Master of Teaching (Primary)

ASSIGNMENT COVERSHEET

Subject Code: EEA406 Assignment No.: 1. Due Date: 23/12/2019

Subject Name: Managing the Classroom Environment
Student Number: 11608777
Student Name: Natasha Bui
Address: 105/72 Civic Way, Rouse Hill NSW 2155

“I am aware of the University’s requirements for academic integrity

(http:www.csu.edu.au/division/studserv/learning/plagiarism/) and I declare that my assignments are my
own work, have not been submitted elsewhere and comply with the University’s requirements for academic
integrity.

I agree that the assessors of my assignments are hereby licensed, for the purpose of assessing my
assignments, to :
(a) Reproduce each assignment and provide a copy to another member of faculty; and/or
(b) Communicate a copy of each assignment to a plagiarism checking service (which may then retain a
copy of the assignment on its database for the purpose of future plagiarism checking; and/or
(c ) Communicate my personal information including name and email address to the plagiarism
checking service to enable the creation of a login/password to facilitate the service.

……Natasha Bui…….. ………Natasha Bui…..… ……23/12/2019…………

Signature Name (print) Date

Name of Lecturer/Tutor: Elena Hey ........................................................................

Tutorial Group (if applicable): ............................................................................................

Lecturer

Comments: ........................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
..................................................................................................................................................
 Learning how to think really means
learning how to exercise some control
over how and what you think. It
means being conscious and aware
enough to choose what you pay
attention to and to choose how you
construct meaning from experience
[ CITATION Wal09 \l 3081 ].
Introduction
The modern learning environment has been confronted with rapid technological,
social and economic changes which in turn has shifted the characteristics of an
effective teacher[ CITATION McD19 \l 3081 ]. The traditional expectation for teachers to
transmit intellectual knowledge to students is no longer satisfactory. Professional
responsibility in the 21st-century now involves a number of duties that positions and
prepares young people to live on and be effective and responsible citizens
(MCEETYA, 2008; Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2018;
NSW Department of Education, 2017). The need for teachers to be aware and
understand the contemporary characteristics of effective teaching and classroom
management is essential in order to provide optimal learning and teaching
experiences. The value of being familiar with the different schools of thought to
classroom management will assist teachers in knowing why and what to do when
disruptions in the classroom occur[CITATION Lou06 \l 3081 ]. Furthermore, it allows
teachers to engage in evidence-based best practice as well as providing teachers
with the language to articulate and justify decisions to all stakeholders [ CITATION Cha11
\l 3081 ]. For this reason, the discussion in this paper identifies one theory from each
of the authoritarian, mixed and egalitarian models to classroom management while
finally focusing on a preferred classroom management theory that adds positive
school and management ecologies.

Classroom management theories

In order to simplify the wide range of theories and approaches to classroom
management, the balance of power continuum developed by Porter (2007) has been
used to describe one theory from each of the authoritarian, mixed and egalitarian
models to classroom management.

Authoritarian approach to classroom management

The Assertive Discipline approach falls into the authoritarian approach to
classroom management[CITATION Lou06 \l 3081 ]. This approach is characterised in the
continuum as distributing an unequal amount of power to teachers leaving little for
students. The assumptions that underpin the assertive discipline approach
encompass the belief that teachers are able to improve classroom behaviour by
setting clear rules, providing continuous positive feedback and applying consistent
appraisals and sanctions[ CITATION Swi02 \l 3081 ] . Characteristics of this approach
include a high degree of power given to the teacher in an effort to control students
and a learning environment where students are obedient and compliant [CITATION
Lou06 \l 3081 ].

A benefit of using the Assertive Discipline approach is the ease of designing and
implementing uniform and compliant learning experiences that supposedly meet the
learning needs of students. In the educational context, the Assertive Discipline
approach argues that the learning needs of students are met when teachers are able
protect them from unruly behaviour through the delivery of positive consequences for
expected behaviours and negative consequences for disruptive behaviours [ CITATION
Lou06 \l 3081 ]. This notion is consistent with schools who strive to succeed in the
National Assessment Program – Literacy and Numeracy (NAPLAN) which compares
students’ literacy and numeracy capabilities across all states and territories in
Australia [ CITATION See14 \l 3081 ] . Using the Assertive Discipline perspective,
classroom management in the form of positive reinforcement and a hierarchy of
consequences could be used to ensure students remain on task so that intellectual
knowledge can be transmitted and received successfully in order for high NAPLAN
results to be achieved. While some students may succeed in a learning environment
where the Assertive Discipline approach is used, others may find it difficult to
conform and comply particularly those who have low cognitive and/or social
functioning.

