Chapter 1. Seeking Self-Discipline

The greatest sign of success for a teacher ... is to be able to say, “The children are now working as if I did not exist.”

— Maria Montessori

Don't make excusses—make good.

—Elbert Hubbard, publisher, editor, and writer

When parents and teachers are asked to generate synonyms for classroom management, discipline is always listed. For our purposes, effective discipline is described as teaching students self-control. In fact, punishment as a form of discipline to gain control is a last resort. Our goal is to establish a community of learners who feel bonded and connected; such a community exhibits self-discipline and perseverance and takes responsibility for learning.

Now you may be wondering if taking time to discipline, to teach self-control, is at odds with teaching to standards. After all, there are only so many hours in the school day and the number of standards keeps growing. The importance of time on task has been heralded since the publication of A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for Educational Reform (National Commission on Education, 1983). The not-so-surprising finding that “the more time students spend on task, the more likely they are to master that task” seems to dictate that we should devote our time to the standards, not to teaching self-control. For the spectator from an ivory tower, this might be the case. For the teachers in the trenches, we know better.

Imagine that a teacher allocates a considerable amount of time to teach to a standard that requires students to investigate a topic and write a research report. That standard requires that students organize their time, perhaps participate as a member of a small group, stay focused over a period of time, and to self-monitor their progress. What happens when students don't have these skills? Teachers may find themselves nagging the reluctant learners, intervening when misbehavior interrupts group work, and then perhaps resorting to punishment. All of this takes time away from teaching and learning and creates an unpleasant tone in the classroom, which is felt by all students. The reality is that time spent preparing students with the skills for learning purchases more time on task than directly pursuing standards.

The approach to classroom management that I'm advocating is proactive: Teachers need to anticipate what skills and work habits students need so that they can demonstrate high levels of performance on state and national standards. The proactive teacher teaches self-control first—before content standards.

As we prepare students for the future, we need to look at the standards. Most standards require work that extends over a longer period of time than the behavioral objectives of the past, which may have been measured in less than a day. On top of this, many secondary schools have moved to block scheduling, using a 90-minute or longer class period instead of a 48-minute period. Block scheduling requires a learner to stay focused over a period of time, schedule or allocate time, and be self-motivated.

Although in the past assessment was largely based on paper-and-pencil test scores, today's students can demonstrate their learning in many ways. As they make a choice to use Hyperstudio software, keep a diary, or prepare a scrapbook for their project, they demonstrate self-awareness of their interests and talents. As a result of their decision, assessment forms may include using scoring guides (rubrics), measuring group work, evaluating problem-solving skills, rating project presentations, as well as valuing the quality of the ideas. Having multiple forms of assessment available requires that a learner be able to problem solve both in and out of a group and exhibit prosocial, or interpersonal, skills. Both students and teachers use scoring guides to evaluate student work. Using scoring guides and giving effective feedback is an additional form of assessment, which requires an empathic individual who can sense feelings and perspectives of fellow students.

How Classrooms Have Changed

When one door closes, another door opens; but we often look so long and so regretfully on the closed door that we don't see the ones which open for us.

—Alexander Graham Bell

Classrooms have changed over the last several decades. We have more children living in poverty. With inclusion, we have students who used to be educated in self-contained classrooms included in mainstream classrooms. We have more students with clinical depression or with uncontrolled anger. On top of all of this, we have increased accountability for meeting standards. Pressure is felt by students themselves. Some states are doing away with social promotion. Students must meet standards, or they'll face another year in the same grade.

Diversity

Some educators have compared the diversity of today's classroom with teaching in a one-room schoolhouse in the middle of the 19th century. The comparison, however, doesn't do justice to the range of diversity. Students in the one-room schoolhouse differed primarily academically. In today's classroom, student diversity has increased academically, emotionally, and socially. Add to this the increase in non-English-speaking students, students from different cultures, and students with physical disabilities—now you've got true diversity. Increased diversity has greatly increased the need for improvement in classroom management if we are to meet the needs of all students.

Just look at the diversity in classrooms. The Carnegie Foundation (summarized by Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, & Simmons, 1997) reported that 26 percent of children in the United States had limited English proficiency and that 24 percent were immigrants. In 1970, 21 percent of schools were minority. In 1992, 40 percent of schools nationwide were minority. Less than half of U.S. teachers feel sufficiently trained to meet the needs of this increased diversity (National Center for Educational Statistics, 1999).

Can you just imagine what would happen in a classroom where the teacher simply lectured, expected students to listen, then gave seatwork assignments? This style of teaching, often referred to as data dumping or spraying and praying, was a primary mode of delivery in classrooms in the 1980s. If we want to meet the needs of all learners today, it won't work.

Children Living in Poverty

Never, never, never, never give up.

