Classroom Management Strategies: Are They Setting Events for Coercion?

Abstract

The purpose of this investigation was to explore the Patterson and Reid (1970) reciprocal/coercive interaction hypothesis as related to the classroom social interactions between teachers and students identified with severe behavior disorders. Additionally, four classroom behavior management strategies are identified as potential setting events for either coercive or positive reciprocal interactions between teachers and students. The literature reviewed indicates that teachers are more likely to attend to student inappropriate behavior (an indicator of coercive interactions) than they are to use positive verbal attention for appropriate behavior (an indicator of positive reciprocal interactions). From this perspective, the authors speculate that the management strategies of posting classroom rules, classroom arrangement, teacher movement in the classroom, and external reinforcement systems (e.g., token economies) may more likely be used as setting events to enhance the effects of teacher coercion rather than potential setting events to enhance positive reciprocal interactions. Recommendations are made for research concerning this hypothesis and for teachers' use of these strategies as setting events for positive reciprocal interactions.

Choice Making to Promote Adaptive Behavior for Students With Emotional and Behavioral Challenges

“…This approach can be contrasted to traditional orientations that are notable for the high degree of external control that is maintained in dassrooms for this population (Knitzer et al, 1990;Shores, Gunter, & Jack, 1993). In this respect, the choicemaking strategy in our study is consistent with a widespread movement to identify effective alternatives to punishment and, in particular, to promote student initiative and individualized curricular interventions for reducing problem behaviors .…”

Implementation of a Classroom Management Program with Urban Elementary Schools in Low-Income Neighborhoods: Does Program Fidelity Affect Student Behavior and Academic Outcomes?

“…Additionally, high-fidelity teachers in this study provided a more positive classroom climate as indicated by an average 4:1, praise-to-correction ratio; that is, high-fidelity teachers praised students for social behavior and academic performance four times more often than they corrected students' misbehavior. Contrary to recommended ratios of 3:1 or higher (Shores, Gunter, & Jack, 1993;Walker, Ramsey, & Gresham, 2004), low-fidelity classrooms in this study had an average praise-tocorrection ratio of 1:2, that is, teachers corrected students' misbehavior twice as often as they made positive statements about student social and academic performance (Table 6). Praise in moderate-fidelity classrooms (once every 53 sec) occurred at rates close to those in high-fidelity classrooms; however rates of correction were closer to low-fidelity classrooms, thereby decreasing the praise-to-correction ratio in moderate fidelity classrooms to 1.4:1 (Table 6).…”

Teacher strategies for effective intervention with students presenting social, emotional and behavioural difficulties: an international review

“…A number of studies of the spatial structure of the classroom focus on such issues as patterns of student seating, the physical proximity of students to teachers, patterns of physical circulation in the classroom, and the overall sense of atmosphere and order, and show that these factors can have a relatively small but significant effect on student engagement (MacAuley 1990;Rinehart 1991;Shores, Gunter, and Jack 1993;Walker and Walker 1991;Walker, Colvin and Ramsey 1995;Wolfgang 1996;Stewart and Evans 1997;Bettenhausen 1998;Quinn et al 2000;Wannarka and Ruhl 2008).…”