases of power: Origins and recent developments. Journal of
social issues, 49(4), 227-251.
Rogers, B. (2000). Behaviour management: a whole-school approach: Sage.
5

Debra da Silva

#18252191

Rogers, B. (2003). Effective Supply Teaching: Behaviour Management, Classroom

Discipline and Colleague Support: SAGE.
Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., & Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based
practices in classroom management: Considerations for research to practice.
Education and Treatment of Children, 31(3), 351-380.
Wolfgang, C. H., & Glickman, C. D. (1980). Solving discipline problems: Strategies for
classroom teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.