Personal Philosophy

When I began thinking about my personal classroom management philosophy, I was determined to be middle of the road: the low control theorists made me cringe (despite discussion, I still can’t get behind Thomas Gordon and his “behavior window”), and the high control theorists made me wince (B.F. Skinner is not someone I ever associated with classroom management, though thinking about his experiments, I do understand that I was somewhat shortsighted, in that regard).

I knew that I was going to have a truly democratic classroom, full of discussions about the rules and consequences for breaking them, the procedures and routines that guided our transitions and jobs and assignments that kept the day running smoothly. I didn’t want my students to view me as the “boss”, but I wanted to create an environment of mutual respect and understanding, where the students knew I was in charge, but also knew they had power as well.

Now that I’ve spent time in a primary school classroom, I realize that while my ideas of classroom management don’t have to be thrown out completely, I will have to take time to build my classroom to that mid-level of control, loosening my hold on the reigns as my students show me they are capable of handling it. I say this knowing that six, seven and eight-year-old children are capable of learning a routine and following it, but I think they do need to begin with the guidance and regulations that come from a high control classroom.

I want my classroom to be well run, and I want my students to want that as well. That means I have to model the behavior I expect; talk to students at their level of understanding without being patronizing, mean or sarcastic; create rules and guidelines that make sense to my students, and discuss implementation concerns with them; and be consistent with the consequences when the rules are broken. On top of this, it is my job to make sure my class is engaged in their education, acknowledging their need to test my own knowledge of the rules, and not react in any way that shames or humiliates any student.

When reading about theorists, there are some parts of most of theories that I think I would bring into the classroom. For example, among the Low Teacher Control theorists, Barbara Coloroso’s Inner Discipline Theory insists that teachers must treat students with respect and dignity, and give them opportunities to make decisions, take responsibility for their actions and learn from their successes and mistakes. Jim Fay and David Funk want to make sure students think for themselves in order to raise their level of responsibility. And Haim Ginott believes teachers should avoid hurried help; labeling the students, and sarcasm, among other things.

Among Medium Teacher Control Theorists, Rudolf Dreikurs’s Logical Consequences theory explains that students and teachers should work together to set the rules and consequences; that identifying and dealing with misbehavior should be done privately and that teacher should control their immediate response to misbehavior in order to avoid reinforcing the behavior. Jane Nelson et al’s Positive Discipline Theory suggests that students have four motivations for misbehavior (attention, power, revenge and assumed inadequacy), and advocates family and class meetings to discuss misbehavior, and using encouragement to promote good behavior.

I mention the above theories because they all contain elements that I think I would naturally bring to my classroom. In rereading about High Teacher Control, I felt uneasy, knowing that so little attention was paid to the feelings and preferences of the students, which can’t, in my opinion, lead to a comfortable, healthy learning environment. At the same time, my experiences in a second grade classroom have shown me children at that age need to be expressly told what they can and cannot do, repeatedly, in several different ways, in order to learn appropriate classroom behavior. It’s no wonder my cooperating teacher ends every morning meeting message with “I will remember to work hard and pay attention”, and reminds students before every assignment that they need to put their name at the top. I never believed that this was because the teacher wanted to waste her time, but never realized just how important it was to repeat those directions.

Young children are not always capable of following directions, working logically or sitting still for long stretches of time. They enjoy being social, and will often find a bracelet, bookmark or eraser just as interesting, if not more so, than their work. My job, as a teacher, is not only to teach the students the skills they will need to move through higher grade levels, but also motivate them to want to learn, while making sure that no one gets left behind. So while I don’t subscribe to B.F. Skinners repeated reinforcement, or Fredric Jones’s “preferred activity time (PAT)” in which the actions of one can penalize the entire class, I understand why they exist, and will have to do my best to incorporate the ideas behind a High Teaching Control classroom without using the detailed methods.

If I were to incorporate any high control theory into my own management plan, it would be Marvin Marshall’s Discipline Without Stress. Marshall believes that being positive is more effective than being negative, that self-evaluation is essential for long-term improvement, that giving students a choice in their responses to different situations and that the opportunity to reflect on behavior leads to responsibility and empowerment.

My goal, in my classroom, is to have students be self-motivated to behave responsibly, and in order to reach that goal, I will have to model the behavior I expect, and set consequences that deal with the student’s transgression, not the student’s sense of self. What struck me most, in the entire chapter on Models of Discipline, is the final thought regarding Marshall’s plan: “Discipline Without Stress focuses on promoting responsibility rather than on obedience. Obedience does not create desire. When responsibility is promoted, however, obedience becomes a natural byproduct” (Burden, p. 37).

I want to instill in my class the desire to learn, and I believe that it is possible, with students of any age, as long as my management plan focuses on teaching responsibility over obedience, encouraging my students to reflect on their behavior in order to learn from it. I know I am not their friend. In fact, I don’t want them to think of me as a friend. I am their teacher, an authority figure who spends five days a week trying to build a strong foundation of knowledge that they will be able to use throughout their life. By modeling the behavior I expect to see in my classroom; listening to my students questions and concerns and responding accordingly; and expecting my students to push their limits without crossing over into absolute confusion, I can create a happy, caring environment that promotes learning, responsibility and community.