School discipline

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 The tone or style of this article or section may not be appropriate for Wikipedia.
Specific concerns may be found on the talk page. See Wikipedia's guide to writing better articles for suggestions.(December 2007)

School discipline is a form of discipline appropriate to the regulation of children and the maintenance of order in schools.

The term refers to students complying with a code of behavior often known as the school rules. These rules may, for example, define the expected standards of clothing, timekeeping, social behaviour and work ethic. The term may also be applied to the punishment that is the consequence of transgression of the code of behavior. For this reason the usage of school discipline sometimes means the administration of punishment, rather than behaving within the school rules. The aim of school discipline is, ostensibly, to create a safe and happy learning environment in the classroom. In a classroom where a teacher is unable to maintain order and discipline, students may become unmotivated and distressed, and the climate for learning is diminished, leading to underachievement.

The enforcement of discipline in schools can, however, be motivated by other non-academic, often moral objectives. For example, a traditional British public school usually has a strong underlying Christian ethic and enforces strong discipline outside the classroom as well as in it, which applies particularly to boarders. Duties can include compulsory chapel attendance, sport participation, meal attendance, conformation to systems of authority within "houses", strongly controlled bed-times and restricted permission to leave the school grounds. Such duties can be stringently enforced, formerly by corporal punishment, and more recently by curtailment of freedoms and privileges.

Contents

[edit] Historical Attitudes to School Discipline

Throughout the history of education the most common form of school discipline was corporal punishment. While a child was in school, a teacher was expected to act as a substitute parent, with all the normal forms of parental discipline open to them. In practice this meant that children were commonly punished with the birch or cane.

However, corporal punishment was often problematic. Unless strictly monitored it could be open to abuse, and there was a growing opposition to any use of physical force in disciplining individuals from the late eighteenth century onwards. A further complicating matter was the rise of compulsory education as parents might be compelled to send their children to schools in which the disciplinary regime was at odds with parental views on punishment. Corporal punishment was consequently abolished in many countries and replaced by positive reinforcements of behaviour in addition to forms of discipline more agreeable to parental tastes, such as the detention of students.

Most modern educationalists in Europe and North America advocate a disciplinary policy focused on positive reinforcement, with praise, merit marks, house points and the like playing a central role in maintaining behavior. When positive reinforcement does not work teachers adopt a variety of punishments including detentions, suspensions and ultimately expulsion of the student from the school.

In part, the disciplinary regime of a school relates to the amount of deference a pupil is expected to show to their teacher. In the Caribbean and East Asia in particular a child is expected to show complete obedience to their teacher, with corporal punishment banned in 109 nations (as of the end of 2006), it's still a sanction in some countries in these regions.[1]

[edit] Current Theory and Practice

School disciple practices are generally informed by theory from psychologists and educators. There are a number of theories to form a comprehensive discipline strategy for an entire school or a particular class.

