Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Another core focus of T.E.T. is to develop problem-solving strategies which are more
corrective than preventative in nature. In line with Vygotskian socio-cultural
perspectives (1978), T.E.T. also includes the use of school-wide strategies such as peer
counselling and peer mediation. However, it is worth noting that as T.E.T. strategies are
based on counselling students, its implementation may be time consuming and requires
sound background knowledge and understanding (Lyons et al, 2011). As a theory, this
inclusive, empowering and modern vision of pedagogy is one which harbours great
potential if implemented in the manner with which it was intended (Killen, 2009). This
however, according to Fielding (2001), is wherein lies the rub; stating that if we are
to avoid the dangers of developing increasingly sophisticated ways of involving students
that, often unwittingly, end up betraying their interests, and reinforcing assumptions
and approaches that are destructive of anything that could be considered remotely
empowering, then we have to explore approaches that have quite different dispositions
and intentions. Skiba & Peterson (2000) consolidate this view, stating the gap between
research and practice has been a continuing issue in the professional literature, adding
that this gap appears to be especially acute in the areas of school discipline and
behaviour. These statements highlight the need for awareness of theory/practice
translation; something which, for any teacher, is a profound reminder of the
importance of critical reflection in regulating teaching practice towards facilitating
desired outcomes (Brookfield, 1995).
The effective use of behaviour strategies and related policies continues to be a
debated issue in public education (Fielding et al, 2013). Falling under this banner,
Behaviour Modification (B.M.) theory and more recently coined Functional Behaviour
Assessment (F.B.A.) and Positive Behaviour Support (P.B.S.) models, is based upon the
as
communication-blocking
which
can
destroy
teacher-student
the same B.M. I had encountered during my studies? I needed to understand why this
had failed and so took it upon myself to investigate B.M. strategies that might yield an
entirely different outcome.
First, this teacher had assumed that verbal warnings followed by a variety of negative reenforcements constituted an entire theory. It doesnt. He had used B.M. in a highly
generalised way and certainly not to the extent it was designed; presenting a common
perception of applied behaviourism as synonymous with much of the basic
classroom management practices used by many teachers (Kazdin 2012). Subsequently, it
was important to learn what B.M. involved and how, if possible, to implement it
effectively.
Opening dialogue with Claires parents was the first practical step towards offering
explanation of her behaviour. During discussion with the parents, I discovered that they,
having had spoken with professionals in assessing Claire (for possible A.D.H.D.), had
heard of B.M. and were reluctant in teaching practices implementing behavioural
strategies; stating We dont want to change our Claire, we love who she is. To this I
could respond, as D'Zurilla, & Goldfried (1971) explain, that behaviour modification
procedures are designed to change behaviour, not a personal characteristic or trait;
providing such example that B.M. is not used to change autism (a label); rather B.M.
is used to change problem behaviours exhibited by children with autism (D'Zurilla, &
Goldfried, 1971).
By understanding, from Zuna & McDougall (2004) that identifying conditions and
events in the classroom related to a student's disruptive behaviour can be very
challenging, prompted me in seeking help from a capable and trusted colleague. This
colleague was able to provide me with useful assistance; offering additional eyes and
ears towards observing and identifying antecedent conditions in the classroom relating to
Claires disruptive behaviour with hope towards modifying the current environmental
events that are functionally related to behaviour (Edwards and Watts, 2008). This is a
vital step which Claires previous teacher possibly failed to address and may have
contributed to her sustained negative behaviour.
Conducting a thorough, data-based baseline assessment of targeted behaviour/s, and
defining these accurately (Lyons, 2011) gave me a solid foundation towards sound B.M.
implementation. Subsequent observations suggested that Claires problematic behaviour,
during academic tasks, was maintained and reinforced inadvertently via specific
consequences. That is, sending Claire to a timeout corner, or directing her to place her
head on her desk allowed her to escape from what was, for her, an aversive situation (i.e.
academic tasks or demands) by engaging in disruptive behaviours. This notion was a
catalyst for developing a series of consequences which still involved Claire to participate
in classroom tasks. This recognition also highlighted the previous teachers failure to
balance positive and negative consequences which, according to Shores et al (1993) may
indeed yield a coercive cycle that increases the likelihood of disruptive behaviour.
Finally, upon consistent observation of Claire and her interactions, the trusted colleague
and I detailed a list of events or precursors to Claires behaviour. These were
consequently removed or minimised as much as possible.
During third term, after witnessing steady improvement in Claires behaviour, one
moment perhaps defined my implementing of this philosophy. This moment happened
during a music class run by an external, specialised teacher. Having initially left the
teacher with the class for a few minutes, I was abruptly brought to notice that Claire had
bitten another child, causing substantial injury, and resulting in the perpetrator storming
outside and up a tree, whilst leaving the victim virtually inconsolable. Such was the
significance, both sets of parents were called to collect the students from the scene. Prior
to the parents arrival, and having tried to coax Claire down from the tree for almost 30
minutes, I had run out of rational ideas, negotiating techniques, B.M. consequences, and
was fast running out of patience. As Claires parents arrived her mother approached me
and asked why is Claire up the tree? Explaining I was unable to get her down after she
stormed out of class, Claires mother, seeming rather surprised, asked why didnt you
just mention the swings? You see, Claire just loved the swings. This was a watershed
moment. Perhaps had I taken the time to get to know Claire, especially beyond the
classroom setting, I might have developed a genuine of trust and understanding of Claire
and of course known those swings. In hindsight, surely these relationships present a
valuable commodity in partnership with the B.M. techniques of defining, observing and
recording focus behaviours in the context of their antecedent conditions and
consequences (Lyons et al, 2011).
Student misbehaviour impairs students learning, achievement and development
(Cornell & Mayer, 2010). Thus, classroom management is an essential skill for preservice and beginning teachers to acquire. As peoples backgrounds, intrinsic motivations
and subsequent behaviours vary, so too should the strategies designed to combat
behaviour issues. There is no one-size-fits-all approach to managing behaviour. This is
an idea which must be recognised by any teacher who aspires to give their students the
greatest chance to assume a valuable place on that societal drivers seat.
References
Axelrod, S., Moyer, L., & Berry, B. (1990). Why teachers do not use behaviour
modification procedures. Journal of educational & psychological consultation, Vol. 1,
No. 4, p. 309.
Cornell, D. G., & Mayer, M. J. (2010). Why do school order and safety matter?
Educational Researcher, Vol. 39, No. 1., pp. 7-15.
D'Zurilla, T. J., & Goldfried, M. R. (1971). Problem solving and behavior modification.
Journal of abnormal psychology, 78(1), 107.
Edwards, C., & Watts, V. (2008). Classroom discipline & management. 2nd ed. NY:
Wiley.
Fielding, C., Lowdermilk, J., Lanier, L., Fannin, A., Schkade, J., Rose, C. (2013).
Applied behaviour analysis: Current myths in public education. University of Texas Pan
American.
Killen, R (2009) Effective teaching strategies: lessons from research and practice. 5th
Ed. South Melbourne: Cengage Learning Australia.
Lyons, G., Ford, M., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (2011). Classroom management. South
Melbourne, Vic.: Cengage Learning, 3rd Ed.
Shores, R. E., Gunter, P. L., & Jack, S. L. (1993). Classroom management strategies:
Are they setting events for coercion? Behavioural Disorders, Vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 92-102.
Skamp, K. (2012). Teaching primary science constructively. 4th ed., South Melbourne,
VIC: Cengage.
Skibia, & Peterson, (2000). School discipline at a crossroads: from zero tolerance to
early response. Teaching exceptional children. Vol. 66, No. 3, p. 335.