Www.cengage.com



Chapter 1: Theories Underpinning The Lyford ModelOur Lyford model is underpinned by a strategic diversity of theories, frameworks, models and principles about human development, psychology and sociology, teaching and learning, and particularly about classroom management. Their inclusion was informed and determined by our collective experiences, action research activities and the academic literature, and represents a challenging amalgam of our worldviews! We acknowledge of course that you hold your own worldview, but urge you to think deeply when choosing the theories, frameworks, models and principles that underpin your emergent professional philosophy, theoretical approach to, and plan/s for classroom management. The theories informing the Lyford model are: Humanist theory; Knowledge acquisition theory; Ecological systems theory; Sociocultural theory; Psychoeducational theory; and Cognitive behavioural theory.Humanist Theory underpinning the Lyford ModelHumanist theories focus on the self and self-development, as well as broader social change, and became popular in the 1970s and 1980s. In the field of learning and education Abraham Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow 1987) is a preeminent humanist theory. Carl Rogers’ substantial contribution was to highlight the importance of relationships in effective learning; the need for students to trust their teachers and for teachers to be empathetic in return (Rogers 1980). Paolo Freire has also been hugely influential as his humanism took on broader dimensions (Freire 2000). He encouraged greater awareness of the political and economic processes that affect systemic disadvantage. He is regarded as the father of transformative education. Freire’s work with poor farmers in Brazil demonstrated the power of education to change lives. Personal change can occur through strategic reflection and action. Action research, promoted by people like Kemmis and McTaggart (1988), is now an embedded framework in the professional development expectations of most teachers. The following Figure 1 is a common representation of an action research sequence.Figure 1 The plan, act and observe, and reflect cycle of action researchFigure 1 a repeating spiral of planning, acting and observing, and reflecting, is helpful because it guides ways to change and improve teaching practices. A most significant concept is to put the researcher (in your case, you as a developing teacher practitioner) at the centre of the action. It signals that sometimes strategies can be implemented, but need further reflection and further action before an action research sequence can be complete. In the Lyford model the outer layer of the main section (the classroom management plan) has the action research process cycling around the core theories and practices. This emphasises the importance of the ongoing development of teaching and learning practices and the need to continually reflect upon and seek change to practices.Knowledge Acquisition Theory underpinning the Lyford ModelThe branch of philosophy known as epistemology is devoted to examining the nature of knowledge, how we acquire it, how we put it into practice and how it informs our being – our identity. This is a topic you will revisit time and again during your studies to become a teacher, but here we want to explain knowledge acquisition as it has influenced our model. Its roots are in phenomenology and we focus on ideas put forward by Hubert and Stuart Dreyfus (Dreyfus & Dreyfus 1986). They presented a matrix that consisted of: novice; advanced beginner; competent performer; proficient performer; and expert.We concur with the conceptualisation of the journey from the beginning of learning something new through to becoming an expert. In this conceptualisation being an expert is not the end point for learning. In this view a novice will first learn a context independent set of rules and attempt to apply those rules in a formulaic way in context. For example, when we learn to plan a lesson for the first time there is a procedure to follow; a set of questions to answer. Lessons have an introduction, a series of steps and a conclusion. In Australia, lessons in schools follow set outcomes derived from curriculum documents and frameworks. Before a novice teacher sets foot in the classroom, this context independent set of rules or procedures is learned.Advanced beginners begin to apply their new knowledge. This provides the opportunity to see the different relevant bits of information needed and can be context dependent and context independent. At this stage the set of rules are applied judiciously. Pre-service teachers will teach individual and sometimes isolated lessons with small groups as a beginning point in their acquisition of teaching competencies. Usually at this level in professional contexts, there is an instructor/mentor carefully overseeing any performance and the learner does not have full responsibility for the task.Increasingly as new knowledge is acquired and current knowledge applied, a learner is likely to become a competent performer. It is at this level that learners may become increasingly uncomfortable – not necessarily more comfortable! This is because as we learn more about a new set of skills we become aware of the more we need to know! This is true of complex scenarios such as learning to become a effective teacher, where there is so much to learn, and so many elements to take account of. The choices of what to prioritise and what to take notice of can seem overwhelming. Flyvbjerg (2001) comments, ‘The lack of terra firma for the choice of a plan, combined with a competent performer’s need to have a plan, produces a new and important relationship between performer and surroundings: a relationship of involvement’ (p. 13). At this level there is a greater degree of responsibility as the competent performer engages in choices about how to operate.For Dreyfus and Dreyfus (1986), the difference between a competent performer and proficient performer becomes more marked, because the choices become more than conscious, systematic decision making. Proficient performers are more deeply involved and are able to shift and change their actions based on experience. They have a better understanding of what needs to come to the fore and what elements can take a back seat. Thinking and action is less sequential and more fluid. Here they seize on intuition as a way to describe proficient performers’ ways of doing things, and see intuitive action as a more sophisticated, finely honed way to operate. Dreyfus and Dreyfus refer to this as ‘holistic similarity recognition’ (p. 28). This intuition is based on both experience and knowledge. It is not guesswork but an additional operation to what is already known.Finally, at the expert level, performance becomes effortless. ‘Experts operate from a mature, holistic well-tried understanding, intuitively and without conscious deliberation’ (Flyvbjerg 2001, p. 19). In modern parlance this could be referred to as operating ‘in the zone’. It refers to a deep understanding of what needs to be done as a result of cumulative experiences in a wide range of contexts. Dreyfus and Dreyfus do make the point, however, that when things are proceeding normally, experts are not solving problems as such, they do what works normally. Once a new element or challenge presents itself then experts will use a combination of deliberative consideration and intuition. They argue that what experts do is critically reflect on their intuition, and even then decisions may not always work out.It is outside the scope of this book to discuss the criticisms of knowledge acquisition theory in depth, but suffice to say that in a complex task such as teaching, with countless elements shifting and changing, there will always be new elements to consider, new ideas to take account of and new issues to deal with. In that sense we can at times feel like novices, and at times like experts. School environments have changed dramatically over the last twenty years, and the challenges facing us as educators are greater; we can never stop learning and we can never be perfect teachers. There are of course expert teachers out there, and it is to these teachers we must turn to understand more about what makes an expert teacher.Ecological Systems Theory underpinning the Lyford ModelEcological systems theory leads the more contemporary move away from the Piagetian ‘ages and stages’ approach to learning and teaching. This theory is informed by Urie Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) social ecological model in which he proposed that human development and the environments in which it occurs are inextricably linked. Bronfenbrenner provided a visual image that helps illustrate the relational influences on learning events. Self-evident is the child at the centre of his ecological model. In Bronfenbrenner’s model, school is part of the mesosystem, alongside family and religion. Here there is a bi-directional influence as these elements are in close proximity to a child’s experiences. The child can influence these elements as the elements can influence the child. Another layer, the exosystem, contains community, culture and society and although a child may not be so directly involved, this layer can also influence a child’s development. Issues reverberating from the wider community can also have an influence and Bronfenbrenner described this as the macrosystem. Cultural beliefs and societal practices as well as global influences play a part here. Teachers do need to be aware of how these influences impact upon a student’s ability to learn, concentrate and be motivated in the classroom. In terms of classroom management, familial influences and global influences can affect the ways students in classrooms interact with each other and these can impact on individual emotional wellbeing.The notion of ecology is used in our model to emphasise the complex and sensitive relationship that involves every element in the context of a child’s life. For example, the degree to which strong study practices and positive expectations for success are modelled at home will influence how a student tackles academic tasks at school. What happens at school will have a direct impact on what happens at home, and so, ‘behaviour evolves as a function of the interplay between person and environment’ (Bronfenbrenner, 1979 p. 16).Bronfenbrenner continued to update and improve his model. He introduced proximal processes as a concept (Bronfenbrenner & Morris 1998) and saw these as the engines of development. Children develop through their experiences with their immediate environment where competence signals the effective acquisition of new knowledge and dysfunction refers to the difficulties of adjusting behaviour. Two examples will illustrate how an ecological approach helps teachers understand the complex issues that are at play in a classroom’s relational dynamics... Some children were adversely affected by the continual bombardment of images after 11 September, 2001 when the twin towers in New York came crashing down. Ongoing media debate and commentary about terrorism and the role of fundamentalist Muslim groups can affect relationships between Muslim and non-Muslim students and more broadly may also influence the ways children and youth from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds interact. Teachers are required to be aware of these global and local issues, have knowledge about them and unpack the complexities of these issues in the context of