Evaluating Theoretical Approaches to Classroom Management EDUC6059

The report must include the following core aspects:

1. Describe the key characteristics of your chosen theoretical approach to classroom management via reference to the subject readings and wider reading/research (Approx. 500 words)
2. Identify and discuss which aspects of your chosen theoretical approach can contribute to a positive learning environment, using current research-based evidence (Approx. 600 words).
3. Describe the theoretical approach with regard to the schools educational philosophy, anti-bullying policy, AITSLs Graduate Teaching Standards and relevant Department policy (Approx. 800 words).
4. Citing current research-based evidence, justify your choice of theoretical approach to the school welfare committee, explaining why your chosen approach to classroom management would best fit the schools educational philosophy (Approx. 400 words).

Introduction

Classroom management refers to the approach, decisions, and practice of teachers in managing the organisation, relationships, and instruction of their classrooms in such a way that encourages student engagement within a positive learning environment (PLE) (De Nobile et al., 2017; Weatherby-Fell, 2015). PLEs are established through effective preventive practices and intervention strategies that recognise and value the needs and wellbeing of the students (McDonald, 2019). PLEs have a significant role in education, enabling students to learn in a safe inclusive environment which values them as individuals and facilitating positive relationships and the feeling of belonging (Lyons et al., 2015). The schools educational philosophy outlines a commitment to evidence-based classroom management practices that recognise and support students human rights, which supports the schools zero-tolerance to bullying policy. The school is committed to implementing a cohesive whole school approach which enables the establishment and maintenance of PLEs through the promotion of respectful relationships, positive student behaviours, belonging, and the overall wellbeing of students. This report will seek to compare the efficacy of two evidence based theoretical approaches to classroom management, Humanist approach (HA) and School-wide Positive Behaviour Support (SWPBS), and evaluate the appropriateness of each in relation to the educational philosophy, zero-tolerance to bullying policy, the AITSLs Graduate Teaching Standards and other relevant department policy including the Employee Responsibility Policy (2019), before finally making a recommendation of the two for the implementation to the school.

Theoretical Approaches

AITSL was formed to provide national leadership for the Commonwealth, state and territory governments in promoting excellence in the profession of teaching and school leadership with funding provided by the Australian Government.

School-wide Positive Behaviour Support School-wide Positive Behaviour Support (SWPBS) is considered to be a behaviourist pedagogy that considers the environmental contexts influencing a students observable behaviours (De Nobile et al., 2017). Drawing from Egebergs Applied Behaviour Analysis (Egeberg et al., 2016) this approach encompasses psychoeducational qualities such as the understanding and support of student needs and ecosystems (Egeber et al., 2017). SWPBS moves away from the previously widespread wait to fail method and instead moves toward a prevention based model (VIC DET, 2021). This approach incorporates proactive strategies by creating safe, supportive, and empowering environments that promote positive behaviours (Bambara & Knoster, 2009; Greaves & walker, 2012). SWPBS is a three-tiered intervention framework: tier one focuses on primary prevention school and classroom wide and is applied to all students, staff and settings. Tier two is the secondary prevention phase focused on identifying and providing targeted support for students at risk of developing challenging behaviours. Tier three, the tertiary prevention phase involves specialised individualised strategies for students exhibiting high risk behaviours (VIC DET, 2021). According the Victorian Department of Education (2021) SWPBS has been shown to demonstrate reduced bullying behaviours, increased school and classroom climate (operation) and culture (atmosphere). The theoretical approach behind SWPBS is based on the notion that to understand student behaviours a teacher must first reflect on the students personal context and ecologies (Arthur et al., 2003). The three-tier approach of intervention strategies enables teachers to respond to undesirable behaviours quickly and efficiently, while also providing students with a support framework designed to guide behavioural adaptations (De Nobile et al., 2017).

Pupils are typically reported as liking teachers who can keep order (without being too strict); are fair (i.e. are consistent and have no favourites); can explain clearly and give help; give interesting lessons, and are friendly and patient (Kyriacou 1986: 139 Authority exists in a relationship and is to a large extent granted by the students. It is in everyones interest that there should be a context in which teaching and learning can take place and teachers must be granted the authority required to perform this role. For their part they will have to earn this authority by the quality of their teaching but it is also helpful from the outset to behave as if they already have it, in a more formal manner consistent with their rank. When a person behaves in a confident and efficient manner we are inclined to believe that such behaviour reflects knowledge and experience. In the school situation the reality is that teachers are in positions of authority in relation to students but their behaviour must be consistent with this and hence imply knowledge and experience; thus the teacher can claim authority (Robertson 1997: 75). Always be prepared to follow up and follow through with a student (one-to-one) on issues that count, such as concerns about a students learning or work, concerns about behaviour or the need to carry through with appropriate consequences (p. 122f). As with all follow-up beyond the classroom setting, a teacher needs to communicate care and concern as well as the authority to address behaviour issues or apply consequences. Alongside any such follow-up one should also be willing to repair and rebuild the relationship if there is any anxiety, tension or animosity. As noted earlier, in any one school, there can be significant differences in the authority granted to teachers by the students. Those differences transcend age and gender. According to Robertson (1997), Kyriacou (1986) and Rogers (2006b, 2011), it is ones personal qualities, demonstrated in effective teaching and management, rather than mere role, that determines ones relational, and moral, authority.

