Classroom managemnt students

ANALYZING RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT
STRATEGIES, STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT SCORES, AND TEACHERS’
ATTITUDES AND BELIEFS IN DIVERSE ELEMENTARY SETTINGS
by
Dusty Hill Moore
JACKSON “SKOT” BEAZLEY, Ed.D., Faculty Mentor and Chair
LISA REASON, Ph.D., Committee Member
CHERYL BULLOCK, Ph.D., Committee Member
Harry McLenighan, Ed.D., Dean, School of Education
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements for the Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Capella University
May 2008

3307900
3307900
2008
Copyright 2008 by
Moore, Dusty
All rights reserved

Abstract
Twenty-first century classrooms are different from twentieth-century classrooms (Spring,
2005). Diverse student populations, students with disabilities mainstreamed in regular
classrooms, and violent students challenge many of today’s teachers who have received
little or no training teaching these students. Specifically, many of today’s teachers
possess minimal classroom management strategies and teaching methodologies that best
promote student achievement (Cameron & Sheppard, 2006). While political attention on
student achievement continues to rise, many teachers strive to adhere to legislation by
closing achievement gaps with out-dated teaching methodologies and inadequate
management skills (Armstrong, 2006). Teachers do the best they can with the skills they
have, but are their skills academically effective? Do they use classroom management
strategies that increase student achievement scores? Furthermore, do teachers’ attitudes
and beliefs about their teaching abilities match their actual classroom practices?
Specifically, do teachers teach students the way they think or believe they teach students?
This study addresses these questions to identify relationships between the variables and to
identify their effects on achievement scores. In this study, teachers who consistently met
academic benchmarks were considered to be effective, and it was clear that some
classroom management strategies, attitudes, and beliefs affected student achievement
scores in diverse elementary settings. By comparing responses to the Attitudes and
Beliefs on Classroom Control (ABCC) Inventory and data collected on observation
checklists, this study determined that relationships between teachers’ attitudes and beliefs
about their teaching abilities and actual teaching practices were nominal. Additionally, it
showed that teachers with the best classroom management practices had higher student

achievement scores than teachers with weaker classroom management strategies. This
study implemented quantitative and ethnographic research methods, which included emic
and etic perspectives, to collect data. This data helped reveal the impact of effective
classroom management strategies on student achievement scores, provided teachers with
conclusive evidence about their teaching attitudes and beliefs, and revealed personal
teaching behaviors that supported the need for professional development training with
teachers in diverse elementary settings that may potentially improve teacher efficacy and
cultivate student achievement.

iii
Dedication
This dissertation is dedicated to my loving grandmother, Ruby Lee Fauscett, and
the rest of my family, including Sir Jose, and friends whose continued patience, support,
and unconditional love made completing this project possible.

iv
Acknowledgements
This dissertation is a direct result of the contributions of my family, friends, and
Capella faculty members who sustained me through this process. At this time I would
like to pay homage and say thanks to the many people who traveled along this amazing
journey with me, showed kindness, generosity, and unconditional support.
First and foremost, I must thank God for the mental ability and patience to endure
this process. Without many answered prayers, this dream would not be a reality.
To my Dissertation Chair and mentor, Dr. Skot Beazley, for his relentless
patience and willingness to share his time, energy, and knowledge through this journey.
His guidance and timely feedback was priceless. I am blessed to have had the opportunity
to be his mentee.
To my other committee members, Dr’s. Casey and Lisa Reason and Dr. Cheryl
Bullock, I applaud your efforts and appreciate your timeless efforts in helping me attain a
life changing milestone that I thought at one time would not be possible.
To my mother, Judy Simmon, for always comforting me and drying the tears
that accompanied this project. To my step-father Gary Simmon for making Phoenix
business and pleasure. To my father Ron Hill and step-mother Sherry Hill, for supporting
me along the way and supplying me with the right resources.
To Tracy, for enduring the madness and supporting me till the end.
To Dave Goldsman, my statistician. Your incalculable knowledge and support
will never be forgotten.
To Tasha, Keri, Karen, Kelly, Gee, and Stacey for being my backbone through
this process. Your friendship and continued support will live with me forever.

v
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements iv
List of Tables viii
List of Figures ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
Introduction 1
Background of the Study 3
Statement of the Problem 8
Significance of the Study 10
Purpose of the Study 10
Rationale 11
Research Questions 13
Hypotheses 13
Study Variables 14
Definition of Terms 15
Assumptions 16
Limitations 17
Nature of the Study 18
Organization of the Remainder of the Study 20
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 21
Introduction 21
History of Classroom Management 21
Bureaucratic Discipline 23

vi
Twentieth-Century Classroom Management 25
Twentieth-Century Home/School Dyads 26
What is Classroom Management? 29
Traditional Discipline Strategies 31
Assertive Discipline 34
Teacher Attitudes and Beliefs About Teaching 39
Educating Diverse Populations 43
Teacher Effectiveness and Student Achievement 47
Theoretical Framework 55
Summary 59
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 62
Introduction 62
Statement of the Problem 62
Purpose of the Study 64
Design of the study 64
Population 67
Instrumentation 67
Data Collection 74
Data Analysis 76
Ethical Considerations 77
CHAPTER 4: PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF DATA 78
Introduction 78
Restatement of the Problem 79

vii
Research Questions 81
Cohort Demographic Data 81
Attitudes and Beliefs on Classroom Control Inventory Overview 83
Statistical Overview of Research Question 1 84
Management Behaviors Chosen By Top Teachers 88
Statistical Overview of Research Question 2 89
Summary 92
CHAPTER 5: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 94
Summary of Methods and Procedures 95
Summary, Interpretations, and Procedures 98
Overall Implications and Conclusions 103
Strengths and Limitations 105
Implications of Practice 107
Future Directions 108
Conclusion 110
REFERENCES 113
APPENDIX A: Class Summary Report Examples 118
APPENDIX B: ABCC Inventory 119
APPENDIX C: Classroom Management Observation Checklist 121
APPENDIX D: Fitted Line Plots for Observation Checklist Data 123

viii
List of Tables
Table 1. Demographic Data for Participating Schools 82
Table 2. Cohort 3 Demographics 83
Table 3. Cohort 5 Demographics 83
Table 4. Analysis of Variance for Observation Checklists 85
Table 5. Consistency Scores between Observation Checklists and ABCC 91
Inventories

ix
List of Figures
Appendix D: Fitted Line Plots for Observation Checklists 123
Figure D1: Teacher uses proximity control 123
Figure D2: Teacher praises students 123
Figure D3: Teacher has positive attitude 124
Figure D4: Supplies readily available 124
Figure D5: Teacher has everyone’s attention before beginning lessons 125
Figure D6: Teacher calls on a wide variety of learners for answers 125
Figure D7: Students who finish work early know what to do next 126
Figure D8: Student noise level is maintained 126
Figure D9: Positive teacher/student interactions 127
Figure D10: Class climate is comfortable 127
Figure D11: Student follows rules in common areas such as halls, restrooms,
cafeterias, etc. 128
Figure D12: Student disruptions handled quickly and timely 128
Figure D13: Teacher uses higher order thinking level questions 129

1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction to the Problem
Popular belief among many administrators, teachers, and parents is that a quality
education depends on curriculum content, school programs that support and enrich
curricula implementation, and the quality of teaching occurring in classrooms
(McCormack, Gore, & Thomas, 2006). However, many teachers are entering classrooms
without in-depth content knowledge, poor classroom management strategies, negative
attitudes, and minimal skills to thwart disruptive behavior that impedes learning and
minimizes student achievement (Cameron & Sheppard, 2006; Boynton & Boynton, 2005;
Mahon, 2006). Some researchers have found that novice teachers, and many veteran
teachers, admit they lack effective classroom management skills and student motivation
tactics that endorse learning (Darling-Hammond, 2003; Malm & Lofgren, 2006). Do
these findings suggest that today’s teachers need these skills in order to increase student
achievement? Kohn (1999) and Cameron and Sheppard (2006) believe that effective
classroom management is crucial to teaching, learning, and student achievement. Their
research indicates that teachers who are unable to grasp students’ attention and involve
them in vast instructional activities are teaching ineffectively. Additionally, Boynton and
Boynton (2005) believe that ineffective classroom management skills can waste
instructional time, reduce time-on-task, and interrupt learning environments. To teach
effectively and impact learning, Darling-Hammond (2003) believes that teachers must be
well prepared and properly trained in classroom dynamics, such as classroom
management and pedagogy, to strongly influence student achievement.