classrooms.The second example is about climate change. Recent research argues that the focus on climate change and the doomsday scenarios sometimes discussed in quite graphic detail in the media are affecting children’s wellbeing and in some cases leading to increases in childhood depression (Tucci, Mitchell & Goddard 2007). On the one hand, it is incumbent on teachers to deal with this issue in the classroom. On the other, teachers have a responsibility to recognise the influences these global concerns can have on individual students. It is clear that developmentally, children and youth understand these issues differently and the way teachers tackle these issues and present them in classrooms requires great sensitivity.One very significant change since Bronfenbrenner published his seminal work in 1979 is that the Internet now provides a much closer link to global issues. Students can tap into the global world in unprecedented ways. Technology allows students to communicate with others in an instant. This immediacy brings into much sharper relief the ecological influences on student learning in the contemporary environment.Sociocultural Theory underpinning the Lyford ModelSchool, by its very nature, is a site of social and cultural transformation. It aims to produce effective local and global citizens in a changing world (see, for example, the Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians 2008). Furthermore schools must ‘ensure that socioeconomic disadvantage ceases to be a significant determinant of educational outcomes’ and ‘ensure that schooling contributes to a socially cohesive society that respects and appreciates cultural, social and religious diversity’ (Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians 2008, Goal 1). This goal signals two points …The first point is that it acknowledges there is still a correlation between socioeconomic conditions (the wealth or otherwise of families, their own educational background, their cultural and linguistic heritage) and educational outcomes. In other words children and youth, whose parents are well off, are English-speaking and have an Anglo, Celtic or European heritage, are likely to do better at school. Sociocultural theories have tried to explain this phenomenon.In the 1960s it was a student’s home background that was scrutinised. In a ‘blame the victim’ approach, poor educational outcomes were the fault of poor home conditions, lack of parental education, lack of resources in the home, and so on. Theories in the 1970s and 1980s (see, for example, Connell 1982; Walker 1988; Willis 1977) argued that schools were an active participant in reproducing economic disadvantage rather than agents to counter disadvantage.These ‘reproduction’ theories suggested that when there was dissonance between the cultures of home and school, successful school outcomes were less likely. During this time it was suggested that schools, with largely white, English-speaking, middle class male teachers masked a wider hidden curriculum (see, for example, Giroux & Purpel 1983; Jackson 1968; Kozol 1991). This hidden curriculum embedded a particular set of cultural values, social practices and ways of communicating that contributed to some students being privileged over others. Ever since, curricula development, together with the cultural assumptions, values, attitudes and social practices of teachers have been the focus of analysis in an attempt to ‘level the playing field’ for all students.The second point is that, Goal 1 in the Melbourne Declaration acknowledges that schools have a part to play in developing citizens for a culturally diverse nation. Australia is very culturally, economically and racially diverse. This diversity continues to increase so it is incumbent upon schools to present curricula that are more equitable, and also to educate students to value and appreciate the diversity within their classrooms and the wider Australian community. More recently, however, there has been a backlash against this curriculum approach that has attempted to become more culturally inclusive. In Australia the most vocal critic has been Kevin Donnelly (2007a). In his strong repudiation of a more culturally inclusive education approach, Donnelly argued that our curriculum has consequently been systematically ‘dumbed down’.Cognisant of the above two points, we posit that sociocultural theories play an important part in examining classroom management practices. They act as a link between the more traditional behavioural and psychoeducational theories (explained in chapter 2) coming as they do from a more individualistic and psychological perspective, and evidence the need to more closely examine curriculum development and implementation as integral to classroom management practice.We will now identify some of the sociocultural theories that influence interrelationships in the classroom and what impact these may have on the teaching and learning nexus. These influences interact in complex ways and Australian classrooms are not immune from the social dynamics of wider society. Bronfenbrenner explained this by including in his model the macro-system, which broadly refers to the cultural and subcultural aspects of people’s lives. (You may also like to refer to an update, Bronfenbrenner & Evans 2000). Teachers and students can be seen as cultural beings embedded, as they are from birth, in the traits, mores, values and attitudes of their own cultures.Giddens (1989, p. 31) gives one useful definition of culture:‘Culture’ concerns the way of life of the members of a given society – their habits and customs, together with the material goods they produce. ‘Society’ refers to the system of interrelationships, which connects together the individuals who share a common culture.In more recent