While this may sound obvious in print, Ive seen many teachers in practice merely expect, even demand, to have their authority accepted when they clearly are ill-prepared; do not find workable engagement, interest and entry points into student understanding; teach in a boring uninteresting way with little enthusiasm; and give infrequent encouragement and feedback to their students. It should also be expected of teachers that they are of such a personality and character that they are able to command the respect of their pupils, not only by their knowledge of what they teach and their ability to make it interesting but by the respect which they show for their pupils, their genuine interest and curiosity about what pupils say and think and the quality of their professional concern for individuals. It is only where this two-way passage of liking and respect between good teachers

Humanist Approach

Humanist Approach (HA) can be classified an egalitarian pedagogy method, as the approach focuses on student-centred teaching that seeks to develop student potential through inclusive empathetic classroom environments (Egeberg et al., 2016). The School philosophy is largely based on the recognition of students human rights, a humanist approach closely aligns with this philosophy as it is centred around the belief that all people are equal in worth (Helmut et al., 2016) and the teachers value is underpinned by their level of competence as an educator rather than being authoritative and commanding of students Porter, 2006). Being egalitarian in nature, this approach moves away from a focus on student behaviour exclusively, to a more comprehensive perspective wherein the reasoning, emotions, and relationships are also considered in relation to the behaviours being presented (Egeberg et al., 2016). According to Zucca-Scott (2010), HA values human worth above all else, this involves recognising and celebrating individual differences and creating an inclusive PLE that acknowledges and actively seeks to accommodate for students personal needs to support academic, social, and emotional growth (Matus, 2019). This approach encourages intrinsic motivation as it is underpinned by the notion that students will work most productively when their needs are met (Porter, 2006). Through this approach students are empowered to develop their critical thinking, decision making skills, and self-regulation ultimately encouraging the students to take responsibility for their actions (Fauzan Akmal & Akrim, 2017). Drawing on the work of Maslow (1970), when developing the innate potential of an individual there is significant value in allowing self-realisation, autonomy, and self actualisation. HA aligns closely with the idea that all students are educatable and capable of success when afforded the appropriate care and support suited to their individualised needs as outlined by Armstrong (2015). In addition to this, Decleva (2013) suggests that students are more inclined to succeed when learning in a safe and inclusive PLE, where teachers actively seek to form positive, meaningful relationships with their students (Matus, 1999).

Aspects of Theoretical Approaches that Contribute to PLEs Positive Learning Environments (PLEs) as defined by De Nobile et al. (2017) are classrooms that incorporate positive interactions and proactive preventative approaches to create an inclusive environment in which students feel values, supported and safe, such environments are conducive to productive engaged students as well as effective teachers who are professional fulfilled (Lyons et al., 2014; McDonald, 2019; De Noobile et al., 2017). PLEs are those which place value on establishing mutually respectful environments that facilitate the minimisation of disruptive behaviours trough the use of positive, proactive strategies (Egeberg et al., 2016). School-wide Positive Behaviour Support PLEs are largely centred around the development of positive relationships built on mutual respect (De Nobile, 2017). School-wide Positive Behaviour Support (SWPBS) reflects this ideology as it is based on building trust through proactively identifying, acknowledging and supporting the contexts of individuals at risk of, or exhibiting, poor behaviour in lieu of employing harsh reactive punishments (Egeberg et al., 2016). De Nobile et al. (2017) acknowledges the value of positive respectful communication the the development of PLEs. The SWPBS approach uses its three-tier intervention method to provide students with explicit expectations of behaviour within the classroom and wider school community, ultimately attributing to the development of positive classroom culture and climate, two key components of a PLE (De Nobile et al., 2017). Such positive classroom climate and culture are attributed to minimised disruption and increased engagement by students (Egeberg et al, 2016). The ecological perspective which SWPBS is based on allows teachers to examine and understand the individual context of students and in turn any behavioural concerns they may be demonstrating (De Nobile et al., 2016). The Ecological Systems Theory as developed by Brofenbrenner provides a framework which teachers can adopt to explore the complex and interrelated nature of the ecosystems in which an individual student exists (De Nobile et al., 2017). This enables teachers to effectively understand the context of a student and use this to select and implement relevant individualised prevention strategies that will be most efficient in counteracting behaviour and conduct (Egeberg et al., 2016).