  • Reality Therapy involves teachers making clear connections between student behavior and consequences in order to facilitate students making positive choices. Features include class meetings, clearly communicated rules, and the use of plans and contracts are featured. Researchers (Emmer and Aussiker, Gottfredson, Hyman and Lally) have noted modest improvements as the result of this approach[citation needed]. Created by William Glasser.
  • Discipline with Dignity supports the idea that good discipline starts by keeping student dignity intact by providing practical strategies for teachers to share responsibility for discipline with students themselves by tailoring discipline to each individual. Created by Drs. Richard Curwin and Allen Mendler.[2]
  • Positive Approach is grounded in teachers' respect for students. Instills in students a sense of responsibility by using youth/adult partnerships to develop and share clear rules, provide daily opportunities for success, and administer in-school suspension for noncompliant students. Based on Glasser's Reality Therapy. Research (e.g., Allen) is generally supportive of the PAD program (Cotton, 2001).[citation needed]
  • Teacher Effectiveness Training differentiates between teacher-owned and student-owned problems and proposes different strategies for dealing with each. Students are taught problem-solving and negotiation techniques. Researchers (e.g., Emmer and Aussiker) find that teachers like the program and that their behavior is influenced by it, but effects on student behavior are unclear (Cotton, 2001)[citation needed].
  • Transactional Analysis works for students with behavior problems to learn to use terminology and exercises to identify issues and make changes within the context of counseling programs. The notion that each person's psyche includes child, adult and parent components is basic to the TA philosophy. Research has been conducted (e.g., Cobb and Richards) has found the TA counseling approach beneficial (McIntyre, 2005)[citation needed].
  • Assertive Discipline focuses on the right of the teacher to define and enforce standards for student behavior with clear expectations, rules and a penalty system with increasingly serious sanctions are major features. Research (e.g., Mandlebaum and McCormack) is supportive, but inconclusive about the effectiveness of the AD approach (Emmer and Aussiker, Gottfredson, and Render, Padilla, and Krank) (McIntyre, 2005)[citation needed]. Developed by Lee Canter.
  • Adlerian approaches is an umbrella term for a variety of methods which emphasize understanding the individual's reasons for maladaptive behavior and helping misbehaving students to alter their behavior, while at the same time finding ways to get their needs met. Named for psychiatrist Alfred Adler. These approaches have shown some positive effects on self-concept, attitudes, and locus of control, but effects on behavior are inconclusive (Emmer and Aussiker) (Cotton, 2001)[citation needed]. Not only were the statistics on suspensions and vandalism significant, but also the recorded interview of teachers demonstrates the improvement in student attitude and behavior, school atmosphere, academic performance, and beyond that, personal and professional growth. (Efficacy of Class Meetings in Elementary Schools, Ann Roeder Platt,B.A., California State University, Sacramento. The University of San Francisco, The Effectiveness of Alderian Parent and Teacher Study Groups in Changing Child Maladaptive Behavior in a Positive Direction. Jane Nelsen
  • The Student Responsibility Center (SRC) discipline process was evaluated for effectiveness in five participating K-12 public schools. SRC was evaluated in terms of meeting the six systems-thinking criteria, the number of suspensions and/or expulsions, the number of discipline referrals to the SRC classroom, and the perceptions of the Learning Community concerning the use of this discipline process. Examination of data collected from the one-on-one interviews and school staff questionnaires suggested that the SRC discipline process did result in a decrease in suspensions and expulsions and discipline referrals. In addition, the analysis of data indicated that there were positive Learning Community perceptions concerning the discipline process. The finding are congruent with effective schools research and school sites should continuously assess, intervene, and monitor the discipline process to ensure the Learning Community is consistently following the processes’ elements and characteristics to accomplish the goal of reducing disruptive behavior overall. (Dunlap, 2007).

[edit] Modern Examples of School Discipline

 This section does not cite any references or sources. (December 2007)
Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed.

A modern example of school discipline in North America and Western Europe relies upon the idea of an assertive teacher who is prepared to impose their will upon a class. Positive reinforcement is balanced with immediate and fair punishment for misbehaviour and firm, clear boundaries define what is appropriate and inappropriate behaviour. Teachers are expected to respect their students, and sarcasm and attempts to humiliate pupils are seen as falling outside of what constitutes reasonable discipline.[verification needed]

Whilst this is the consensus viewpoint amongst the majority of academics, some teachers and parents advocate a more assertive and confrontational style of discipline.[citation needed] Such individuals claim that many problems with modern schooling stem from the weakness in school discipline and if teachers exercised firm control over the classroom they would be able to teach more efficiently. This viewpoint is supported by the educational attainment of countries -- in East Asia for instance -- that combine strict discipline with high standards of education.[citation needed]

It's not clear, however that this stereotypical view reflects the reality of East Asian classrooms or that the educational goals in these countries are commensurable with those in Western countries. In Japan, for example, although average attainment on standardized tests may exceed those in Western countries, classroom discipline and behavior is highly problematic. Although, officially, schools have extremely rigid codes of behavior, in practice many teachers find the students unmanageable and do not enforce discipline at all.

Where school class sizes are typically 40 to 50 students, maintaining order in the classroom can take divert the teacher from instruction, leaving little opportunity for concentration and focus on what is being taught. In response, teachers may concentrate their attention on motivated students, ignoring attention-seeking and disruptive students. The result of this is that motivated students, facing demanding university entrance examinations, receive disproportionate resources, while the rest of the students are allowed, perhaps expected to, fail.[opinion needs balancing] Given the emphasis on attainment of university places, administrators and governors may regard this policy as appropriate.

Consequently, that many students leave secondary education with very unrealistic expectations and little in the way of useful skills, leaving it up to employers or vocational colleges to teach the basic social expectations needed for employment or higher education. Frequent complaints of teachers at the university and college level are that students lack the concept of punctuality, consider that attendance to class is sufficient for a passing grade so use class time to catch up on sleep or email, and lack the self-discipline and motivation needed for effective study. Students frequently refuse to complete homework or classwork, or even bring books and paper to class, on the assumption that low standards of behavior will be accepted and that an automatic pass grade will be awarded provided they do not actively disrupt classes. University administrators frequently pressure teachers to issue passing grades despite poor achievement due to constraints imposed by the Ministry of Education in relation to funding.

