CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT THEORIES

Ashley Rowan
2017

Classroom management and student engagement are significant issues for educators.
Contemporary approaches recognise that a safe and supportive classroom environment is required
for students to achieve teachers’ expectations (Doyle, 1992, in CIU, 2002), as illustrated through the
National Safe Schools Framework [NSSF] (MCEECDYA; 2011a; MCEECDYA; 2011b) and
Education Queensland’s Safe, Supportive and Disciplined School Environment (DET, 2017). State
schools in Queensland are also required to devise a pedagogical framework, consisting of a whole-
school approach to classroom and behaviour management and student well-being (DETE, n.d.).
Educational theories have provided the basis for effective classroom management practices, and
demonstrate the variety of perspectives of education and management (Martella, Nelson, Marchand-
Martella & O'Reilly, 2012; McDonald, 2013).

Based on the work of Skinner, behaviourism concentrates on managing behaviour, by

shaping the conduct of subjects via positive and negative reinforcement. Skinner proposed the
notion of operant conditioning, based on the premise that behaviours are strengthened and more
likely to be repeated when they are reinforced. In this framework, an operant refers to the response
which follows an individual’s action or behaviour, such as a teacher’s reaction. These operants can
be neutral, having no bearing on repetition of behaviours; punishers, which decrease the probability
of a behaviour being repeated; and reinforcers, which increase the likelihood of repetition of
behaviour (Diedrich, 2010; Landrum & Kauffman, 2006; McLeod, 2007). In this approach, learning
is said to have occurred when observable changes are made in the subject’s behaviour (Landrum &
Kauffman, 2006; McLeod, 2007). Arguments against this system suggest that the expectation of
extrinsic rewards undermines intrinsic motivation, such as pride, interest and self-esteem.
Additionally, by focusing solely on observable behaviour, internal experiences such as thinking and
emotion are not considered (Landrum & Kauffman, 2006; Omomia & Omomia, 2014; Martella,
Nelson, Marchand-Martella & O'Reilly, 2012).

Canter’s assertive discipline approach to classroom management positions teachers as

classroom leaders, whose role it is to plan and implement a discipline strategy which outlines the
expectations, rules and method of discipline to be used in the classroom. In this model, students
choose to misbehave, and excuses are not acceptable. Teachers have the right to expect that students
do not interfere with others’ learning, by conforming to the rules and routines of the classroom as
determined by the teacher. Both positive and negative consequences are applied, and the classroom
environment structured in a way that encourages students to choose appropriate behaviours
(Martella, Nelson, Marchand-Martella & O'Reilly, 2012).

Canter and Canter (1992, in Martella, Nelson, Marchand-Martella & O'Reilly, 2012) outline
five steps to assertive discipline: teachers must acknowledge that they can and do affect student
behaviour; teachers must display an assertive response style; teachers must provide a discipline plan
that contains rules and clear, effective consequences; teachers provide student instruction on the
discipline plan; and teachers instruct students on how to behave responsibly. By instructing students
of classroom rules and expectations, this approach to classroom management offers a proactive,
preventative measure for possible management issues. However, there has been inadequate research
to confirm the effectiveness of this approach (Martella, Nelson, Marchand-Martella & O'Reilly,
2012).

According to Glasser’s choice theory, behaviours are exerted in order to satisfy five personal
needs for survival: belonging, love, power, freedom, and fun. This approach is based on the premise
that students are in control of their own behaviour and makes choices whether to act appropriately
or not. Fundamentally, this approach encourages students to learn to manage their behaviour by
examining the consequences of their behaviour on others, and making judgements about their own
future conduct. This approach is effective in involving students in developing classroom
procedures; however, student choices are restricted by the limits for behaviour set by the teacher,
meaning that the choices they make are still dependent on the actions of the teacher (Martella,
Nelson, Marchand-Martella & O'Reilly, 2012).