years, sociocultural theories have paid greater attention to areas more traditionally psychologically focused, such as issues of identity and subjectivity and are examining processes of identification in terms of broader sociological concepts such as class, race, ethnicity and gender. Avtar Brah’s definition of culture is representative of this emphasis, that is ‘Culture is the play of signifying practices; the idiom in which social meaning is constituted, appropriated, contested and transformed; the space where the entanglement of subjectivity, identity and politics is performed’ (1996, p. 234). It is here that postmodern ideas of breaking down boundaries between different disciplines have had the greatest impact. Identity, subjectivity, efficacy and resilience can now be discussed from both psychoeducational and sociocultural perspectives as both cognitive and social processes.One main sociocultural influence informing classroom practices is the diverse range of beliefs, attitudes and values about relationships and behaviour. Some (groups of) students often have quite definite views on other students based on gender, class or ethnic, racial and religious markers. It is also likely that popular culture, images and trends will influence students’ interactions. Teachers may also hold diverse views based on similar social and cultural markers. It is clear then that this diversity is likely to impact upon personal, classroom and school interrelationships. At the same time, there is a desire to normalise children; make them all literate and numerate in English, help them improve their health and wellbeing, provide basic information in science, technology, and human society, as well as teach ways to become productive Australian citizens. For many schools with diverse class and school populations this can be an almost insurmountable challenge if school values come up against family values.Influencing this even further is the history of Australian migration and how attitudes towards migrants have changed. These attitudes have been embedded into shifting government policies over time. Between the 1970s and mid 1990s, there was bipartisan support for the government's multicultural policy where the emphasis was on respecting and celebrating a variety of ethnic practices within the wider Australia society. We sometimes forget that what prompted the introduction of the multicultural policy was that migrants from a range of countries made (and continue to make) an enormous contribution to the wealth and development of Australia. They deserved to be recognised and respected for their contribution. From 1996 to 2007 (during the years of the Howard Liberal federal government) this emphasis shifted to one of integration. The multicultural policy was slowly dismantled. In 2010 the Labor federal government introduced a policy of social inclusion. It is not entirely clear how this differs from previous policies, except that there is greater emphasis on providing support for economic equity (Ford 2009).Australia continues to change, and global events have had an impact upon debates about migration. There are many people in Australia who debate migration from an ethnic or racial viewpoint. These views could be constructed along a continuum ranging from those who feel comfortable with the pluralist nature of contemporary Australian society, to those who feel uncomfortable with certain social groups, to those who actively dislike the diversity of cultures and ethnicities in Australia. Children are aware of these larger debates as they hear their parents talk and see the ways different people are treated on the news, in the media, in schools and in public spaces.Related to the sociocultural considerations of attitudes and values on social dynamics within and outside classrooms is another important factor – power relationships. It is clear we operate in a hierarchical society of unequal relations of power marked by, among other things, gender, class, ethnicity, race, age, ability, body image and sexuality in the social context of the broader community. There is also an unequal power relation between teachers and students in classrooms and schools that is primarily based on age and status. In Australian culture children have a comparatively low status, and in the school setting teachers are in positions of authority because of their age and knowledge. There are two issues here...The first is the lack of understanding in the past about how students comprehend and interact with these wider social factors. There have been widespread assumptions that children do not recognise differences and are accepting of others in the classroom. In reality, even very young children appear to be aware of the unequal power relations in society, based on age, gender, ethnicity, race, ability and class. They use this knowledge in their day-to-day interactions with other students in the classroom and the playground. A study by van Ausdale and Feagin (2002) demonstrated this process of increasing awareness that is occurring in child-care centres with three- and four-year-olds.The second issue is that teachers may not recognise the larger sociocultural dynamics that may influence classroom interactions, not only between students, but between staff and students. It is naive to assume that teachers are not culturally biased, because it is impossible to leave our own cultural experiences at the classroom door. What we can hope for is that teachers are ever mindful of those biases and strive to reduce them as much as possible in their dealings with students. If teachers recognise that broader sociocultural influences may be involved in conflicts and difficulties within schools, then this must be addressed through curriculum content changes, and taken into account in the development