—Winston Churchill

When we understand our students and their needs, wants, and characteristics, we'll be more effective in designing an environmental fit in the classroom. In A Framework for Understanding Poverty(1998), Ruby Payne lists behaviors related to poverty:

• Laughs when disciplined; or is disrespectful to the teacher
• Argues loudly with the teacher
• Responds angrily
• Uses inappropriate or vulgar comments
• Fights to survive or uses verbal abuse with other students
• Hands are always on someone else
• Can't follow directions
• Is extremely disorganized
• Talks incessantly
• Cheats or steals

If one out of every four children under the age of 18 in the United States was living in poverty in 1996, then 25 percent (or more) of our students may exhibit these behaviors in the classroom. Instead of viewing these statistics and our students in a negative light, see them as challenges to be met.

Inclusive Education

Don't ever take a fence down until you know the reason why it was put up.

—Gilbert Keith Chesterton

The increasing diversity of our classrooms hasn't been spread out evenly over the last 100 years or more; rather, most of the changes have occurred during the past 30 years. I'll use inclusive education as an example. Students with disabilities were not in a regular classroom until P.L. 94–142, the Education for All Handicapped Children's Act, passed in 1975 (currently, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA). Even then, students with special needs were included only part time in general education classrooms. By the 1990s, many districts were including mildly and moderately disabled students in the general classroom for most of the school day. Although the law says that children with disabilities placed in a regular education class must be supported with the use of supplementary aids and services, this section of the law has been loosely interpreted.

Little Butte Elementary School in Eagle Point, Oregon, has made inclusion work with a strong collaborative support system in place. Every other week, each teacher collaborates with support teachers (Title 1, Special Education or Resource Teacher and a Child Development Specialist) at a 45-minute meeting. A substitute covers the class while the team meets. Figure 1.1 shows a sample agenda used during these meetings.

Figure 1.1. Agenda for Collaborative Support System

During the collaboration, the support personnel give concrete suggestions to the teacher and they share insights as to why certain behaviors are occurring. In addition to participating in these meetings, the support teachers team with the classroom teacher to teach small, flexible groups and to coteach lessons.

Unfortunately, not all schools have found a way to make inclusion work. Sometimes the support person ends up grading papers, fixing bulletin boards, making coffee, and copying worksheets. The trend toward full inclusion versus providing a continuum of services is still being debated (ASCD Curriculum Update, 1994). Some argue that the inclusive education model has left average students to fall through the cracks (see Ratnesar, 1998). Whatever the outcome, we have special-needs children in our classrooms and we need to adapt the environment to fit their needs.

How Format Has Changed

A journey of a thousand miles must begin with a single step.

—Lao-Tsu

The Winner says, “It may be difficult but it's possible.” The Loser says, “It may be possible, but it's too difficult.”

—Source unknown

The format of schools has changed. For example, few of today's teachers stand in front of a graded classroom of children for nine months, in one hour blocks. With the increasing diversity of students in our classrooms, we have transformed the school day. The resulting format changes only increase the demand for better classroom management.

Multi-Age Classrooms. A popular way of restructuring elementary classrooms in the 1990s was to establish multi-age rooms, with students from two or more grades staying with the same teacher for two or more years. The rationale for this structure was to provide a more individualized approach to teaching, more time for teacher-student bonding, and opportunities for cross-age tutoring. In his review of the research on multi-age classrooms, Veenman (1995) found that student learning in a multi-age setting does not differ from learning in single-grade classrooms. In fact, Gutierrez and Slavin (1992) found that achievement goes down in nongraded classrooms which have more individualized instruction, less teacher-directed teaching, and more seatwork. Based on their finding of a small negative effect in their analysis of multi-age classes, Mason and Burns (1996) point out the difficulty in management when multi-age classroom teachers must deliver two different curricula to students of twice the age range in the same amount of time as teachers in a regularly graded classroom. What all of the reviews point out is that classroom management is a key factor if multi-age classrooms are to be successful. The power of reviewing the research is that the information helps us to understand what not to do as well as what strategies are important for success.

Looping. In the last half of the 1990s, many elementary schools moved from an emphasis on multi-age classrooms to looping, which is a single-grade class with the same teacher for two or more years. The argument that supports looping is an increased opportunity for teachers to bond with students and the continuous progress of students from one year to the next. In this case, classroom management should be easier because returning students already know the rules of the game. (A similar case can be made for the multi-age classroom.) A cautionary note, however, is sounded by Sanders (as reported in Pipho, 1998). Sanders found that the single largest factor affecting academic growth is the difference in the effectiveness of individual classroom teachers—the effects being both cumulative and additive. While a strong teacher who exacts learning gains from a student has a lasting effect on that student for the next three years of school (regardless of the effectiveness of the subsequent teachers), a weak teacher also has a negative impact for the next three years.

Block Scheduling. The block scheduling found in middle and high schools in the 1990s increased the demand for better classroom management. The stand-and-deliver form of teaching simply won't work for 90 minutes. “What am I going to do with the class for 90 minutes?” is a classroom management issue.

Parenting Styles and Management Styles

Children have never been good at listening to their parents, but they have never failed to imitate them.