While the benefit of this approach appears to minimise class disruption by controlling
student behaviours[ CITATION Swi02 \l 3081 ], a criticism of the approach argues that it
does not provide opportunities for students to practice control over their own
behaviours[CITATION Lou06 \l 3081 ] and there are not enough proactive actions taken
to change the reasons behind why misbehaviours are occurring [ CITATION Cha11 \l
3081 ]. Furthermore, research conducted by Clunies‐Ross, Little and Kienhuis (2008)
suggest that having a reactive approach to classroom behaviour adds to the level of
teacher stress and is less effective in managing disruptive behaviours in the
classroom. In addition, the effort to be consistent in rewarding and punishing
students for preferred behaviours takes up a lot of time that could be spent on
teaching[ CITATION Clu08 \l 3081 ] . The point of not preparing young people in practicing
control over their own behaviours and not taking proactive steps to change the
underlying reasons behind why certain behaviours are occurring is incongruent with
Australia’s institutional instruments such as the Melbourne Declaration [ CITATION
MCE08 \l 3081 ], the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers [CITATION Aus181 \l
3081 ] and the Professional Responsibilities of Teachers outlined in the Teachers
Handbook [ CITATION NSW17 \l 3081 ] . These instruments clearly articulate that the
crucial role of a teacher in the 21st century is to prepare young people to live as
successful and active global citizens. As argued by McDonald (2019), the approach
of mindlessly controlling student behaviour does nothing to develop students of
becoming problem solvers and life-long learners in life after school.

It is clear that the challenges as a teacher to navigate the contemporary learning

environment and prepare students for life in the 21 st century using this approach far
outweighs the benefits.

Mixed approach to classroom management

The Cognitive Behaviour Theory (CBT) falls into the mixed approach to
classroom management. This approach is characterised in Porter’s (2007)
continuum by a slightly less imbalance of power between teacher and student when
compared to the authoritarian approach to classroom management.

The guiding principle in CBT is that there are strong links between a person’s
thoughts, behaviours and emotions [ CITATION Bie17 \l 3081 ]. In the education context,
this means that students will behave based on how they think and feel. According to
Porter (2007), students will behave based on a variety of reasons such as the
consequence of behaviour, environmental and social contexts and their own skills in
problem-solving. Using a CBT-orientation, teachers are able to guide and alter a
students’ choice to disrupt or behave poorly by taking proactive and preventative
actions to improve a child’s way of thinking [ CITATION Bie17 \l 3081 ]. This may involve
providing students with the opportunity to identify and practice replacing negative
thoughts, actions and behaviour with positive ones [ CITATION Ban11 \l 3081 ] . Other
strategies to help rewire thought processes may include self-control, role-playing and
modelling expected behaviours[ CITATION Ban11 \l 3081 ]. By way of example, Banks
(2011) argues that when implemented properly, CBT strategies have the ability to
help students achieve their goals while developing problem-solving skills that will
assist them in dealing with the challenges of life in the 21 st century. This notion is
consistent with Australia’s constitutional instruments such as the Melbourne
Declaration[ CITATION MCE08 \l 3081 ], the Australian Professional Standards for
Teachers[CITATION Aus181 \l 3081 ] and the Professional Responsibilities of Teachers
outlined in the Teachers Handbook [ CITATION NSW17 \l 3081 ] which state that the
crucial role of a teacher is to prepare young people to live as successful and active
global citizens.

While the benefits of using a CBT approach to classroom management is observed,

some of the challenges include the lack of time and training that teachers may have
to employ CBT strategies[ CITATION Ban11 \l 3081 ]. With current programs and units of
work already compacted to allow for competing priorities [ CITATION Cla08 \l 3081 ],
Kauffman, Pullen, Mostert, and Trent (2011) assert that teachers have external
control to assist in changing thought patterns but doing so is only possible when
teachers are able to build strong relationships with their students and have gauged a
good understanding of the needs of individual students which requires sensitivity to
subtle individual differences and can be time consuming. Furthermore, while it is
possible that teachers can devote attention to CBT strategies, a whole-school
approach is required in order to embed and integrate this preventative approach into
curriculum planning and programs of work to alleviate stress from teachers [ CITATION
Ban11 \l 3081 ].