2
In the past, the term classroom management could be defined as a way to ensure
students complied with teacher demands (Spring, 2005). Kohn (1999) believes it was
teacher directed and driven by negative beliefs about students. However, in modern
terms, classroom management is summarized by some researchers as a comprehensive
term used to describe the encapsulation of the actions and strategies that teachers
implement to involve students in learning, how efficiently they use instructional time,
provide optimal learning experiences, maintain safe and orderly environments, manage
student behavior, and form cohesive learning relationships (Emmer, Evertson, &
Worsham, 2003; Malm & Lofgren, 2006; Miller & Pedro, 2006; Kohn, 1999). Armstrong
(2006) believes that teachers have an enormous influence on classroom dynamics, but he
also believes that well managed classrooms with student-centered goals contribute to
developing holistic educational environments that promote student achievement. He also
believes that not all teachers are equipped with appropriate strategies to manage diverse
classrooms or build holistic cultures conducive to improving student achievement.
Glasser (1998) supports Armstrong’s (2006) statements by conveying that more and more
teachers believe they are not to blame for poor school discipline, habitual classroom
disruptions, and decreasing achievement scores. He also states that teachers increasingly
blame students for their behavior and that students choose to be disruptive, but Kohn
(1999) believes many teachers fail to recognize the possibility that their classroom
management strategies may need to be evaluated instead of students’ misbehavior. To
support Glasser, Kohn stresses that many times the teachers’ corrective requests may
need to be analyzed rather than continuing to explore why students do not comply with

3
requests. Analyzing discipline requests may compel teachers to keep an open mind about
classroom management and personal practices.
Background of the Study
Improving America’s public schools is a dilemma perplexing citizens, politicians,
administrators, parents, and teachers (Armstrong, 2006). Furthermore, monitoring
improvement using high-stakes testing has intensified demands on teachers to increase
test scores and improve student achievement (Armstrong, 2006). However, some teachers
are better at facilitating student growth and managing classrooms than their colleagues.
How are some teachers able to increase student achievement scores and practice
classroom management better than other teachers? This question has penetrated
educational research for decades in the quest to examine factors such as teacher
behaviors, personality, attitudes and beliefs, self-efficacy, student efficacy, motivation,
content knowledge, and pedagogies to better understand dynamics in teacher/student
dyads (Malm & Lofgren, 2006). Additionally, Glickman (2002) adds that teacher
behaviors are reflected in attitudes and beliefs about teaching and classroom
management, which he believes can effect student achievement.
Some researchers believe that teachers adopt instructional methodologies and
classroom management strategies that mirror how they were taught and disciplined
(Goddard, Hoy & Woolfolk-Hoy, 2000; McCormack, Gore & Thomas, 2006). However,
instructional methodologies and discipline strategies designed for younger generations
may not be effective with today’s students or students from culturally diverse
populations. In fact, Everhart and Vaugh (2005) believe that a “one-size-fits-all

4
pedagogical model” and the use of ineffective, traditional classroom management
strategies are contributing to chronic, habitual behavior disruptions and lower student
achievement scores (p. 222). Also, Everhart and Vaugh (2005) purport that many of
today’s teachers lack experience teaching in diverse settings and have little to no
knowledge about proper methodologies that increase student achievement in culturally
diverse schools. Interestingly, in 1994, Everhart’s field research found that urban teachers
focus more on management, while suburban teachers “emphasized instructional
outcomes,” but the ethnicity and cultural backgrounds of the students were not disclosed
(Everhart & Vaugh, 2005, p. 224).
In other research, a 1998 survey conducted by the National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES) reported that 71% of teachers surveyed indicated they were well
prepared to handle classroom discipline problems, while only 21% of the teachers
reported being well prepared to address the needs of culturally diverse students (NCES,
1998). However, Parsad, Lewis, and Farris (2000) conducted a survey that highlighted
teacher preparedness in classroom dynamics that revealed different percentages for
teachers in both areas. Their survey revealed that only 45% of teachers felt well prepared
in classroom management strategies, while 41% felt well prepared to teach students from
culturally diverse backgrounds. The data from the 2000 survey clearly shows that
teachers felt less prepared to handle classroom discipline demands than in the 1998
survey, but believed they were more prepared to teach culturally diverse students.
Unfortunately, it was not clear if the same survey instruments were used in both studies
or if the same group of teachers were resurveyed. Overall, lacking classroom
management skills and teaching methodologies that promote academic achievement for

5
culturally diverse students can possibly cause students to miss achievement benchmarks,
which may create even larger achievement gaps between the “schoolhouse world” and
the “real world” than what already exists in test scores among minority students
(Armstrong, 2006, p. 90).
The teacher’s role in public education sectors has changed considerably since the
beginning of educational institutions (Spring, 2005). In the past, teachers could be
defined as knowledge transmitters and behavior controllers (Spring, 2005). Teachers used
memorization methods to enhance learning, while using humiliation, nagging,
embarrassment, coercion, and scare tactics to intimidate students into compliance
(Spring, 2005). Fortunately, in many of today’s classrooms, classroom management no
longer encompasses traditional behavior management strategies, such as paddling, verbal
threats, or the punitive actions listed above. Instead, Cameron and Sheppard (2006) and
Miller and Pedro (2006) believe that the most effective teachers are those who manage
their classrooms by focusing on the whole child and use more assertive tactics. These
include improving social skills among, between, and with students, teaching life tasks,
character education, moral education, spending individual time with every student, and
showing respect for students’ feelings about personal experiences or traumatic life events.
Teachers who implement these practices in their classrooms validate students’ feelings
and thoughts, which foster emotionally safe and optimal learning environments (Cameron
& Sheppard, 2006).
Very few teachers are able to manifest techniques associated with teaching whole
child concepts in emotionally safe classroom environments, and a low percentage of
classrooms have teachers who are sympathetic, supportive, or equipped with effective

6
classroom management practices that minimize behavior disruptions (Cameron &
Sheppard, 2006). Furthermore, they are unaware of various teaching methodologies that
increase learning and academic achievement for all students. Although the term academic
achievement is familiar terminology in many American public education realms,
Armstrong (2006) believes that academic achievement became “the cornerstone of U.S.
education” during the nineteenth-century when The Committee of Ten determined that
college bound students had different academic needs from those who planned not to
attend college (p. 18). Despite the differences among the two sets of students, The
Committee of Ten recommended that curriculum adhere to a college preparatory format
in an attempt to provide everyone with a common education and similar skills for future
social dynamics. Spring (2005) adds that because more wealthy children attended college
than poorer children, The Committee of Ten argued against varying courses of study to
eliminate the possibility of “creating a class system of education” (p. 246).
During the nineteenth-century, college-bound and non college-bound students
were offered equitable educational courses, but it was not until the twentieth-century that
standardized testing became an icon in public schools. Since the inception of Thorndike’s
first standardized achievement test in 1909, a mass use of standardized measures have
engrossed public schools to quantify student achievement on academic standards
(Armstrong, 2006). During the wide-spread development of standardized tests and the
government’s involvement in the national assessment system, the term accountability
evolved in educational realms. Spring (2005) believes the accountability movement was
an attempt to regain community control of schools and end educational discriminatory
practices towards minorities. Additionally, he states that although communities often

7
lacked sufficient knowledge to make decisions about professional education practices, the
schools listened and were responsive to public concerns.
As the accountability movement began to spread through the 1970s, local
communities and many states required schools to publish their annual achievement test
scores. Under close scrutiny, behavioral objectives were accentuated. Emphasizing the
use of behavioral objectives soon became linked to classroom instruction, classroom
management, and student achievement (Spring, 2005). Inevitably, since the
accountability movement increased teacher responsibility, Goddard, Hoy, and Woolfolk-
Hoy (2000) believed that some teachers would try to control student learning instead of
supporting autonomous learning.
Controlling students’ learning and behavior may be interpreted by some as a form
of discipline. Without minimizing student achievement concerns, Cotton (2001) believes
discipline has become “the most serious problem facing the nation’s educational system”
(p. 1). In fact, Cameron and Sheppard (2006) support Cotton and claim that non-
instructional activities account for up to one-half of classroom time, with discipline
interruptions responsible for an extensive portion of those activities. Ultimately, they
believe that teachers’ inabilities to control classrooms contribute to lost instructional time
and lower student achievement. One of the goals of this study was to identify and
examine relationships between classroom management strategies and high student
achievement scores.

8
Statement of the Problem
It is not known how and to what extent classroom management strategies and
teacher attitudes affect student achievement scores in diverse elementary settings. Kohn
(1999) purports that classroom management may be linked to student achievement
because managing styles are reflected in teacher behaviors and performances, are related
to teacher stress, and procure learning. As mentioned earlier, a survey conducted in 2000
by Parsad, Lewis and Farris revealed that only 45% of teachers they surveyed felt well
prepared in classroom management strategies, but a 1999 survey conducted by the NCES
revealed that 71% of surveyed teachers felt well prepared in classroom management
strategies. The 26% reduction in teacher efficacy can be interpreted to mean that many
teachers may need professional development in classroom management strategies to
minimize student disruptions, effectively handle discipline problems, and foster student
achievement.
Many of today’s teachers have not received appropriate training in classroom
management tactics or discipline strategies (Cameron & Sheppard, 2006). Cameron and
Sheppard purport that many teachers may not be aware of the effectiveness or
ineffectiveness of classroom management strategies they implement in their classrooms.
In fact, the researchers believe that some classroom management strategies may
encourage unwanted behaviors, especially from students who have no interest in learning
or do not want to be at school. Many times, these students can be disruptive and interrupt
critical instructional time. When these interruptions occur, many teachers use positive
reinforcements or rewards to temporarily cease unwanted behaviors (Cameron &
Sheppard, 2006; Kohn, 1999). To reinforce behavior, Kohn (1999) believes teachers

9
should use “social rewards” such as smiles or nods to emit personal value or self-
confidence and stop rewarding appropriate behavior with tangible, extrinsic rewards (p.
31). Also, he stresses that using punitive, demeaning responses never help students
become better people, and he strongly concurs with Skinner’s argument (as presented in
Kohn, 1999) that when most teachers punish students for misbehaving, they usually focus
on negative behaviors and rarely reflect on positive behaviors that can replace negative
behaviors.
Canter and Canter (2001) concur with Skinner’s argument (as presented in Kohn,
1999). Therefore, to help eliminate negative behavior focus, they incorporated
communicating about positive behaviors and future choices as tenets of assertive
discipline. Canter and Canter (2001) believe that assertive discipline is an effective
practice for teachers because it helps identify motivations behind inappropriate behaviors
that occur at that moment without focusing on past behaviors. However, Kohn (1999)
opposes assertive discipline and argues that it attributes all classroom problems to the
students, bases punishment on their “choices,” and places no demand on teachers to
change or review their discipline methods or actions (p. 165). Additionally, he states that
guidance towards appropriate behaviors, reasoning about misbehavior, and discipline
discussions rarely occur or they are often omitted. For these reasons, Kohn (1999)
believes that many discipline and punishment tactics provoke resentment and defiance,
which can ultimately lead to rebellious behavior, lost instructional time, and lower
student achievement.