—James Baldwin

From parenting research, we know that parenting style can affect a child's success in school (Steinberg, 1996). The authoritative parent is much more successful than an authoritarian or permissive parent. Many people in my generation were brought up with an authoritarian approach: strict rules to be obeyed, a rigid “You'll do it because I told you to” approach. Perhaps in response to such a controlling approach (no matter the age), the next generation produced a lenient or permissive parent who resisted setting limits or responding to disobedience. Although accepting and nurturing, the permissive parent did not set clear goals or make strong demands of a child. Researchers have found that the authoritative parent combines the two approaches, balances nurturing with setting clear limits, gives guidance without controlling, seeks input from children for important decisions, sets high standards of responsibility, and encourages independence, not dependency.

It's hard to argue with the premise that we need to develop a caring community in our classrooms—analogous to the permissive parent. Yet, research has found this is not enough. When comparing a caring classroom environment with a classroom that has high academic expectations, the second model is more effective in producing learning (Phillips, 1997). If a teacher spends more time on social-emotional behaviors than on teaching cognitive skills, this finding isn't surprising. The goal is to focus on increasing learning by teaching students the prerequisite behaviors needed to meet standards—within an accepting and nurturing environment. Like the authoritative parent, teachers need to balance nurturing with setting clear limits (see Chapters 2 and 3); setting high standards of responsibility, encouraging independence (see Chapter 4), and giving guidance without controlling (see Chapter 6).

Former Army general and Seattle Schools' Superintendent John Stanford believed there is a common ingredient in successful generals, parents, and teachers:

Most people don't expect a general to talk about love. But we talk about love all the time, because love is a key leadership principle. Love is what the most famous military commanders use to inspire their troops to risk their lives in battle; it's what the most effective CEOs use to elicit maximum performance from their employees; it's what the best parents use to encourage their children to learn and grow. It's certainly what teachers and principals use to get academic performance from their students (Stanford, 1999, p. 196).

Perhaps Stanford's idea is another way to underscore how important it is to win them over, not to win over them.

Preparing Students for the Work Force

Like so many generals when plans have gone wrong, I could find plenty of excuses, but only one reason—myself.

—William Slim, British General

Change done to you is debilitating. Change done by you is exhilarating.

—Source unknown

You have to expect things of yourself before you can do them.

I can accept failure. Everyone fails at something. But I can't accept not trying.

—Michael Jordan

The management skills that we're focusing on in this book complement the skills the U.S. Department of Labor identified as required to find and hold a good job (Secretary's Commission on Achieving Necessary Skills, 1991). If we haven't prepared students to enter the work force, then who will prepare them? This book addresses the following competencies identified in the report: time management, organizational skills, following schedules, participating as a member of a team, listening and responding to verbal messages, self-management (including goal setting and monitoring progress), and taking responsibility.

Goleman found similar competencies required for the job market in the late 1990s: self-awareness, self-regulation, motivation, empathy, and social skills. His analysis of 121 companies with a work force in the millions found that “ ... 2 out of every 3 of the abilities deemed essential for effective performance were emotional competencies” (Goleman, 1998, p. 31). If these competencies are twice as important as cognitive skills, then we must build them into our classrooms. Goleman notes that in studies aimed at identifying why careers are ruined, lack of self-control is a primary factor. Here are other parallels between Goleman's findings of success in the work force and classroom management:

• A major cause of low performance on the job is frequent distractions. This is also a cause of low performance in the classroom. Seating arrangement, a critical factor in minimizing distractions, are discussed in Chapter 3.
• Employees who feel a sense of helplessness, with little or no choice of how they do their work or with whom, are more likely to be poor performers and have poor physical health. When the supervisor micromanages every step, creativity is suppressed. Perhaps the dishing out of one small assignment at a time—which must be completed before recess or the end of the class period—is an example of overcontrol and micromanagement in the classroom. In Chapter 3 we look at providing work menus for students, menus that allow for choice and put students in control of managing their time.
• Top performers have a passion for feedback—how well they are doing. They seek this feedback when it is most useful to them—when they can adjust their performance. In Chapter 2 we discuss how to seek feedback from students.
• “Listening well is essential for workplace success” (Goleman, 1998, p. 140). Goleman cites U.S. Department of Labor estimates that of the time we spend in communication, 55 percent is spent listening. Active listening, a communication standard found in most districts, is discussed in Chapter 3.
• Setting high expectations for all, then letting employees set their own goals to accomplish these expectations “communicates the belief that employees have the capacity to be the pilot of their destiny, which is a core tenet held by those who take initiative” (Goleman, 1998, p. 150). Many opportunities for student goal setting can be found in Chapter 4.

* * *

Goleman concludes his book with this reminder: “Old ways of doing business no longer work.... As business changes, so do the traits needed to survive, let alone excel” (1998, p. 312). Translated to education, Goleman's thought means that old ways of teaching no longer work; as children and our society change, so must our teaching strategies. We are preparing children for a world in which they may be changing jobs every three to five years; where the information explosion in the 20th century was greater than that of the past 2,000 years and promises to be even greater in the next 100 years. The challenge is there—and we can live up to it.