Egalitarian approach to classroom management

The humanist approach falls into the egalitarian approach to classroom
management. This approach is characterised in the continuum as distributing an
equal amount of power and worth to teachers and students[CITATION Lou06 \l 3081 ].
The guiding principle in the humanist approach in education is a strong belief that
students have an inherent capacity to not only grow developmentally but also be
unselfish and considerate of others no matter the students age [ CITATION Ban11 \l
3081 ]. This approach is considered student-centred and is committed to creating
learning environments which are free of intellectual oppression, coercion and
humiliation toward disruptive students [ CITATION Kha13 \l 3081 ]. While same may think
this gives free reign for students to behave in ways considered disruptive, teachers
with this approach to classroom management are able to successfully create a
learning environment that not only meets the needs of students but also their own
needs of being treated with dignity [ CITATION Lou06 \l 3081 ].

The teacher’s role using the humanist approach is to facilitate student achievement
by providing students with information and allowing students to choose what they do
with it[CITATION Lou06 \l 3081 ]. When the humanist approach is applied, the teacher is
able to design classroom activities that focuses on supporting and caring for oneself
as well as of others and furthermore, develops students in working autonomously
and being self-aware[ CITATION Kha13 \l 3081 ]. As a result of using a humanist
approach to classroom management, students become more wholesome as the
intention is to not only provide cognitive and intellectual education but also personal
growth and creativity[ CITATION Kha13 \l 3081 ].

In order for classrooms to reap the benefits of a humanist approach to classroom

management, the underlying principles of equality and social justice for all members
of society has to be in line with the schools aim [ CITATION Lou06 \l 3081 ]. Furthermore,
curriculum documents and programs of work all need to complement each other as it
is within these documents that beliefs are put into action and teachers are able to
use it to guide their classroom practices [ CITATION See14 \l 3081 ]. The challenge in
applying this approach into classrooms is the disparity between the aims and goals
of a curriculum and that of the humanist approach [ CITATION Kha13 \l 3081 ]. For
example, the aims in the Australian Mathematics curriculum is to ensure that
students are confident, creative users and communicators of mathematics [ CITATION
Aus10 \l 3081 ]. While the aim allows teachers to provide cognitive and intellectual
education to students, there is not much room outside the stipulated elaborations for
teachers to encourage students in their own personal growth and creativity.

While the humanist philosophy can be applied to students of all ages, Jean Piaget's
theory of cognitive development suggests that children move through four different
stages of mental development which means that their capacity for learning are also
at different stages [ CITATION Ewi11 \l 3081 ]. For this reason, while some students,
particularly those who are in stage 3 and above may thrive in a humanistic class,
others may find it different as their capacity for learning develops from being a
concrete frame of mind to more of an abstract understanding [ CITATION See14 \l 3081 ].
Preferred Classroom Management Theory
The need for an educational philosophy that matches the current educational reform
is one that not only focuses on the method of which to impart knowledge but also on
the ability to connect oneself with the subject as well as with students [CITATION Par12 \l
3081 ]. Furthermore, any form of behaviour management practices are focused
foremost on preventative measures rather than corrective actions [ CITATION McD19 \l
3081 ]. For this reason, my philosophy concerning classroom management is
fundamentally considered a mixed approach using Cognitive Behaviour Theory
(CBT). I feel that this approach best meets the aims of the modern classroom by
contributing to a positive school and management ecology. The CBT accomplishes
this by changing the thought patterns of students from negative to positive thus
improving students’ behaviour in the classroom. For me, the most significant aspect
of the CBT is the ability to create balance and cohesion between classmates and
the learning environment. My role as a teacher in the 2st century will be to identify
and understand the needs of students in a positive learning environment while
imparting knowledge[ CITATION McD19 \l 3081 ]. This will allow me to promote equity
and excellence in the classroom so that students may go on to be successful
learners, confident and creative individuals and active and informed citizens
[ CITATION MCE08 \l 3081 ] . The challenge that I may experience is the difficulty in
connecting and building individual relationships with students while providing
teaching and learning experiences that meet the expectations of the school and
curriculum.

Conclusion
This paper discussed one theory from each of the authoritarian, mixed and
egalitarian approaches to classroom management. The Assertive Discipline
approach is an authoritarian approach which aims to manage the class through
compliance and obedience. The Cognitive Behaviour Theory (CBT) is a mixed
approach which aims to develop a student’s ability to think positively about
themselves as well as developing skills in problem-solving and organisation. The
humanist approach is an egalitarian approach and aims to create learning
environments which are free of intellectual oppression, coercion and humiliation
toward disruptive students. After analysing these three approaches, it was identified
that the approach most congruent with my own values and thus my preferred
classroom management approach is the CBT.
References
ACARA. (2010). Australian Curriculum: Mathematics. Retrieved from Australian Curriculum,
Assessment and Reporting Authority : https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-
curriculum/mathematics/

AITSL. (2018, January). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from AITSL:
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership:
https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards

Banks, T. (2011). Helping students manage emotions: REBT as a mental health educational
curriculum. Educational Psychology in Practice, 383-394.