of classroom management plan/s.The ways young people understand their own cultures and society, as well as those of others, and the influences this has on their own sense of self is an important aspect of sociocultural theorising. A key concept that emerged from the theorising of William Glasser and Rudolf Dreikurs (see chapter 2) is belonging; and this concept has been taken up more recently in government policies around social inclusion. We argue here that a fuller understanding of the concept of belonging and how it plays out for individuals and between groups in schools can only be achieved by looking at psychologically and socioculturally inspired theories, and then translating those considerations into educational planning and programming in and across the school.We put the position that ecological theory acts as an overarching theory that can encompass sociocultural and psychological theorising, but we draw on sociocultural theories to explain the complexity of social dynamics. Sociocultural factors in the classroom will inform student behaviour in a variety of ways and have an impact on the classroom social dynamics as well as upon the quality of teaching and learning that takes place. In the context of classroom management this is important because sometimes conflicts arise out of broader societal tensions. These can be around gender, class, ethnicity, race, nationality, language and even about body image and body size. Teachers must aim to build a social milieu in the classroom where every student feels he/she is safe, belongs and can learn comfortably.Psychoeducational Theory underpinning the Lyford ModelPsychoeducational theories (together with behavioural theories) have traditionally informed classroom management. As will be further explained in chapter 2, they continue to have a major influence, and this section can be read in conjunction with the explanations of Rudolf Dreikurs’ Goal Centered Theory and William Glasser’s Choice Theory that are located there. We too see their value as they provide a wealth of sensible principles for achieving effective interactions with students. The focus of psychoeducational theories is the individual child, what teachers can do to understand and support them in the classroom, and how they can best teach them to behave appropriately so that effective learning takes place. Psychoeducational theories are best introduced through their five interrelated key elements: belief systems; needs satisfaction; links between beliefs, thoughts, emotions and behaviour; democracy and autonomy; and preventative emphasis.Belief SystemsBeliefs (values and attitudes) can be examined from a psychoeducational viewpoint. Beliefs, particularly about the self, determine the typical manner in which people go about solving the lifelong challenge to meet their social needs. Because everyone is exposed to different experiences in their childhood, each person develops unique views and behaves differently in pursuit of needs satisfaction. As children grow, they adapt their behaviour to differing circumstances. Many children grow up in homes where there is support to develop positive beliefs that lead them to see the world as safe; where they are respected. Unfortunately, other children have to learn to cope with more challenging situations. These children develop more negative beliefs about the world, and their own worth and ability. The beliefs children develop through early experience then establish the positions from which they embark on new interactions with other elements of their growing world, including teachers, other children and new learning experiences. It has been suggested that behaviour corresponding to a child’s beliefs is likely to produce responses or experiences that confirm the original belief. In the main, many children experience some encouraging and some discouraging circumstances, which can lead them to develop complex personal belief systems, and which may give rise to considerable variation in behaviour between children in seemingly similar circumstances.Belief systems developed from early experiences are seen by psychoeducationalists as fundamental driving forces within an individual’s personal ecology and that positive behaviour is best developed through the purposeful encouragement of positive beliefs. Negative behaviours require responses designed to lead the child ultimately to challenge negative beliefs on which such behaviours are based. That is, teachers’ responses should be predictable and should not confirm the negative belief. Lasting changes in behaviour will occur once children alter their belief systems to perceive themselves, and the world with which they interact, in a more positive light. Psychoeducational theories seek to enable teachers to understand the purpose of student behaviours and the beliefs on which they are based. Teachers can then systematically teach more constructive, alternative behaviours that enable students to meet their needs and, through experiential learning, challenge them to re-evaluate their belief systems.Psychoeducational theorists see beliefs about the self, particularly self-concept, self-efficacy and self-esteem, as crucial in shaping the way individuals interact with their world. According to all major theories of psychological development, self-beliefs are formed predominantly in early childhood in response to children’s early interactions with significant others in their lives; principally, family members. These early views of the self are not set in concrete. They are seen as subject to modification throughout life as new experiential evidence becomes available that embellish or sometimes contradict earlier views. Although potentially subject to change, the tendency for ecological interactions to reinforce beliefs rather