10
Significance of the Study
This research study was conducted to better understand relationships between
classroom management strategies and student achievement scores, as well as,
relationships between teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their teaching abilities and
actual teaching practices in diverse elementary settings. The use of effective classroom
management strategies is believed to increase student achievement by focusing on safe,
social learning environments (Cameron & Sheppard, 2006). Acquiring new knowledge
about relationships between effective classroom managers, teachers’ attitudes and beliefs,
and student achievement not only contributes to the education field, but also allows
central-office and school-level administrators to examine individual teaching practices,
gather information for future professional development, build positive school cultures,
and promote safe learning environments that augment teacher improvement and student
achievement. Overall, this study proved that there is a slight positive relationship between
classroom management strategies and student achievement scores. Additionally, it proved
that there were not strong relationships between teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their
teaching abilities and their actual teaching practices. In the end, results from this study
provided administrators with data that could enhance school improvement efforts,
allowed teachers to analyze and evaluate their attitudes, beliefs, and practices, improve
pedagogies, and better manage diverse twenty-first century classrooms.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study was to (a) examine the relationship between classroom
management strategies and student achievement scores and (b) examine the relationship

11
between teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their teaching abilities and their actual
classroom practices or behaviors. The overall goals of this study were to (a) determine if
classroom teachers with high student achievement scores used certain classroom
management strategies researchers have found to increase student achievement and (b) to
determine if teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their teaching abilities match their actual
teaching practices in diverse elementary settings. This study investigated classroom
management strategies of teachers with high summative nationally-normed standardized
achievement test scores and teachers with low summative nationally-normed
standardized achievement test scores to determine if teachers with higher summative
scores were more effective classroom managers and had better attitudes than teachers
with lower summative scores. The findings of this study allowed school-level
administrators to formulate data driven decisions about professional development that can
potentially improve classroom management skills and teacher instruction that increases
student achievement, while simultaneously meeting national mandates and expanding
school improvement plans.
Rationale
The No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 requires schools to make
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) by consecutively meeting academic benchmark goals
until all students “reach 100% proficiency” in reading and math (Armstrong, 2006, p. 8).
The pressure to achieve 100% proficiency in reading and math requires many
administrators and teachers to analyze and evaluate school policies and procedures, test
data, teacher quality, effectiveness, and classroom practices (Armstrong, 2006).

12
Armstrong believes high-stakes testing data has become the proficiency measure for
identifying student achievement, effective teachers, and quality schools. He further states
that this data increases teacher accountability for academic learning and can help identify
strong and weak teachers. In fact, recent research has identified relationships between
effective classroom management and academic achievement (Beach & Reinhartz, 2000;
Wolfgang, 2001; Cameron & Sheppard, 2006; Miller & Pedro, 2006). Cameron and
Sheppard (2006) revealed in their recent research that many teachers are not aware of the
effects of their classroom management strategies on students or academic achievement,
nor are they equipped with various discipline strategies to use with difficult or diverse
students. Not all students respond to similar disciplinary tactics; therefore, Boynton and
Boynton (2005) believe some students may need more traditional discipline strategies
while other students may need more assertive discipline strategies.
This study was conducted because of increased local and national concern about
academic achievement gaps and a growing trepidation of teacher quality. This study
implemented a third grade cohort and a fifth grade cohort from two Georgia suburban
elementary schools that represented the district’s growing diverse populations that
include high percentages of disadvantaged students, English Language Learners (ELL),
Black, Asian, and Hispanic students. These demographics may challenge some teachers
who are not prepared to effectively teach or manage such diverse student populations.
However, this study revealed that a few teachers effectively managed diverse student
populations and incorporated appropriate classroom management strategies that
researchers believe raise achievement scores among diverse learners.

13
When this study was completed, administrators and teachers had improved
understandings of how classroom management strategies, teacher attitudes, beliefs, and
perceptions impacted student achievement scores in their diverse elementary settings.
Also, administrators better understood how potential professional development could
help teachers expand management skills with diverse students and possibly ensure
student achievement. In the end, professional development opportunities that can expand
teachers’ professional repertoires associated with classroom management and teaching
methodologies were recommended to increase teacher quality and student achievement
among diverse populations.
Research Questions
The following research questions have been formulated for this study:
1. What is the relationship, if any, between classroom management strategies
and higher student achievement scores in diverse elementary settings?
2. What is the relationship, if any, between teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about
their abilities and actual classroom practices in diverse elementary settings?
Hypotheses
The following hypotheses have been formulated for this study:
H1: There is a relationship between classroom management strategies and student
achievement scores.
H2: Effective classroom managers teach cognitive and social skills that reflect
students from all cultures on varying skill levels.

14
H3: Effective classroom managers implement similar classroom management
strategies that promote student achievement.
H4: Teachers are confident about their teaching practices with diverse students.
H5: Teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their teaching abilities in diverse
elementary settings match their actual teaching practices.
Study Variables
The first independent variable for this research study was classroom management
strategies. Teachers use numerous classroom management strategies to control their
classrooms. It was hypothesized that the type of classroom management strategies used
by effective teachers are similar and contributes to student achievement, while classroom
management strategies used by ineffective teachers are similar and do not contribute to
student achievement. Therefore, it was believed that classroom management strategies
would impact student achievement scores.
The second independent variable for this research study was third and fifth grade
teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their personal teaching abilities. It was hypothesized
that the most effective classroom teachers believe their teaching skills and abilities are
efficient, enjoy teaching and learning, and use methodologies and classroom management
strategies that promote social and cognitive learning while ineffective teachers use
punitive classroom management strategies and implement minimal teaching
methodologies. Therefore, it was believed that teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their
teaching abilities would match actual classroom practices and impact student
achievement scores.

15
The dependent variable for this research study was teachers’ 2007-2008 Iowa Test
of Basic Skills (ITBS) summative grade equivalent (GE) score. This score was needed to
rank teachers’ classes from highest achieving class to lowest achieving class and to
evaluate the class’s overall student achievement growth. This data provided quantifiable
numbers that later helped statistically identify correlations between effective classroom
management strategies and high student achievement scores.
Definition of Terms
The following terms are specifically defined for this study:
Academic Achievement. Students’ concepts, knowledge, and skills in reading,
math, science, and social studies content areas (Wilde, 2004).
Accountability. The NCLB provision for state public schools to describe how they
intend to close achievement gaps among disadvantaged students and minorities to ensure
they achieve “academic proficiency” (U.S. Department of Education, 2003, p. 1).
Behavior. Observable individual actions which serve as a mean for functioning in
particular environments (Kohn, 1999).
Benchmark. A standard used to evaluate student growth (Wilde, 2004).
Classroom Management. Teaching strategies used to cultivate teaching, learning,
and discipline in classrooms (Emmer & Stough, 2001).
Cognitive Domain. Information processing of the brain’s intellectual systems
to form concepts that aid in rationalizing ideas and understandings about how the world
works (Pratt, 2000).

16
Data. Facts, figures, statistics, records, and information that are known from
which conclusions can be generated (Marzano, 2007).
Discipline. Consequences intended to correct misbehavior (Kohn, 1999).
Effective Teachers. Teachers who are believed to possess skills and knowledge
needed to improve student academic achievement (Emmer & Stough, 2001).
Ineffective Teachers. Teachers who are not believed to possess skills and
knowledge needed to improve student academic achievement (Emmer & Stough, 2001).
Punishment. Imposing unpleasant consequences on students as a response to
disobedient behavior (Spring, 2005).
Social Domain. Students of different backgrounds and cultures interacting in
learning environments to form relationships and associations among people (Pratt, 2000).
Assumptions
The following assumptions are reflected in this study:
1. Classroom teachers use classroom management strategies.
2. Classroom teachers use teaching methodologies.
3. Classroom management strategies minimize behavior disruptions.
4. Classroom teachers are knowledgeable in subject content areas.
5. Classroom teachers are familiar with cognitive and social domains.
6. Classroom teachers treat all students morally and respectfully.
7. Teachers use different classroom management strategies for difficult students.
8. Teachers have set classroom discipline plans and students are aware of the
consequences for misbehavior.

17
9. Teachers have positive attitudes about teaching and students.
Limitations
The following limitations are inherent in this research study:
1. This study was limited to 10 third grade and nine fifth grade teachers in two
Georgia suburban public elementary schools.
2. Teachers may spend a significant portion of time implementing discipline
strategies. This study does not focus on the total amount of time teachers spend on
classroom discipline strategies.
3. This study was limited to classroom management practices implemented in one
hour during one regular school day.
4. As an undergraduate, many teachers may have taken classroom management
courses. This study does not reflect college course material pertaining to
classroom management.
5. This study focused on classroom management skills and did not reveal how
school-wide discipline programs effect classroom management or student
achievement.
6. Teachers may have graduate degrees or professional development credit in
classroom management, but this study does not focus on advanced teaching
degrees or professional development courses taken to improve classroom
management strategies or teaching methodologies.