Biesecker, B., Austin, J., & Caleshu, C. (2017). Theories for Psychotherapeutic Genetic Counseling:
Fuzzy Trace Theory and Cognitive Behavior Theory. Journal of Genetic Counselling, 322–330.

Clunies‐Ross, P., Little, E., & Kienhuis, M. (2008). Self‐reported and actual use of proactive and
reactive classroom management strategies and their relationship with teacher stress and
student behaviour. Educational Psychology, 693-710.

Ewing, J., Foster, D., & Whittington, S. (2011). Explaining Student Cognition during Class Sessions in
the Context Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development. NACTA Journal, 68-75.

Kauffman, J., Pullen, P., Mostert, M., & Trent, S. (2011). Chapter 4: Analyzing Behavior Problems. In
Managing Classroom Behavior : A Reflective Case-based Approach (pp. 35-52). New Jersey:
Pearson Education Inc.

Khatib, M., Sarem, S. N., & Hamidi, H. (2013). Humanistic Education: Concerns, Implications and
Applications. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 45-51.

Lyons, G., Ford, M., & Slee, J. (2011). Chapter 1: Classroom management. In Classroom
management: Creating positive learning environments (pp. 18-41). Australia: Cengage
Learning.

McDonald, T. (2019). Classroom Management: Engaging Students in Learning. Docklands, Victoria:

Oxford University Press.

MCEETYA. (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. Retrieved
from Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs:
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational
_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf

Morgan, P., & Hansen, V. (2008). Classroom Teachers' Perceptions of the Impact of Barriers to
Teaching Physical Education on the Quality of Physical Education Programs. Research
Quarterly for Exercise and Sport, 506-516.

NSW Department of Education. (2017, November 27). Teachers handbook: Chapter 5 - Professional
and Legal Responsibilities of Teachers. Retrieved from NSW Department of Education:
https://education.nsw.gov.au/about-us/careers-at-education/roles-and-locations/roles-at-
 education/teaching/teachers-handbook

NSW Education Standards Authority. (2003). Professional responsibilities for teachers (NESA).
Retrieved from NSW Education Standards Authority (NESA):
https://educationstandards.nsw.edu.au/wps/portal/nesa/teacher-accreditation/proficient-
teacher/roles-responsibilities

Palmer, P. J. (2012). The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher's Life. San
Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.

Porter, L. (2007). Student behaviour : theory and practice for teachers. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen &
Unwin.

Seely Flint, A., Kitson, L., Lowe, K., & Shaw, K. (2014). Literacy in Australia: Pedagogies or
Engagement. Milton: John Wiley & Sons Australia.

Swinson, J., & Cording, M. (2002). Assertive Discipline in a school for pupils with emotional and
behavioural difficulties. British Journal of Special Education, 72-75.

Wallace, D. F. (2009). This is water: Some thoughts, delivered on a significant occasion about living a
compassionate life. New York: Little, Brown and Company.
Appendix A: discussion post
The modern classroom has been confronted with rapid technological, social and economic changes
which in turn has shifted the characteristics of an effective teacher[ CITATION McD19 \l 3081 ]. The
need for an educational philosophy that matches the current educational reform is one that not only
focuses on the method of which to impart knowledge but also on the ability to connect oneself with
the subject as well as with students[CITATION Par12 \l 3081 ]. Furthermore, any form of behaviour
management practices are focused foremost on preventative measures rather than corrective
actions[ CITATION McD19 \l 3081 ].

This educational philosophy is congruent with the assumptions and beliefs of psycho-educational
approaches which essentially affirm that the teacher’s role is to identify and understand the needs of
students in a positive learning environment while imparting knowledge[ CITATION McD19 \l 3081 ].
The primary aim as a teacher with this educational philosophy is to develop tolerance and social
cohesion that promotes equity and excellence so that students may go on to be successful learners,
confident and creative individuals and active and informed citizens [ CITATION MCE08 \l 3081 ].

The preferred classroom management and teaching approach that I feel best meets the aims of the
modern classroom is listed below[ CITATION McD19 \l 3081 ]:

 Discipline with dignity by Curwin and Mendler

 Pragmatic classroom management by Harry and Rosemary Wong
 Cooperative discipline by Linda Albert.

References
McDonald, T. (2019). Classroom Management: Engaging Students in Learning. Docklands, Victoria:
Oxford University Press.

MCEETYA. (2008). Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians. Retrieved
from Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs:
http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educational
_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf

Palmer, P. J. (2012). The Courage to Teach: Exploring the Inner Landscape of a Teacher's Life. San
Francisco: John Wiley & Sons.