than challenge them, in the manner of a self-fulfilling prophecy, militates against major change once beliefs about the self have become reasonably definite.Psychoeducational theorists also contend, however, that individuals can change the way they interact with the world. Such theorists see past experience as formative for current behaviour, but current behaviour as future-oriented. In other words, although the past has contributed to our current situation, principally by guiding our perceptions and evaluations, we are not driven by past experiences. By changing the way we see ourselves, and by learning new skills in interacting with the world, we can re-determine our future interactions. Students who believe in their ability to solve problems and who evaluate themselves highly are more likely to behave appropriately. Thus the provision of an educational environment that empowers students to meet their needs through desired behaviour leads to fewer disruptive incidents. Positive behaviour is promoted through personal encouragement and empowerment.Needs SatisfactionAlfred Adler’s theory (see chapter 2) is based on the notion of needs satisfaction wherein that each of us learns through experience to behave the way we do in order to satisfy our basic needs. In infancy these needs are predominantly physiological. Once these needs have been met, or patterns of behaviour have been established that enable the child to meet physical needs as they arise, social needs take precedence. How each individual solves the problem of relating to others in satisfying ways forms the foundation of the individual’s ‘style of life’, or their guiding belief system. Principal among the social needs individuals strive to satisfy is the need to belong, which means: to matter; to be significant; and to count in some way with other people. Positive or negative behaviour can enable an individual to be of significance in any group. Children who misbehave are seen as pursuing the satisfaction of the same need as children who behave productively; their manner of doing so is simply driven by a different set of beliefs developed through different life experiences.Adler saw the early correction of negative ways of satisfying needs as important, since these tend to develop into patterns of behaviour. In other words, the younger the child, the more malleable is the belief system and behavioural pattern. Adler thought that patterns of behaviour once established, remain relatively stable throughout life. With increasing age, behavioural change becomes correspondingly more difficult, although still possible if belief constructs are successfully challenged.Links between beliefs, thoughts, emotions and behaviourCongruence between beliefs, thoughts, emotions and behaviour (and indeed the confirmatory reaction from others around us) forms a cornerstone of psychoeducational theory. Adler referred to this phenomenon as the ‘unity of personality’ in his definition of style of life. According to Adler, the beliefs individuals form about themselves and their role in relating to others colour their perceptions of events. Thoughts provide the pseudo-logical rationalisation that maintains congruence between perception, evaluation and behaviour. Emotions are outcomes of these thought processes and provide the energy or impetus to act. Consequences of our actions or behaviour are then perceived and evaluated in accordance with the same belief systems. These consequences and our evaluations (largely as emotional reactions) are remembered, and these memories form further building blocks in the development of our style of life.Balson (1996) believed that children make the best choices of which they are capable in view of their perception of situations. They have learned to justify and to be logical about their inadequate behaviour. The teacher’s attention should not be focused on the behaviour but the faulty assumptions and mistaken views which the student holds. While those assumptions and beliefs are faulty, they constitute the reality which determines the goals towards which the student’s behaviour is directed. Dreikurs, Grunwald and Pepper (1998) referred to the process of rationalising perceptions, beliefs, emotions and actions as ‘private logic’, while Glasser (2000a) saw the process as a kind of reconciliation between an individual’s idealised world and the world s/he perceives. Psychoeducationalists see individuals operating as wholly integrated persons in all aspects of behaviour and thought, and reject any notion of treating subcomponents separately. Thus beliefs, thoughts and feelings are seen as interconnected and integrated with behaviour, which is always directed towards satisfying a need in the best way individuals believe they can in the prevailing circumstances.Democracy and AutocracyPsychoeducational theories emphasise the necessity to establish democratic methods of classroom management in order for students to learn from social reality and to take responsibility for their behavioural choices. Dreikurs, Balson and Glasser all recommend democratic approaches as more likely to enable students to meet their basic needs.Glasser emphasises that classroom structure influences the manner in which children are able to satisfy their need for power. Autocratic classrooms rely on coercion to maintain order and are, by definition, disempowering. Such social structures afford students little opportunity to meet their need for power independently, other than by the benevolence of the teacher. Students who do not expect teachers to be benevolent may thus believe they have little choice but to satisfy this need by challenging the teacher’s authority.Glasser’s distinction between ‘boss’ and ‘lead’ teachers demonstrates his commitment to democratic principles that lead