18
7. Teachers may use numerous classroom management strategies with students.
However, this study only addressed the classroom management strategies used by
the participants during observations.
8. Due to extensive daily duties, teachers may not promptly return surveys.
9. With internal pressures and increased paperwork on today’s teachers,
participation may be minimal.
Nature of the Study
This research study incorporated a mixed-methodology approach to collect data
and determine relationships between classroom management strategies and student
achievement scores, as well as, relationships between teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about
their teaching abilities and their actual teaching practices in diverse elementary settings.
Teachers’ 2007-2008 Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) summative grade equivalent
scores were used to numerically rank 10 third grade and nine fifth grade teachers’ classes
from highest achieving class to lowest achieving class within their grade levels.
After teachers were ranked, they completed an Attitudes and Beliefs on
Classroom Control (ABCC) Inventory that included twenty-six items to score with a 4-
point Likert Scale developed by Martin, Yin, and Baldwin (1998). The inventory
measured aspects of teachers’ attitudes, beliefs, and perceptions about their classroom
management practices. Teachers marked responses between 1 and 4 depending on how
close each statement described their classroom practices, attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors.
The number 1 indicated the statement describes me not at all, the number 2 indicated the
statement describes me somewhat, the number 3 indicated the statement describes me

19
usually, and the number 4 indicated the statement describes me very well (Martin, Yin, &
Baldwin, 1998). More specifically, the instrument measured three separate dimensions of
classroom management. Fourteen of the instrument’s items reflected Instructional
Management, eight items reflected People Management, and only four items reflected
Behavior Management (Martin, Yin, & Baldwin, 1998). According to Martin, Yin, and
Baldwin the 14 inventory items pertaining to Instructional Management include
“monitoring seatwork, structuring daily routines, and allocating materials” (p. 7). The
eight inventory items relevant to People Management “pertains to what teachers believe
about students as persons and what teachers do to develop the teacher-student
relationship” (p. 7). Finally, the four items pertaining to Behavioral Management include
“setting rules, establishing a reward structure, and providing opportunities for student
input” (p. 7). Once teachers returned their inventories, they were observed teaching in
their classrooms to collect real-time data about classroom management strategies
implemented during instruction to maintain control over learning environments. This data
was analyzed and evaluated for positive correlations or relationships between teachers’
attitudes and beliefs about their teaching abilities and their actual teaching practices.
Essentially, the ABCC Inventory responses were analyzed for comparisons to classroom
observations for possible correlations, or relationships, and consistencies between the
researcher’s observations and teachers’ responses on their ABCC Inventories.
Overall, by taking a humanistic and social approach towards the effectiveness of
classroom management on student achievement, this study revealed the impact of some
classroom management strategies on student achievement scores and identified minimal
relationships between teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about their teaching abilities and

20
their actual teaching practices in diverse elementary settings. Receiving a quality
education in today’s schools may be the overall objective for many parents, teachers, and
administrators. But, poor teacher quality, nominal teaching methodologies, negative
attitudes, and a lack of classroom management skills may be hindering students from
reaching their highest potentials. In the end, the nature of this study was to identify
relationships between the variables. This study’s results identified relationships between
the variables that potentially affect student achievement scores and teacher efficacy in
diverse elementary settings.
Organization of the Remainder of the Study
The remainder of this study is divided as follows: Chapter 2 presents a literature
review of historical and modern classroom teaching effectiveness, how classroom
management strategies have evolved over the years, and describes what quality teaching
means and looks like. The chapter concludes with discussions about classroom
management theories grounded in traditional and assertive discipline practices, research
surrounding teachers’ attitudes and beliefs about educational practices, educating diverse
populations, teacher effectiveness and student achievement, and teaching perspectives.
Chapter 3 presents the research methodologies used during data collection and
instrumentation. Chapter 4 presents the study’s results and statistical data. Chapter 5
summarizes research findings, discusses relevant conclusions, highlights implications,
and recommends future educational studies.

21
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The literature review examines critical research on classroom management,
teacher attitudes and beliefs, student achievement, and educating diverse populations.
The review discusses the following sections: history of classroom management as it has
evolved, classroom management as defined by current literature, traditional and assertive
discipline practices that help facilitate learning and minimize disruptions, research
surrounding teacher attitudes and beliefs, educating diverse populations, teacher
effectiveness as it relates to student achievement, and teaching perspectives.
History of Classroom Management
In the early nineteenth-century, Americans were enthralled with the idea that
public institutions could create good people and in turn create good societies (Spring,
2005). This way of thinking made it possible for educators and leaders to envision a
common schooling system that would reform society. Ultimately, it was believed that
public institutions created moral, political citizens, and conducted social reformations. As
these institutions grew, charity schools developed. Charity schools’ impetus was to
correct problems arising out of parental failure and to develop moral character.
Furthermore, they were to protect students from exposure to criminal contacts and
immoral education practices (Spring, 2005). Charity schools were cheaper to maintain
and they used the Lancasterian Monitorial System, which allowed advanced students to
teach less advanced students (Spring, 2005). This concept allowed everyone to participate

22
in the education process. Additionally, school masters, or teachers, could educate vast
numbers of students at once in large communal areas, while order was maintained by
monitors. Classes competed against other classes, students were seated in communal
areas by level, and students who were ranked higher than other students were given
specific seating positions in their classes (Spring, 2005). Theoretically, Lancaster’s
system was sound for students, but quality teachers needed to manage this system were
scarce. At the time, many teachers working in the system were young, female, and not
trained to handle the number of students they were educating (Spring, 2005).
Furthermore, men were considered to be unable to teach, because they lacked “emotional
qualities” and relied too heavily on reason (Spring, 2005, p. 154). In the end, despite the
fact that the majority of teachers were female and few quality teachers existed, the vast
number of students participating in the system may have been what caused it to fail.
Discipline, obedience, and order used in the Lancasterian system were supposed
to sustain moral learning. Since the system prohibited corporal punishment, rewards
systems, lighter punishments, and student promotions were being utilized (Spring, 2005).
Students were rewarded or punished based on their class participation and they could
achieve award badges for their virtues. The Order of Merit Badge was the most
prominent to achieve because virtues of submission, ability, and order were considered
necessities for functioning in business realms (Spring, 2005). Plus, continuous display of
virtue and abilities could lead to students being appointed monitors. Monitors were not
school teachers or masters. They were advanced students with rank who would tutor
smaller groups of learners with approximately equal abilities. Monitors precisely assessed
posture and carriage to ensure students were attentive during lessons (Hogan, 1989).

23
Although the Lancasterian system prohibited corporal punishment, students who
“talked frequently” or remained “idle were punished by having a wooden log placed
around their necks” (Spring, 2005, p. 59). Habitual violators and extreme behavior
problem students were placed in sacks or baskets suspended from the school house roof
for all pupils to witness. This form of humiliation allowed school masters (principals) to
displace violence and ridicule upon teachers and other students. Humiliation and
inhumane punishments remained in schools throughout the nineteenth-century and may
exist in some schools today. However, the Lancasterian system began to fade midway
through the nineteenth-century with the emergence of bureaucratic management and
discipline techniques.
Bureaucratic Discipline
David Tyack (as cited in Spring, 2005) states that as American schools were
developing and organizing, employing women seemed to correlate with “the pace of
bureaucratization” because relationship values in nineteenth-century females were closely
related to bureaucratic organization attributes (p. 150). Like the Lancasterian System,
typical school organization during the late nineteenth-century emphasized school order.
Tyack quotes William T. Harris’s 1871 statement that “the first requisite of the school is
order” (p. 150). Harris continued to stress that all students must be taught how to conform
behaviors to a “general standard” so that students could be socialized for business and
industry organizations (p. 151). For example, the workforce was expected to attend work
regularly and exhibit punctuality; therefore students attending school were also expected
to attend school regularly and exhibit punctuality. Organizational values were extremely

24
important among nineteenth-century teachers and leaders. These values were so esteemed
that tardiness to class was considered a serious offense (Spring, 2005).
Through bureaucratic organizational beliefs, classroom management and
motivational methods were developed and designed to be elements of pedagogical
practices (Spring, 2005). One major organizational school development during the
nineteenth-century was the separation of students in to age-appropriate classes. This
included smaller, self-contained classrooms that required teachers to grade student
performances and simultaneously teach various subjects on various levels to every
student (Spring, 2005). This practice mirrors modern-day differentiated instruction
practices that cultivate student achievement through learning strengths. In essence, it was
the development of Bloom’s Taxonomy in the twentieth-century that gave teachers
opportunities to implement higher ability lessons for students on different levels.
Nineteenth-century educators did not have this luxury. Throughout the nineteenth and
early twentieth centuries, classroom teachers concurrently combined traditional teaching
pedagogies and bureaucratic discipline strategies. Symbols of extrinsic motivation to
conform (e.g., whips, paddles, switches) were hung on walls for easy viewing or placed
on desks as punishment reminders (Spring, 2005). The ironies of viewing these
punishment reminders were that (a) they were seen by good and bad students and (b) they
were used by teachers who sought to build trust and teach at distinctively different ability
levels. The fearful extrinsic motivators did not need to be seen by all students. The very
presence of the symbols may have intimidated good students and indirectly hindered
academic achievement.