Building on Alder’s social theory, Dreikurs' educational philosophy rests on the premise that
the central motivation of humans is to belong and be accepted. According to Dreikurs’ social
discipline model, all behaviour, including misbehaviour, is orderly, purposeful, and directed toward
achieving social approval. Dreikurs believed it was possible to understand children's misbehaviours
by recognizing the four main purposes or goals of the child. The four goals of misbehaviour
are attention getting, the contest for power, seeking revenge, and displaying inadequacy. For
example, a student lacking a sense of belonging in their peer group may begin to display certain
behaviours in order to gain attention. Teachers should interpret goals of students’ behaviour and
respond accordingly (Doyle, 2006; Dreikurs, Grunwald & Pepper, 2013).

Dreikurs proposed the use of natural or logical consequences rather than rewards and
punishment, from which students will ideally develop insight into their behaviour and commit to

Ashley Rowan 2017

more productive goals. However, it may be argued that the logical consequences applied in
Dreikurs’ model can be considered as punishments from behaviouralist perspective. Additionally,
very limited research has been conducted to verify the effectiveness of this approach (Doyle, 2006;
Dreikurs, Grunwald & Pepper, 2013).

Ashley Rowan 2017

References

Curriculum Implementation Unit [CIU] (2002). A Guide to Productive Pedagogies: Classroom

Reflection Manual. Education Queensland. Retrieved from
http://education.qld.gov.au/public_media/reports curriculum-framework/productive-
pedagogies/

Department of Education and Training [DET] (2017). Safe, Supportive and Disciplined School
Environment, v.7.4. Queensland Government. Retrieved from
http://ppr.det.qld.gov.au/education/learning/Pages/Safe,-Supportive-and-Disciplined-School-
Environment.aspx

Department of Education, Training and Employment [DETE] (n.d.). Pedagogical Framework.

Queensland Government. Retrieved from
http://education.qld.gov.au/curriculum/pdfs/pedagogical-framework.pdf

Diedrich, J. (2010). Motivating Students Using Positive Reinforcement. Education and Human
Development Master's Theses. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.brockport.edu/ehd_theses

Doyle, W. (2006). Ecological approaches to classroom management. In Evertson, C & Weinstein,

C. (eds). Handbook of Classroom Management: Research, Practice, and Contemporary
Issues. Routledge, pp. 97-125.

Dreikurs, R., Grunwald, B. B., & Pepper, F. C. (2013). Maintaining sanity in the classroom:
Classroom management techniques. Taylor & Francis.

Landrum, T. & Kauffman, J. (2006). Behavioural approaches to classroom management. In

Evertson, C & Weinstein, C. (eds), Handbook of Classroom Management: Research,
Practice, and Contemporary Issues. Retrieved from
https://www.routledgehandbooks.com/doi/10.4324/9780203874783.ch3

Martella, R., Nelson, J., Marchand-Martella, N. & O'Reilly, M. (2012). Behaviour management
models. Comprehensive Behaviour Management: Individualized, Classroom, and
Schoolwide Approaches. Sage Publications. Retrieved from
https://www.sagepub.com/sites/default/files/upm-binaries/40497_1.pdf

McDonald, T. (2013). A positive learning framework for classroom management. Chapter 1

in Classroom management: Engaging students in learning. Oxford University Press.
Retrieved from
www.lib.oup.com.au/he/Education/.../mcdonald_classroommanagement2e_sample.pdf

Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs
[MCEECDYA] (2011a). National Safe Schools Framework. Department of Education,
Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR]. Retrieved from
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/national_safe_schools_framework.pdf

Ashley Rowan 2017

Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs
[MCEECDYA] (2011b). National Safe Schools Framework: Resource Manual. Department
of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR]. Retrieved from
https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/other/national_safe_schools_framework_reso
urce_manual.pdf

McLeod, S. (2007). B. F. Skinner - Operant conditioning. Simple Psychology [website]. Retrieved

from http://www.simplypsychology.org/operant-conditioning.html

Omomia, O. & Omomia, T. (2014). Relevance of Skinner’s Theory of Reinforcement on Effective

School Evaluation and Management. European Journal of Psychological Studies,(4)4, pp.
174-180. Retrieved from http://ejournal12.com/journals_n/1421062148.pdf

Ashley Rowan 2017

Ashley Rowan 2017