to power sharing. Dreikurs and Balson contend that autocratic classrooms invite some students to defy teacher authority by challenging for power, and that democratic classrooms more appropriately reflect the prevailing social reality in contemporary Western society. Their further contention is that teachers who rely on autocratic methods must do so through bluff. Autocratic power relies on the ability to coerce, and since teachers’ coercive powers are limited ultimately to exclusion from school, teachers have little they can truly do when students defy authority. Miller’s (2001) research suggests that children respond favourably to democratic classroom structures and that this approach assists the development of self-direction.Preventative EmphasisPsychoeducational theories aim predominantly to prevent behaviour problems, largely through needs satisfaction, developing positive self-efficacy through empowering the student, and positive self-esteem through caring and encouragement. Preventative approaches are intended to be built into regular classroom routines and to become largely automatic and minimally disruptive. This is a departure from older models of behavior management that focused on disruptive behavior alone and strategies to deal with it. Obviously if we can create classrooms that are supportive communities of learners, who are aware of their actions and have a shared language to deal with issues of social interaction, it prevents much of the disruptive behaviour at its source. Psychoeducational theorists also support intervention approaches for use with seriously disruptive students. These generally take an individual perspective and may take considerable time and effort to plan and implement. These are explained in chapter 7.Cognitive Behavioural Theory underpinning the Lyford ModelCognitive behavioural approaches originated as techniques developed by psychiatrists and psychologists and applied in clinical settings for bringing about behavioural change in individual and small groups of clients with dysfunctional or challenging behaviours. These approaches draw on a range of learning models and human development and behaviour theories, including both behavioural and psychoeducational theory. They were designed to sustain the best elements of clinical behavioural interventions while engaging clients in the recognition of their ‘inner’ cognitive experiences. (See Chapter 7 interventions.)Cognitive behavioural theory and therapies emphasise that thoughts and behaviours are not necessarily incompatible and that behaviour change requires a recognition and understanding of the relationships between thoughts, beliefs, feelings and overt behaviours. Interventions based on cognitive behavioural theory and therapies found considerable favour and application in school settings, particularly in clinical interventions settings with students with more challenging behaviours. More recently they have been used with groups of students as a means to enhance the development of positive behaviours.Cognitive behavioural approaches are relevant to a number of concerns teachers commonly experience when they attempt to promote positive behaviour. Cognitive behavioural approaches are useful in bridging the gap between student reliance on external prompting, control and consequences and their internal regulation of behaviour. Instead of waiting for or relying on somebody else (usually the teacher!) to establish goals and deliberately encourage appropriate behaviour, students can learn to self-instruct, self-monitor and reinforce their own actions, resulting in increasingly independent and responsible behaviour. Note that the developmental level of the student is an important consideration for teachers who plan to use these approaches, as the demands for self-reflection may require a higher level of emotional maturity than is commonplace among younger children.Cognitive behavioural programs have the potential to enhance students’ self-perception. This self-expectation and personal belief is normally developed through individual experiences, and can be a powerful determinant of future behaviour patterns, so teachers should identify and apply methods for actively improving the self-efficacy of their students. Cognitive behavioural strategies also have the potential to assist generalised behaviour change by enabling students to generate solutions to problems under new and varying conditions. In their meta-analysis of several intervention techniques for students with disabilities, Lloyd, Forness and Kavale (1998) found an average positive effect size for cognitive behavioural based interventions that suggested teachers should use these approaches to promote self-management of behaviour in their students.What does cognitive behavioural theory and practice mean for the classroom teacher? Essentially, a teacher using a cognitive behavioural approach incorporates the use of behavioural strategies like antecedent control, reinforcement and measurement of behaviour change alongside and complementary to the development of a student’s use of strategies such as self-instruction, cognitive problem solving and self-regulation. The teacher, as part of the learning context, assists her/his students to generate and use thinking strategies to modify their own behaviour.Cognitive behavioural theory and approaches are included as key theories underpinning the Lyford model because they provide a research-evidenced link between psychoeducational and behavioural theories and practices. The popularity and success of cognitive behavioural programs ‘allows’ teachers to consider taking a pragmatic theoretical approach to classroom management which can embrace apparently diverse theoretical principles. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download