25
As nineteenth-century disciplinary styles evolved, their use broadened and was
standardized well in to the twentieth-century in forms of report cards, promotion,
retention, and grading (Spring, 2005). Spring believes that each of these elements
affected classroom management and strained relationships in student/teacher dyads.
Inevitably, it would not be until the twentieth-century that using rewards and increased
concern about child development would become factors of improving student
achievement and strengthening communication in student/teacher dyads.
Twentieth-Century Classroom Management
In the nineteenth-century, many teachers linked behavior problems to parental
concerns and larger social concerns (Hogan, 1989). Also, Hogan purports that almost all
educational discussions pertaining to student discipline were aimed at broader social
issues. These issues were still visited early in the twentieth-century, but there began to be
a shift towards using classroom management strategies that minimized problem behaviors
linked to poor self-confidence and individual needs instead of larger social issues. Many
of these strategies were used till the mid 1900s, but research conducted since the 1950s
mostly focuses on minimizing problem behavior through the use of punitive punishments,
rewards, or other extrinsic means (Deci, Koestner, & Ryan, 2001; Kohn, 1999 &
Cameron & Pierce, 2002). Kohn (1999) believes that rewarding students for appropriate
behavior with extrinsic motivators, such as gold stars, extra free time, and smiley faces,
only subjects students to bribery that does not sustain moral learning. He believes that
teachers should find alternatives to extrinsic motivators because rewards drive behavior,
not the morality of doing what is right. Rummel and Feinberg (1988, as cited in Akin-

26
Little, Eckert, Lovett, & Little, 2004) concur with Kohn that extrinsic rewards damage
intrinsic motivation. However, to contrast Kohn and Rummel and Feinberg, Eisenberg,
Pierce, and Cameron (1999, as cited in Akin-Little et al, 2004) believe rewards that
satisfy personal needs and wants can increase students’ intrinsic motivation. As a result
of over 100 research studies, Cameron and Pierce (2002) discovered that rewards can be
used to maintain and enhance intrinsic motivation and should not be excluded from
classroom management practices.
Interestingly, researchers such as Deci, Koestner, and Ryan (2001) have
conducted sound research that solidifies Cameron and Pierce’s (1994, as cited in
Cameron & Pierce, 2002) findings and purport that social rewards do not effect or
decrease a student’s intrinsic motivation. However, Cameron and Pierce’s research
conducted in 1971 (as presented in Cameron & Pierce, 2002) failed to employ tasks that
were unattractive to elementary and college students. Their study used tasks that were
attractive to each respective age group, which may not place validity on the results. Their
study may have more validity if they had used unattractive tasks to each respective age
group to better understand extrinsic reward effects on intrinsic motivation.
Twentieth-Century Home/School Dyads
In 2004, Common Good released a Public Agenda stating that the majority of
teachers surveyed believed that discipline interruptions compromise student learning
(Common, 2004). Additionally, 80% of these teachers said their schools have students
who need to be removed and sent to alternative schools. Seventy-Eight percent reported
that students are quick to remind them of their rights and that their parents can sue, 55%

27
believed that districts who back down from assertive parents leads to prolonged discipline
problems, 76% of the teachers believed that special education students are disciplined too
lightly, 94% indicated that stronger parent accountability for their children’s actions
would help deter behavior problems, 82% believed lawsuits should be limited to serious
infractions, and 91% believed that in-depth concentration on classroom management
skills in teacher education programs would help teachers assemble effective classroom
management strategies.
In addition to teachers, parents were also administered the same survey, and 70%
indicated that they believe giving more authority to principals to handle discipline
problems could be an effective solution to discipline problems, 74% supported alternative
schooling for more chronic disciplinary problem students, 78% believed that lawsuits
should be limited to serious infractions, and 88% supported rewards for strictly enforcing
“little” rules to avoid the possibility of larger problems emerging (Common, 2004, p. 1).
This Public Agenda supports the idea that teachers and parents are open to palpable
solutions that allow administrators to have greater authority when disciplining students,
more power to minimize litigations in attempts to solve discipline problems, and the
ability to create learning communities that foster student achievement.
Since the nineteenth-century, home/school dyads have drastically changed.
Community growth, higher transient percentages, reduced family cohesion, an increased
number of working single mothers, increased divorce rates, television violence, and
aggression associated with video games all contribute to the seriousness and frequency of
discipline problems that are plaguing today’s schools (Kohn, 1999; Boynton & Boynton,
2005; Cameron & Sheppard, 2006). These changes challenge schools to control these

28
influences with extensively less support from families, communities, and churches than
in past decades. Although these changes developed late in the twentieth-century, there are
several recurring discipline problems that continue to plague teachers, such as teasing,
talking without permission, getting out of seats without permission, failing to complete
assignments, refusing to do work, bullying, and disrespecting teachers (Boynton &
Boynton, 2005). Boynton and Boynton believe that disrespect has become inherent in
American student culture. Students grasp it and bring it to school with them. To add to
disrespect’s raging overture, there are newer societal discipline problems emerging that
are frustrating teachers and administrators. These newer problems include, but are not
limited to, physical and verbal aggression towards teachers, drugs, possession of guns or
knives, gang violence, vandalism, and truancy (Elam, Rose, & Lowell, 1996; Boynton &
Boynton, 2005). These newer complex problems and behaviors require teachers to adopt
comprehensive discipline models and more stringent classroom management strategies.
Boynton and Boynton (2005) state that knowledge of the most effective discipline
measures will not always prevent students from disrupting lessons or bullying teachers
and students, but that teachers should be aware of strategies that are productive and
counter-productive with defiant students. Kohn (1999) adds that teachers who wait for
students to become mature enough to handle discipline responsibilities often aid in the
creation of vicious cycles of repetitive disruptive behaviors. He strongly argues that
teachers and students should be participating and practicing in decision-making processes
together that enables students to clearly understand classroom rules, better manage
current behaviors, and develop respect for classroom responsibilities.

29
What is Classroom Management?
Over the years, classroom management has acquired many definitions. Today,
these definitions can be synthesized to mean a comprehensive term used to describe the
encapsulation of actions and strategies that teachers implement to involve students in
learning, how efficiently they use instructional time, provide optimal learning
experiences, maintain safe and orderly environments, control student behavior, and form
cohesive learning relationships (Emmer, Evertson & Worsham, 2003; Malm & Lofgren,
2006; Miller & Pedro, 2006; Kohn, 1999). Effectively managing students may be a
teaching necessity. In fact, Wang, Haertel, and Walberg (1993/1994, as cited in Boynton
& Boynton, 2005) reviewed “11,000 pieces of research that spanned 50 years” and found
that the number one influence on student learning was classroom management (p. 3).
Moreover, Emmer and Stough (2001) believe that classroom management represents a
paramount aspect of teachers’ pedagogical knowledge. Research conducted by Jackson
(1968, as cited in Emmer & Stough, 2001) revealed that increased attention on complex
classroom settings and pedagogical knowledge combined with teaching goals,
procedures, and strategies contributed to classroom management effectiveness. In his
research, Jackson purports that management is a tenet of various classroom dynamics
including (a) multidimensional events and people, (b) numerous tasks occurring
simultaneously, (c) immediate, fast-paced events that limit reflections, (d) unpredictable
outcomes and events, (e) awareness of behaviors witnessed by all students, and (f) past
and future actions.
Adding to Jackson’s research findings, Jones (1996, as cited in Emmer & Stough,
2001) believes five basic views of comprehensive classroom management exist. He

30
believes that in order to maintain learning environments and to control behaviors teachers
must (a) understand current research in classroom management, (b) create positive
relationships among and between students, (c) be familiar with instructional methods that
facilitate learning for students on various levels, (d) have knowledge about organizational
management to maintain on-task behavior, and (e) be familiar with counseling methods
that assist students with chronic behavior problems. Both Jones’s (1996) and Jackson’s
(1968, as cited in Emmer & Stough, 2001) classroom management components are
sensible and may be connected to student learning and increased student achievement.
Kounin (1970, as cited in Emmer & Stough, 2001) concurs with Jackson and Jones and
believes that teacher content knowledge, well-planned lessons, teacher behaviors, and
classroom settings preclude effective management. However, not all teachers have the
knowledge and skills they need to effectively manage classrooms. Bosch (1999) states:
Contrary to popular belief, classroom management is not a gift bestowed upon
some teachers. While it is true that some teachers adapt to classroom
management techniques, making it look to their colleagues like they possess some
innate talent, classroom management is a skill, a skill that can be taught like any
other, and most importantly, a skill that like any other must be practiced to
achieve proficiency (p. 3).
Sergiovanni (2001) believes that Jones, Jackson, and Kounin correctly identify
teachers’ roles in controlling student behavior, but he further narrows and identifies
teachers’ roles as Manager, Executive, Mediator, and Leader. The Manager teacher
executes highly structured learning environments that aim to manage student behaviors.
The Executive role requires teachers to be aware of current research practices and make

31
crucial decisions about instruction, assignments, and subject matter. The Mediator role
requires teachers to perform interactive teaching that allows students to link prior
knowledge to new constructs, and the Leader role requires teachers to enthusiastically
model the importance of the subject matter and focus on key concepts that explain why
and how content is being studied. Teachers who adopt these four roles are well
structured, are aware of current research practices that promote learning, help students
make sense of learning, and personally care about and appreciate learning (Sergiovanni,
2001). Sergiovanni also believes these four roles help define teacher effectiveness and
good management in conjunction with appropriate discipline strategies.
Traditional Discipline Strategies
The word discipline has several definitions and can be interpreted differently. In
many of today’s classrooms, discipline may be defined by the way classrooms are
managed. Cotton (2001) believes that classroom management is inherent in effective
instruction and discipline, which she believes has become synonymous with punishment.
However, being instructionally effective might be difficult for many teachers because
Cotton’s research revealed that one-half of instructional time is dedicated to activities not
associated with instruction. Additionally, her research revealed that discipline consumes a
majority of that time and that students affected by divorce, poverty, family depression,
hunger, and mental illnesses are often instigators of disruptive behavior.
Throughout history, teachers have used various techniques to minimize disruptive
behavior. During the early nineteenth and twentieth centuries, classroom discipline could
be measured by noise level (Pioneer, n.d.). Lower noise levels or the absence of noise