Humanist Approach PLEs are underpinned by effective communication and the establishment of healthy, respectful relationships (Lyons et al., 2011). The value of creating positive classroom culture and climate in the development of PLEs through preventative measures has been previously discussed in this paper. This idea is tantamount with the humanist approach (HA) which seeks to establish strong meaningful relationships between the teacher and students as well as between students themselves (De Nobile et al., 2017). Students should be afforded a classroom climate that is supportive, inclusive and safe for them to express their ideas and opinions without fear of humiliation or reprimand (Kohn, 1996). In order to achieve this teachers should avoid using methods of discipline where they raise their voice, embarrass the student, or make accusations (Matus, 1999) as, according to Porter (2006) coercion is viewed as being destructive to relationships. With this in mind, when dealing with poor behaviour teachers should actively seek to listen to the students concerns and challenge them to understand the consequences of their behaviour and how if affects others around them (De Nobile et al., 2017). When a student is engaging in disruptive or disrespectful behaviours, one strategy a teacher could employ is to ask the student to reflect on how they would feel if someone was treating them the same way (Matus, 1999). In order to establish an effective classroom culture, the teacher should seek to collaborate with students when establishing rules and expectations of behaviour, this will allow students to develop a sense autonomy and ownership of the rules and provide them with a deeper understanding of the expectations. By establishing a classroom which emphasise respect, mutual collaboration, and acceptance teachers are able to positively influence the self esteem of their students and ultimately increase engagement and overall learning within the classroom (Matus, 1999).

Evaluation of Theoretical Approaches

Both of the theoretical approaches explored in this paper, the Humanist Approach and School-wide Positive Behaviour approach, closely reflect the principles that underpin the school philosophy and zero-tolerance to bullying policy. Additionally, these approaches reflect the expectations of teachers as outlined by the Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leaderships (AITSL) Professional Standards for graduate teachers and other relevant departmental policy including the Employee Responsibility Policy (2019) and the Bullying of Students Prevention and Response Policy (2021). The NSW Department of Education (2021) defines in-school bullying as being actions that are intentional, targeted and repeated. It is important to recognise the many forms in which bullying can exist including, physical, verbal, social, indirect, and more recently online as cyber bullying (NSW DoE, 2021). The school is committed to implementing preventative whole school approaches to encourage and promote PLEs where respectful relationships and interactions, positive student behaviour, and belonging are valued.

School-wide Positive Behaviour Support

School-wide Positive Behaviour Support (SWPBS) enables teachers to understand the broad and complex nature of the influence of the students ecosystems on their behaviour through then lens of an ecological perspective (De Nobile et al., 2017). This supports the schools philosophy which focuses on recognising students human rights, as teachers seek to understand and proactively respond the individualised needs of each student to minimise and manage undesirable behaviour and build cohesive teacher-student relationships (Egeberg et al., 2016). Whole school approaches are recognised as being effective strategies to the prevention and management of negative student behaviour such as bullying (Weft, 2012). SWPBS is an example of such a whole school approach wherein students are consistently supported across all areas of their school (Lyons et al., 2014). Teachers should employ proactive interventions to prevent the occurrence of bullying and instead promote the occurrence of positive social interaction between students (Egeberg et al, 2016). The three-tiered structure of SWPBS offers a framework to achieve this, the primary tier, focused on whole school and classroom systems, which encourages teachers to proactively manage behaviour by establishing clear, realistic rules and consequences as well as rewards (De Nobile et al., 2017). It is the responsibility of the teacher to set clear expectations, boundaries and guidelines surrounding the interaction between students (Pirola-Merlo, 2003). The NSW Department of Education (NSW DoE) Bullying of Students Prevention and Response Policy (2021) outlines a clear framework for teachers to employ when seeking to minimise bullying and promote the safety and wellbeing of students while also contributing to the establishment and maintenance of PLEs. SWPBS is a relevant approach to this policy as it endeavours to promote PLEs through the application of positive proactive strategies to promote positive behaviours and social interactions (De Nobile et al., 2017). The NSW DoE Bullying policy (2021) goes on to acknowledge the importance of collaborative, meaningful relationships between teachers, parents, and the wider community to improve student behaviour (NSW DoE, 2021). The ecological perspective of the SWPBS approach closely aligns with this notion as it empowers teachers to consider observable student behaviour in relation to their broader context and ecologies (Egeberg et al., 2016).

