Behavior Management - Report Example

Running head: Positive Behavior Management Student name: Student number: Lecturer: Dates: Behavior management The nature of the topic encompasses a variety of skills to bring sanity among the students. This involves the incorporation of productive pedagogy in learning. This is specifically on the policies and practices of school discipline. This is because behavior management is a policy matter and it has priority over other classroom practices. However care must be taken to ensure that the issues of discipline do not conflict with the developments of education (Glasser, & Dotson, 1998). It is widely believed by many research literatures that behavior management alongside the models of discipline that are widely applied have uplifted and publicized with no or little considerations on the wider context of curriculum. To some extend teachers have developed their approaches to discipline with little or no regard for the existing pedagogy and curriculum. The Choice theory and the Quality schools by William Glasser`s is an exemption to the separation of discipline and pedagogy. He observes that the manner and the content of what one is teaching are important in order to make behavior management a success. However the manner in which teachers should approach behavior management is clearly spelt out in the productive pedagogy. The recognition of difference and the supportive classroom environment are the productive pedagogies dimensions that teachers should apply in managing the behavior of the students. In the context of the second dimension the teachers are anticipated to create learning environment where the students can regulate themselves and be in apposition to control the activities of the classroom and how the activities can be put into practice. The classrooms that are supportive are made up students who respect other students` contribution withstanding on their ability and devoted to their academics. Supportive classrooms on the traditional approach are properly managed and easily distinguished by the time, though little, to discipline the students. However, the less supportive classrooms are known by their regular verbal scolds by the teacher and abstain and where students behave in a manner likely to suggest that they want to be regularly compelled into embracing the curriculum. It is therefore vital that supportive classrooms attain discipline by way of teaching in the classrooms. The dimension on the recognition of difference umbrellas the involvement of minority groups. The classroom that is conscious of difference` recognition there is indisputable tolerance and acceptance of diversity. Certainly, diversity is regarded as an affirmative essential in a classroom; it is observed and applied as a platform for the curriculum. The disability and cultural difference is, to be specific, diversity. It also encompasses the minority groups and students from varied backgrounds, who cannot easily adapt to and meet the prospects of the schools basing on the apt behavior, are also supported and contained. The study on productive pedagogy literature basing on behavior management terminologies like student control, choice, self regulation, and collaboration are highly pronounced whether the milieu is behavior management or is teaching. They provide a ground for decision making about discipline in a classroom, and the teachers get a head start on how management of behavior should be dealt with. The models on behavior management and other programs have been propped up strongly and have brought in a lot of followers among school administrators and teachers. Models like assertive discipline, choice theory, Bill Rogers work, and responsible thinking have been largely applied in Australian schools as an approach to discipline. Most of these models go together. However, Assertive Discipline and Choice Theory is complex to harmonize due to the fact that teachers` control varies (Freiberg, 1999). In the context of behavior management there is notable conflict on how to capture and retain the cooperation of the students and how to engage them in academic activities and tasks, and what penalties to employ when the students portray unbecoming behaviors. This as however elicited varied opinions as to how children should be thought about behavior and what should be the role and the responsibility of the teacher in the process of instilling discipline. But to a few individuals behavior management is concerned with attaining compliance as in Jones Fredrick’s Positive Classroom Discipline and Center Lee`s Assertive Discipline models (Edwards, 2000). Others believe that it is about helping students make informed decisions on their actions and cultivating self control as in Albert Linda`s Cooperative Discipline and Glassier William`s Choice Theory. Nonetheless, all the evidence proposed on practice and theories of behavior management in schools are still far from harmonization. According to a research by the Queensland on school reforms and policy development it was found out the behavior management strategies rating recorded the lowest on direction and control by the teachers. Both teachers directed behavior and teacher leadership registered a strong support. For many years the theory on behavior management and practice has shifted to discipline from the later where the teacher directed and controlled. It is no accident that this kind of move has created an archetype change from performers to constructivist opinions on the learning of the children and the conviction that students can regulate themselves and can be handed the responsibility for their behavior and learning (Charles, 2002). The change of the school curricula to accommodate the student`s needs to exercise greater control over their experiences on learning and that learning is made possible when students are allowed to reflect on and to built their on understanding, this is similar to the approaches on management of behavior which has shifted from the attitude that children cannot control their behavior and that they need to be managed. These to most of the teachers are unpopular and are reluctant to transform from the traditional way of managerial orientation and the traditional way of controlling to management of behavior. Of all the behavior theories that I have learnt and researched, I have come to find out that Jacob Kounin’s has many points which are relevant and therefore I would like to put into practice in my classroom. The first thing I will have to take into consideration as a teacher would be to be aware of what the classroom entails. This will therefore require me to position myself at a strategic position that would enable me to view the whole classroom; this position will also enable me to move freely in the class and therefore will enable me to interact freely with the class. If the class is divided into groups, I will make sure that I glance at the groups and be keen to look for unusual noise and quietness. This will therefore require me to plan for the class lessons so as to run smoothly; this is according to this theory. I will ensure that there is regular warning of transitions among the students (Glasser, & Dotson, 1998). On top of this, I will make sure that there are regular attention grabbers so that the students are always busy and have something to work on. I will also ensure that I adopt an active learning approach which will enable me to have a challenging activities and depending on the abilities and experience of the group members of the different groups. This model that is advocated by Kounin has its advantages. On top of this is the advantage of basing mostly on eth behavior of the teachers. What this means is that it is easier to change the behavior of one person rather than change the behavior of a mass. There are, however, some limits to this theory. One of the disadvantages of this is the fact that even though I believe in prevention strategy is a very important factor while managing the classroom; my view is that he overlooks the fact that teachers have a formal system which has already been set which they are supposed to follow. I also believe in the fact that methods which do not use any verbal means should be made to be in use so that the verbal will not have a chance to correct and be rejected in making the same correction (Freiberg, 1999). Another model which is worth using is that of Fredric Jone’s. This model deals with students which have disabilities. One argument that I like in this model is the fact that it requires that the program be taught in the first few weeks of the program. With this approach, the students would be able to know what they will expect as they go on with their work. The model also advocates the need for the teacher to access the classroom quickly. In this model, the teacher is encouraged to have outside activities. This model is effective as it encourages teachers to be responsible in their training. Unlike the former model, this model encourages teachers to give students activities in which they are good at. Rudolf Dreikur’s is more democratic as it encourages classrooms which are free and students are made to have as much sense of belonging as possible. There are similarities between this model and that of Jone’s. The similarity is seen in the democratic way of making decision between the class and the teacher. References: Charles, C. (2002). Building classroom discipline. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Edwards, C. (2000). Classroom discipline and management. New York: Wiley. Freiberg, J. (1999). Beyond behaviourism: Changing the classroom management paradigm. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Glasser, W. & Dotson, K. (1998). Choice theory in the classroom. New York: HarperCollins. Read More