32
usually implied that learning and effective discipline strategies were being implemented
because students were working and not misbehaving. Furthermore, morning routines
were highly structured (Spring, 2005). As school days began, students entered
classrooms, were marched to their seats, received and completed assignments, followed
strict rules and orders, maintained certain postures, gave attention on command, and
followed stringent desk packing drills (Spring, 2005). Silence was enforced, order was
maintained, and students were granted permission to speak when acknowledged for
raising their hands. Additionally, correct English was expected to be spoken and titles of
respect such as Mr. and Mrs. were used to address authority figures. If these expectations
were defied, punishments were inevitable.
During the 1800s and early 1900s traditional punishments emerged and were
assigned in diverse forms (Pioneer, n.d.). Severe traditional punishments included
corporal punishment, detention, spanking, suspension, and expulsion (Pioneer, n.d.). Less
severe punishments included raps on the hands or knuckles with rulers, standing in
corners, standing with arms stretched out holding books palm-side up until exhaustion,
and isolation in cloakrooms (Pioneer, n.d.). In today’s schools, these discipline strategies
would probably be considered cruel or inhumane and could justify litigation.
As the twentieth-century progressed, more attention was centered on child
development (Pioneer, n.d.). The increased attention on child development generated
sympathetic views for children and their surroundings. As a result, authoritarian
strategies and corporal punishments were softened and interest around self-discipline
increased (Pioneer, n.d.). As a result of increased attention on child development, the mid
to late 1900s materialized traditional discipline practices that included writing names on

33
chalkboards, time-out, writing sentences, copying discipline policies, not participating in
extra-curricular classes, calling or conferencing with parents, and timed placement in
other classrooms (Pioneer, n.d.). Many of these strategies have been practiced for decades
and are still used today in numerous American classrooms (Kohn, 1999). However, Kohn
(1999) believes that not all traditional punishments included writing, hitting, standing, or
displacement. In fact, he believes the incorporation of rewards late in the twentieth-
century began paradigm shifts that steered twenty-first century classroom management
trends in new directions. Kohn (1999) believes that teachers using rewards as forms of
bribery to minimize disruptions fail to recognize their similarities to coercive traditional
discipline techniques. Furthermore, he posits that good behavior festers intrinsically;
thus, students receiving rewards for appropriate actions or behaviors will only exhibit
good behaviors when rewards are offered. In essence, good behaviors disappear when
rewards disappear. Ultimately, Kohn (1999) believes that in many of today’s classrooms
students are controlled by extrinsic rewards rather than driven by appropriate intrinsic
behaviors.
Overall, discipline strategies used to embarrass students or inflict pain to control
disruptive behaviors have been shown in research to increase disruptive behaviors and
student aggression (Kohn, 1999). Using rewards may not elicit intrinsic or moral student
behaviors, but they may be good alternatives to humiliating traditional discipline
practices used in earlier centuries. In the end, Kohn (1999) refutes using rewards because
he believes that students may purposefully act inappropriately to receive rewards. He
concludes that students are manipulating teachers to conquer a need, which could be
power, attention, or reverse manipulation.

34
Assertive Discipline
Assertive discipline can be defined as a take-charge approach to classroom
discipline (Canter & Canter, 2001). The term assertive discipline was coined by Lee and
Marlene Canter as a result of their participation in assertion training techniques. The
premise of assertion training is communication, so they believed using assertive
discipline techniques in classrooms would allow teachers and students to openly and
clearly communicate their needs and wants without violating the rights of other students
(Canter & Canter, 2001). Although assertion training was mostly used in business
sectors, it has been used outside of business sectors by mothers, counselors, and
psychologists to help eliminate inappropriate behaviors in small children (Canter &
Canter, 2001). The success of assertion training techniques outside of business sectors led
Canter and Canter to believe its concepts could be applied in educational realms to
achieve similar results.
In educational realms, Canter and Canter (2001) believe assertive discipline’s
premise is to focus mainly on communicating about current behaviors and the
motivations or influences behind the behaviors. This directly contrasts traditional
discipline strategies because they only addressed and punished the acts without further
investigating the reasons behind the acts. Both Canter and Canter (2001) and Glasser
(1998) agree that focusing on current behaviors and the motivations behind the behaviors
are crucial to understanding and changing negative behavior into positive behavior while
holding students accountable for their actions. Furthermore, the researchers support
Kohn’s (1999) beliefs that (a) students can control their behaviors and (b) they
consciously choose to misbehave or follow rules in attempts to attain personal wants and

35
needs. On the other hand, Wolfgang (2001) believes that assertive discipline is only
another method of enforcing “teacher-established rules,” asserting power, and creating
punishments or rewards to enforce authority (p. 100). Interestingly, he supports Canter
and Canter’s (2001) communication concept and Glasser’s behavior theories. Plus, he
believes that high expectations and clear directions are assertive discipline’s strengths.
However, he stresses that teachers promoting democratic classroom methods will find
themselves frustrated with assertive discipline’s techniques because they eliminate
student participation in decision making processes and mainly focus on the teacher’s
wants.
As noted earlier, assertive discipline involves communication and it is believed to
be an important element in defining behaviors portrayed for purposes of achieving wants
and expressing feelings. To support this element, Glasser’s (1998) theory, grounded in
reality therapy, purports that behaviors stem from survival and psychological needs. His
theory complements assertive discipline because its procedures include therapists,
counselors, parents, teachers, and administrators working in tandem to solve or eliminate
disruptive behaviors. Furthermore, Glasser (1998) believes that providing choices and not
excusing past inappropriate behaviors allows appropriate behaviors to surface. Glasser’s
belief mirrors Canter and Canter’s (2001) beliefs about assertive discipline strategies
because both theories promote effective learning environments that provide students with
choices that propel appropriate behaviors through self-reflected social communication
with teachers. Siding with Glasser (1998), Dreikurs (as cited in Wolfgang, 2001) purports
that humans are motivated by feelings, the need to belong, and acceptance from others.
All behavior, he adds, is purposeful and aims to achieve social recognition. In other

36
words, the “inner goal results in the outward behavior” (p. 115). Dreikurs believes there
is always an established cause for behavior and that it is the teacher’s responsibility to
actively teach students how to get along with others in order to promote socialization and
learning. Ultimately, assertive discipline requires teachers to teach and focus on
appropriate behaviors. Canter and Canter (2001) believe when teachers focus on and
communicate positive behaviors they elicit positive reactions from students. They believe
that students will eventually learn that positive teacher comments meet their needs or
wants and are more likely to continue exhibiting good behaviors as a direct result of the
positive comments.
Focusing on appropriate student behavior is a good idea, but what about habitual
violators or violent students? Many of today’s classroom teachers may not be properly
trained to control habitually disruptive or violent students. Canter and Canter (2001)
believe that by using assertive discipline strategies teachers can learn to manage repeat
offenders by promising, not threatening, punishment and consistently implementing
consequences for unwanted behaviors. Also, they believe offering choices and being
persistent in discipline strategies will help minimize inappropriate behaviors. However,
Canter and Canter (2001) caution teachers to be mindful of using assertive discipline
strategies with students because they may not be effective with all students. More
important than knowing the students, they believe, is knowing that consequences should
be meaningful, age-appropriate, and suitable to offenses.
Contrasting Canter and Canter (2001), Emmer and Stough (2001) refute assertive
discipline practices because they feel students’ choices are limited in “classroom
government” decisions (p. 104). Additionally, Kohn (1999) believes assertive discipline

37
is an ineffective coercive discipline model that stifles teacher wit and student
communication. Plus, he believes assertive discipline views students as the root of
behavior problems and does not require authority figures to evaluate their methods. He
argues that assertive discipline does not require teachers to change their behaviors since
its premise is to blame students for classroom problems. Also, Kohn (1999) strongly
opposes assertive discipline methods because he feels they encourage teachers “to
remove anyone who misbehaves” to regain control and for “its overriding goal to get
students to do whatever they are told without question” (p. 57). To support Kohn, Malm
and Lofgren (2006) believe that teachers who practice assertive discipline strategies will
fail to meet the needs of the whole child and continue to inadvertently use traditional
discipline strategies that may delay student achievement.
One final component of assertive discipline is teacher communication with
parents (Canter & Canter, 2001). Canter and Canter believe that many teachers fail to ask
for parental support and often make five critical errors when speaking with parents
regarding students’ behavior. First, many teachers apologize for bothering guardians
when they call to discuss problems, (b) they minimize the severity of the behavior, (c)
they belittle themselves, (d) they do not clearly indicate what they need parents to do, and
(e) they reduce the behavior’s consequences. Canter and Canter (2001) believe teachers
make these mistakes because they fear parents will be offended by their comments and
that administrators will not support their discipline strategies. Overall, the researchers
believe that assertive discipline will only be effective if teachers are honest with parents
and ask for assistance in resolving inappropriate behaviors.