[edit] Problems

Methods of maintaining discipline in schools are not always successful. The misbehaviour of children is common in all schools, although most schools managed to keep this within tolerable limits. Occasionally, however, poor disciplinary management within school can cause a more general breakdown in order.

In modern years this has been popularly characterized by violence against teachers and other children. This is, of course, not a new problem. The public schools of eighteenth and nineteenth century England, for instance, were subject to a number of violent armed uprisings and violence against teachers was a common phenomenon throughout the nineteenth century. Even low levels of indiscipline at school can result in a detrimental working environment for children and good teaching will often depend on good school discipline.

Effective discipline requires the consent, either explicit or tacit, of parents and pupils. Whilst few children will enjoy punishment, most will submit to it providing it is perceived as being equitable.

Moreover, to be effective, punishment should never appear arbitrary. School hierarchies award teachers great power over their students and the perceived abuse of this power to punish children in arbitrary ways can be the source of much resentment and hostility.

Problems with school discipline have also led to a reduction in the number of people willing to become teachers, especially in schools regarded as being difficult. Student misbehaviour and rudeness is the leading cause of teacher resignations. In some areas and countries, this has led to a severe teacher shortage, with classes either not taught, or taught by an unqualified person. In some schools, a senior class, for example, may have up to a dozen different teachers in a single year, as the replacements decide to leave rather than deal with student behaviour. Many countries are now trying to offer incentives to new teachers to remain in such schools, but with very limited success.

[edit] Discipline in Sudbury Model Democratic Schools

Sudbury model democratic schools claim that popularly-based authority can maintain order more effectively than dictatorial authority for governments and schools alike. They also claim that in a Sudbury model democratic school the preservation of public order is easier an more efficient than anywhere else. Primarily because rules and regulations are made by the community as a whole, thence the school atmosphere is one of persuasion and negotiation, rather than confrontation since there is no one to confront. Sudbury model democratic schools experience shows that a school that has good, clear laws, fairly and democratically passed by the entire school community, and a good judicial system for enforcing these laws, is a school in which community discipline prevails, and in which an increasingly sophisticated concept of law and order develops, against other schools today, where rules are arbitrary, authority is absolute, punishment is capricious, and due process of law is unknown.

They emphasize that much more important than the externals of order is the question of the sources of internal discipline: how does a person come to develop the inner strength and character that endows his life with order and coherence, an independent man appropriate to a free republic of co-equal citizens, capable of making decisions within a rational, self-consistent framework -- a person treating and being treated with respect.

Sudbury model democratic schools affirm that the hallmark of the independent man is the ability to bear responsibility and since there is no way of teaching or training another person for self-sufficiency, there is no technique for obtaining or transmitting these traits. Hence, the only way a person becomes responsible for himself is for him to be responsible for himself, with no reservation or qualifications.

Thence a Sudbury model democratic school is structured in such a manner that all the trappings of external support that shore up the weak, all the trappings of external authority that substitute for inner self-direction, all the trappings of external moral pressure that replace the inner moral development and all the well-meaning paraphernalia that enervates and often paralyzes the individual wills of students and teachers alike, are missing. Sudbury model democratic schools claim that in these schools the basic building block is the responsible individual, whose sense of life derives from his overcoming with his own strength the great obstacles, errors and temptations that are strewn in his path, and whose existence is given form by his own creative efforts. [3]

[edit] See also

[edit] Notes

  1. ^ BBC NEWS | Asia-Pacific | Taiwan corporal punishment banned
  2. ^ (n.d.) Discipline Associates website.
  3. ^ The Crisis in American Education — An Analysis and a Proposal, The Sudbury Valley School (1970), Law and Order: Foundations of Discipline (pg. 49-55).

[edit] References

Cotton, K. (2001) Schoolwide and Classroom Discipline. Online Resource Accessed on June 8, 2005 at: *http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sirs/5/cu9.html

McIntyre, T. (2005) Assertive Discipline. Retrieved on August 12, 2005 at: *http://maxweber.hunter.cuny.edu/pub/eres/EDSPC715_MCINTYRE/AssertiveDiscipline.html

William Glasser Institute (2005) Counseling With Choice Theory: The New Reality Therapy. Retrieved on August 12, 2005 at: *http://www.wglasser.com/thenew.htm

[edit] External links