The NSW DoE Employee Responsibility Policy (2019) outlines the expectation of a teachers Duty of Care toward students. Under this Duty of Care it is outlined that a teacher must actively ensure the safety of all students and requires the implementation of relevant preventative strategies to minimise bullying behaviours. A SWPBS approach aligns closely with the expectations of a teachers Duty of Care as it promotes positive preventative strategies to minimise poor student behaviour and encourage positive behaviour (Egeberg et al., 2016). Through the implementation of the SWPBS approach, teachers are able to effectively support student development of a meaningful understanding of their actions and the necessary skills to improve their social skills resulting in an increase in positive behaviour, effective PLEs and reduced bullying (De Nobile et al.,2017). A successful implementation of the SWPBS approach will allow for the promotion of positive behaviour through the development of strong respectful relationships, this reflects the expectations outlined in the NSW DoEs Quality Teaching Framework where the notion of a Quality Learning Environment is outlined as being a place where in positive relationships are facilitated (NSW DoE, 2003). Furthermore, SWPBS employs relevant preventative strategies that seek to reduce the time spent managing poor student behaviour (Egeberg et al., 2016) aligning with the QTFs target of the time used to correct poor behaviour by developing students self-regulation skills (NSW DoE, 2003). The AITSL Professional Standards for Teachers provide an additional framework for teachers to refer to when managing such behaviours. Several standards are focused toward the establishment and maintenance of safe positive learning environments that support the safety and wellbeing of students (AITSL, 2017). SWPBS aligns with a number of these standards, including standard 4.3 which outlines the expectation that teachers manage challenging behaviours, by encouraging teacher to recognise and understand and respond to such behaviours using the three-tier framework of intervention strategies (De Nobile et al., 2017). Standard 4.4 compels teachers to support the wellbeing and safety of students (AITSL, 2017), SWPBS demonstrates the expectations of this standard by supporting teachers to establish clear rules and expectations of the students to promote positive respectful social interactions and behaviours (De Nobile et al., 2017), fundamental components of achieving this standard. Humanist Approach Departmental policy denotes the idea that teachers must create supportive, safe, and inclusive learning environments for students that promote and support their overall wellbeing (NSW DoE, n.d.). The AITSL teaching standards reflect this same notion in standard 4.4 which outlines the importance of teachers understanding and implementing strategies that support the wellbeing and safety of students (AITSL, 2017). The fundamental basis of HA is the value of students human rights and the need for PLEs (Woolfolk & Margetts, 2013). For HA to be employed as an effective whole school approach to combating bullying and implementing effective PLEs, teachers must seek to promote a school culture which rejects the idea of bullying completely. HA can be a means for teachers to develop empathy in students by facilitating the education of students in terms of the impact of their actions on others. Theoretically this method will encourage a decrease in bullying behaviours however it is necessary that a teacher actively intervenes if they observe or are privy to any bullying incidents as per the DoEs Duty of Care requirement (NSW DoE, 2017) rather than waiting for students to resolve the issue themselves. With this in mind it can be argued that HA is not as effective in the management of bullying behaviours as other strategies or approaches.

Recommendation

Based on the analysis of the two theoretical approaches HA and SWPBS this report is recommending SWPBS as the approach to be adopted as the new whole-school approach to classroom management. SWPBS seeks to actively promote the development of meaningful, respectful relationships (Lyons et al., 2012). These relationships are fundamental components of the successful establishment of PLEs (De Nobile et al., 2017) and directly correlate with the teachers responsibility to establish positive relationships as outlined by the DoE QTF (NSW DoE, 2003). Additionally, SWPBS provides a useful and effective framework for teachers to employ to both prevent and manage bullying behaviours (Egeberg et al., 2016). This framework allows teachers to understand the behaviour of students through an ecological lens that allows them to recognise the many interrelated contexts in which the student exists and is influenced by (De Nobile et al., 2017). This enables teachers to be able to respons appropriately and in a positive manner, ultimately reflecting the expectations outlined in the DoEs Bullying of Students Policy (NSW DoE, 2021) which mandates that teachers must develop preventative strategies to both manage and prevent bullying behaviours. By recognising the importance of establishing meaningful relations between teachers and key stakeholders such as parents, other school staff, and the wider community SWPBS allows teachers to obtain invaluable support for the student across a range of the ecologies.

Conclusion

This report has explored two evidence based theoretical approaches to classroom management. Both of which closely align with the schools philosophy and zero-tolerance to bullying policy. SWPBS has been recommended based on the positive and proactive approach to student behaviour management and bullying prevention. However, it should be noted that in order for teachers to be well prepared to manage difficult behaviours they should be adept in a wide range of theoretical approaches and draw on a variety of them throughout their teaching practice (Lyons et al., 2011).