38
All classrooms have rules. Class rules are formulated with the hopes of
maintaining order. Even when the best management strategies are implemented they may
not be effective with all students; therefore, consistent and persistent teaching practices
are crucial elements in classroom discipline (Boynton & Boynton, 2005). Boynton and
Boynton believe teacher relationships with and among students can determine and define
classroom environments. Furthermore, they believe that most teachers employ some type
of management strategies that help maintain control. However, too many teachers still
use traditional discipline strategies and rewards to manipulate actions (Kohn, 1999).
Some teachers may use discipline strategies that communicates feelings and analyzes
motivations driving misbehavior, but these strategies may not work with students in
diverse settings. Many of today’s classrooms are composed of culturally diverse students
with various needs and teachers need to be familiar with multiple discipline strategies
that maintain order and meets students’ needs in these settings (Boynton & Boynton,
2005).
No matter what management strategies teachers are using in their classrooms,
they may only be effective if they are implemented consistently (Boynton & Boynton,
2005). Ultimately, traditional and assertive discipline strategies aim to prevent discipline
problems and offers methods for dealing with problem students. Their various elements
may be conducive to minimizing disruptive behavior, but may not eliminate all classroom
discipline problems. Knowing which strategies to implement with students and which
ones are counterproductive with students can save valuable classroom time. Generally,
effective teachers know their students and which strategies work best with them. They
also know that students will learn what is taught and not announced (Boynton &

39
Boynton, 2005). Like curriculum, appropriate behavior must be taught to students from
all ethnic groups, cultures, and diverse populations. Similarly, possessing good attitudes
about curriculum and having skills to teach diverse students may be pertinent to
achieving goals and increasing student achievement scores.
Teacher Attitudes and Beliefs About Teaching
According to Ross and Bruce (2007) individual teacher efficacy can predict a
myriad of “enabling teacher beliefs, functional teacher behaviors, and valued student
outcomes” (p. 50). Ross and Bruce define teacher efficacy as a teacher’s expectation and
belief that she can foster student learning. More specifically, they state, teachers believe
they have the capability to organize and implement methodologies needed to sustain
student growth and increase student achievement scores. Ross and Bruce (2007) concur
with Bandura (1997, as presented in Ross & Bruce) that teachers with high levels of self-
efficacy have higher student expectations, set higher goals for their students, aggressively
pursue those goals, have positive attitudes, higher student achievement scores, and endure
obstacles that teachers with lower self-efficacy refute. Additionally, Ross and Bruce
(2007) and Leroy, Bressoux, Sarrazin, and Trouilland (2007) purport that teachers with
high self-efficacy beliefs promote classroom management tactics that inspire student
autonomy. Leroy et al. (2007) add that when teachers institute and support autonomous
learning environments that students exhibit higher levels of “self-determination and are
intrinsically motivated” (p. 529). Moreover, they believe that higher test scores are
eminent among these teachers’ students because they remain focused, are self-directed,
and highly motivated.

40
To further promote their findings on teachers with high levels of self-efficacy,
Ross and Bruce (2007) revealed in their recent elementary school research that teachers
with high self-efficacy beliefs focused closely on the needs of students with lower
abilities, whereas teachers with low self-efficacy beliefs focused their attention on
students with higher abilities. Expectedly, teachers with higher efficacy beliefs had
positive attitudes with low-achieving students, built relationships with them, and had
higher academic expectations for them than teachers who had lower self-efficacy beliefs.
Efficacy and Teacher Behavior
Ross and Bruce (2007) purport that teacher efficacy can effect teacher behavior
and impact student perceptions about their academic abilities. They believe that if student
efficacy is enhanced, then they will become increasingly more enthusiastic and
intrinsically motivated about learning and would be more likely to approach teachers for
additional help. But surprisingly, Midgley, Feldlaufer, and Eccles (1989, as presented in
Ross & Bruce, 2007) found in their research that teaching behaviors have delayed
impacts on achievement. They found that teacher behaviors were directly “correlated
with achievement in the spring, but not in the fall” (Ross & Bruce, 2007, p. 51). The
research conducted for this study included data collected from fall achievement tests
instead of spring achievement tests.
Overall, teacher efficacy and behavior can influence student achievement (Ross &
Bruce, 2007). Ross and Bruce believe teachers with high self-efficacy beliefs view
declining student achievement scores as a challenge and inspiration to exude greater
effort to increase those scores instead of accepting failure as a paradigm beyond their
control. Unfortunately, teacher efficacy, beliefs, and behaviors can materialize in early

41
teaching experiences and remain stagnant through out careers to become either
autonomous or controlling (Ross & Bruce, 2007).
Autonomy vs. Controlling Teaching Behaviors
Reeve and Jang (2006) have shown that teaching behaviors can be presented in
two types of climates: autonomous or controlled. In educational settings, “autonomy
support revolves around finding ways to nurture, support, and increase students’ inner
endorsement of their classroom activity” (p. 210). Teachers promoting autonomous
learning environments seek to identify resources that meet students’ needs and sustain
intrinsic motivation. These environments allow teachers to pay more attention to what
students are saying, designate more time for students to problem solve, provide effective
and timely feedback about tasks, and can better identify with students’ educational or
personal difficulties.
Contrasting autonomous climates are controlled classroom climates in which
undue teacher pressures are mistakenly assigned to students to elicit specific actions
(Deci & Ryan, 1987, as presented in Leroy et al., 2007). Teachers who exhibit controlling
climate behaviors pay little or no attention to students’ motivational needs and try to
manage student behaviors with incentives, rewards, punitive statements, or one-sided
communication tactics (Reeve & Jang, 2006; Kohn, 1999). In this climate, teachers do
most of the talking and students have minimal time to complete tasks. Unsurprisingly,
teachers exhibiting controlling behaviors are more critical of student abilities and are
more likely to verbally express student disapproval (Reeve & Jang, 2006).
Leroy, Bressoux, Sarrazin, and Trouilland (2007) found in their research of 336
fifth grade teachers from 269 schools that teachers’ personal attitudes and beliefs about

42
themselves played a significant role in teaching behaviors. They also found that factors
contributing to teacher behaviors extended to social contexts beyond classrooms. For
example, educational settings that enhanced teacher efficacy and reduced teacher stress
helped promote autonomous class climates. In contrast, educational settings that
weakened teacher efficacy and increasingly pressured teachers to achieve results caused
teachers to promote controlling class environments (Leroy et al., 2007). The researchers
believe that high pressure educational settings are not conducive to sustaining teachers’
intrinsic motivation, positive attitudes, or promoting student achievement.
Teacher Beliefs and Behaviors in Culturally Diverse Settings
Hollins and Guzman (2005, as presented in Mahon, 2006) reviewed research
conducted for the American Educational Research Association and found that many
teachers had negative attitudes or beliefs about various cultures, had little experience
teaching diverse students, and were not interested in teaching in urban sectors. Duff and
Uchida (1997) have established links between teachers’ thoughts, attitudes, beliefs, and
behaviors in diverse classrooms. In their research, they examined teaching behaviors and
attitudes in language teachers and found incongruence. This means that teachers
proclaimed to have certain understandings or beliefs about diverse cultures, but these
beliefs were in constant negotiation or blatantly ignored. One of their research
participants believed he was a feminist with feminist attitudes and behaviors, but his
actions towards female students in his class differed significantly from his belief.
Information exists about teacher attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors towards cultural
diversity, but there is nominal information available that explains “how this
understanding is constructed” (Mahon, 2006). Hollins and Guzman (2005, as presented in

43
Mahon, 2006) have expressed a need for “longitudinal outcome-focused research” that
seeks to understand how teachers transfer their cultural diversity educations to actual
classroom behaviors and practices.
Teaching is a profession that is becoming increasingly more complex. Many of
today’s teachers cling to personal beliefs about diverse cultures while they possess
attitudes and beliefs that all students have the same needs or desires. Students are more
than hearts and minds; therefore, teachers must understand and recognize the need for
various pedagogies among diverse populations in their quests to sustain student
achievement.
Educating Diverse Populations
American public schools display the “dramatic demographic shift” better than any
other entity (Brown, 2007, p. 57). Changes in cultural, racial, and linguistic demographics
have diversified American schools more today than ever before. However, Brown (2007)
argues that it is not only these demographic changes affecting student achievement, but
that it also includes the way teachers have responded to these changes that is challenging
today’s classroom dynamics and effecting academic achievement. Historically, American
education has not been culturally welcoming to diverse populations, but NCLB
provisions challenge teachers to find creative ways to effectively teach students from
diverse backgrounds and promote safe learning environments for all students (Wilde,
2004). Gay (2002) believes that academic achievement in diverse settings would increase
if teachers made an effort to implement classroom instruction that is relative to students’
home cultures. However, this is where the problem may begin. Many teachers in today’s

44
classrooms are not trained to teach or discipline culturally diverse students. In fact, many
of today’s teacher “pre-service programs” fail to include culturally diverse teaching
strategies, effective classroom management training for diverse students, and real
learning environments that equate to the “reality of full time teaching” that promotes
student achievement for all students (McCormack, Gore, & Thomas, 2006, p. 97).
How, then, can administrators produce culturally conscious teachers with skills
that increase student achievement scores in culturally diverse settings? School
administrators are responsible for complex instructional improvement, following national
mandates, and hiring highly qualified teachers, but they are also responsible for teacher
preparation that improves student achievement, acknowledges diversity, and helps
prepare students “to find connections among themselves and the subject matter” (Brown,
2007, p. 60). This can be done by implementing professional development (PD) that
provides a curriculum instructional framework with guidance through activities that
develop culturally diverse knowledge, applies diverse curricula, builds appreciation for
diverse cultures, and explains cultural codes used to process thinking and learning
(Brown, 2007).
Additional support for PD derives from Ross and Bruce’s (2007) research that
established positive PD effects on teacher attitudes. Their study revealed that PD
participants in treatment groups had higher self-efficacy and frequently incorporated
curriculum materials in their classrooms that were distributed during PD courses. High
self-efficacy remained constant as long as PD courses were revisited, administrators
provided follow-up meetings, and instilled collaboration models. Finally, the researchers
found that when PD programs provided “participant interaction” and increased

45
opportunities for “vicarious experiences” (i.e., observing successful teachers) teachers
were more apt to create settings that warranted positive attitudes and to implement new
teaching techniques that augmented student achievement.
In general, PD refers to continuous learning opportunities made available to
teachers through schools or districts (Brown, 2007). Traditionally, PD has been made
available to teachers through school workshops as in-services (Professional, 2007). The
in-service model usually includes hiring outside consultants or curriculum experts to
provide one-time training courses on a plethora of subject topics or one specific content
area. According to Professional (2007), one-shot workshops are not the most effective
way to implement teacher training in to professional development. Plus, these workshops
offer very little coherence and continuity to teacher growth and development. In fact, a
survey conducted in 2000 by the National Center for Education Statistics revealed that
teachers spent one day or less in PD training for content areas (Professional, 2007).
Additionally, the survey revealed that teachers felt uninspired, belittled, and embarrassed
by many PD topics their administrators offered for teacher or school improvement.
Twenty-first century PD is moving away from one-shot workshops and towards
more active and coherent school environments (Professional, 2007; Cotton, 2003). PD
proponents believe that active environments provide specific connections to school
improvement’s bigger picture. Cotton (2003) and Connors (2000) purport that the most
successful schools offer their staffs quality professional development training that
exposes teachers to relevant and practical site-based needs such as data-based instruction,
collaborative learning, reflection, research and inquiry, subject matter exploration,
engagement in practical instructional and assessment tasks, constructive feedback, and

46
follow-up activities. Also, Brown (2007) states that many schools promote effective
teaching through diversity PD training. In American public schools, it is important for
administrators and teachers to believe that students from “culturally and linguistically
diverse” (CLD) backgrounds can learn (Brown, 2007, p. 57). Brown also believes
teachers should develop instructional strategies that prevent failure and engages all
students in the learning process. Additionally, Brown (2007) purports that teachers who
graduated from traditional teacher education programs would benefit the most from
professional diversity training since most university programs fail to incorporate diversity
courses. On the whole, diversity training could improve school culture. Succinctly, to
increase personal growth and further promote cultural awareness, Brown (2007) believes
teachers should be involved in developing potential PD that meets their needs,
incorporates school improvement objectives that maximize all students’ potential,
increases student achievement scores, and closes achievement gaps.
One final facet of PD effects on teacher attitudes was noted by Usher and Pajares
(2005, as noted in Ross & Bruce, 2007). They found more evidence through interviewing
children that efficacy attitudes and beliefs vary among certain subgroups and that
“invitations” are important sources of information (p. 59). “Invitations” are messages that
teachers send to themselves and others that indicate how comfortable they feel about their
teaching abilities and personal values. The researchers found that these “invitations” and
“disinvitations” (i.e., negative messages about their teaching abilities) may be useful
when exploring how PD influences classroom teaching behaviors (p. 59). Finally, they
believe more research needs to be conducted to identify links between PD, teacher
attitudes and beliefs, and self-efficacy.

47
Teacher Effectiveness and Student Achievement
Recent research conducted on teacher effectiveness revealed that relationships
exist between teaching behaviors, attitudes, and academic achievement (Ross & Bruce,
2007; Darling-Hammond, 2003; Cotton, 2001; Emmer & Stough, 2001; Boynton &
Boynton, 2005). To support these findings, research conducted by McCormack, Gore,
and Thomas (2006) and Emmer and Stough (2001) revealed that classroom management
and quality teaching were underlying foundations of student achievement. But, what
constitutes quality teaching? Previous research suggests that instructional methods and
classroom management strategies are important qualities of teacher effectiveness and are
two of the main factors that make a difference in quality classroom teaching
(McCormack, Gore, & Thomas, 2006). Additionally, Emmer and Stough (2001) purport
that quality teachers possess three major qualities: positive expectations for students,
superior classroom management skills, and well-prepared lessons. As a result of their
research, Emmer and Stough believe that effective teachers tandemly manage their
classrooms in ways that foster learning and promotes teacher mobility so they may
accomplish instructional goals with all students through “group management” (p. 104).
To further support instructional goals, Marzano, Marzano, and Pickering (2003)
and DiPerna (2006) believe that classroom teachers tremendously effect student
achievement through social skills and study skills closely connected to academics.
However, teaching dynamics that produce top results are not simple. Marzano et al.
(2003) believe that quality teachers perform numerous functions in their classrooms that
improve student achievement scores. These functions include (a) wisely choosing the
most effective pedagogies for all students, (b) designing lessons that foster student

48
learning and social interaction, and (c) effectively using classroom management
strategies. They further state that a “strong case” for quality instruction and good
curriculum designs underlie the foundation of successful classroom management (p. 3).
To further analyze classroom management strategies and curriculum designs, DiPerna
(2006) adds that students’ social skills can be significant predictors of academic
competence and possibly foretell performance on nationally-normed standardized tests.
Good and Grouws (1977, as cited in Emmer and Stough, 2001) concluded in their
research that teachers who incorporated better classroom management techniques spent
less time transitioning between subjects, were cognizant of potential disruptions, and had
higher achievement scores. Additionally, Emmer and Stough (2001), Boynton and
Boynton (2005), and Marzano (2007) add that effective teachers establish classroom rules
at the beginning of the school year, implement them consistently, take time to explain
reasons for the rules, and ensure students understand them. Moreover, these researchers
concur that quality teachers are fair in their judgments when enforcing rules, provide
immediate feedback, and pace classroom activities to enrich learning. Finally, Pollock
(2007) adds three dynamics she believes are prevalent among quality teachers:
congruency between management styles and instructional goals, use of various activities
to reach benchmark goals, and using differentiated instruction to match students’ learning
strengths. She believes effective teachers intersect these dynamics and incorporate
methodologies that complement ability levels.
Ideas for Improving Student Achievement
In 1902, the New York Sun editors wrote that when they attended school, students
completed minimal work (Rothstein, 1998). Spelling, writing, and mathematics were

49
required subjects, not electives. Today, educational changes have current New York Sun
editors claiming that students must be kept entertained and can learn what they please
(Rothstein, 1998). Was it meant for educational institutions to be entertaining and allow
personal course selections? Maybe, but in the early 1900s The Committee of Ten
questioned the purpose of education in the United States. By 1950, after much
contemplation, the general consensus about education’s purpose was “to create cultural
literacy and patriotism” and to “catapult the U.S. economy into its place as a world leader
in trade” (Pollock, 2007, p. 10). With the vast amount of courses being offered in many
American high schools to today’s students and the inception of the internet, it could be
argued that entertaining students and allowing personal course selections meets these two
objectives.
After World War II, the baby boom significantly contributed to the growth in
school-age students, which created new concerns about existing curriculum and learning
targets. New curriculum, strategies, and ideas soon emerged to improve learning, student
achievement, and teacher accountability. One of the first ideas to emerge was Bloom’s
Taxonomy, which was formulated by 34 committee members from various colleges and
universities into six progressive learning levels: Knowledge, Comprehension,
Application, Analysis, Synthesis, and Evaluation (Pollock, 2007). As the levels
progressed from Knowledge to Evaluation, students had to think more critically. The
committee designed a progressive level classification system that allowed teachers to
logically teach concepts on each level that built on previous levels, as well as, from
underlying knowledge required for higher thinking levels. Their intention was not to
classify teaching methods or to regulate materials, but to classify intended student

50
behaviors, such as the way they think, act, or feel about instructional participation
(Pollock, 2007). Unintentionally, the use of Bloom’s Taxonomy may have led curriculum
writers to question its quality and to ask for teacher input in curriculum development.
After the 1950s, the second postulated idea was curriculum development (Pollock,
2007). Its goal was for teachers to learn how to write curriculum, but Pollock states that
many teachers were unsure of how to write or create quality curriculum for all students.
As a result, the majority of teachers relied on textbooks and teacher’s editions as
curriculum guides (Pollock, 2007). During this time, many teachers believed that using
textbooks as guides would help students achieve curriculum targets and advance through
Bloom’s Taxonomy levels, but this was not the case (Pollock, 2007). Once lessons were
taught, tests were given to assess knowledge, and grades indicated how well they retained
or knew basic information. There was rarely, if ever, a product or performance measure
for critical thinking, application, or higher level learning (Pollock, 2007). Furthermore,
curriculum development processes failed to include opportunities for teachers to design
lessons that promoted critical or creative thinking (Pollock, 2007). Teaching higher order
thinking skills, it seemed, would require extra effort and additional lessons.
During the 1990s, curriculum development became overshadowed by the third
new idea: content-specific or performance standards which state what students should
know and be able to do (Armstrong, 2006). In efforts to strengthen cognitive domains and
parallel Bloom’s Taxonomy to improve learning, hundreds of standards were written to
improve student achievement in math, reading, language arts, science, social studies, fine
arts, and technology (Pollock, 2007). However, Armstrong (2006) believes that increased
attention on standards and academic skills decreased attention on human development

51
and ultimately sabotaged student social maturity, as well as, individual growth by
continuing to only measure growth and achievement through standardized testing.
Are New Teachers Old School?
Are today’s teachers modernized? What does effective teaching entail? Pollock
(2007) believes that many teachers learned how to teach by observing their former
elementary and secondary teachers throughout their school experiences. If this is true and
they learned or adopted teaching methodologies from previous teachers and professors,
then it could be argued that many of today’s teachers are implementing teaching habits
that were prevalent during the 1950s. Pollock (2007) believes that effective teaching
involves modernized thinking and creativity about teaching and learning. This belief is
important for teachers who believe teaching’s foundation is “to become master teachers”
instead of creating “master learners” (p. 9). Furthermore, she states that improving
instruction does not necessarily mean student learning will improve. Historically,
improving instruction by becoming a master teacher has been a dominant teaching
approach in US educational trends that include achieving National Teacher Certification
or completing advanced degrees, but the majority of these trends fail to focus on learning
improvement (Pollock, 2007). To improve learning with instruction and to overshadow
grade-focused classrooms, Pollock believes there are four approaches that effective
teachers use to improve student achievement. They (a) implement a well designed
curriculum, (b) plan for meaningful content delivery, (c) vary assessments, and (d)
provide feedback that reflects objectives and not behaviors. Too often, many teachers
provide feedback that aims to modify behavior and not learning objectives. Frequently,
feedback is untimely and not applicable at the time it is received. Therefore, in order to

Classroom managemnt students

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (19)

En vedette

En vedette (11)

Similaire à Classroom managemnt students

Similaire à Classroom managemnt students (20)

Plus de Siti Khalijah Zainol

Plus de Siti Khalijah Zainol (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Classroom managemnt students