Skinner

Skinner's view of the educational process was that it is a way of designing culture.Positive reinforcement, according to Skinner, could encourage people to begin altering andcontrolling schools. For Skinner, good consequences were positive reinforcement, and badconsequences were aversive/negative reinforcement. The behavior, according to Skinner (1974) is"said to be strengthened by its consequences and for that reason the consequences themselves arecalled reinforcers" (p. 39). He believed that behavior is shaped in the direction of rewards. Thismeans that behavior could be reinforced to the extent of the consequences of the behavior, whichcould be either good or bad (Skinner, 1974).

Behaviorists, like Skinner, believed that children enter the school system highly programmedby the influences of their parents, society, peers, siblings, radio, and television. According to Skinner,it is important to realize that their environment, which may cause a disruption in theirprogramming/teaching, may have influenced these children negatively. Skinner believed that thereason individuals had difficulty with making moral decisions were that the programming they had21received on morality had been contradictory (Skinner, 1974). An example of this would be a fathertelling his child that it is wrong to tell a lie. Later, the child witnesses his father telling a lie.According to Skinner, teachers could benefit greatly from the use of rewards or reinforcers intheir classrooms. Skinner felt that the use of extrinsic rewards is necessary when other methods haveproved unsuccessful. Furthermore, they should be replaced by intrinsic rewards later on (Skinner,2002). A reinforce is a stimulus that increases the frequency of a response it follows (Ormrod, 1999).Examples of rewards and positive reinforcers include, but are not limited to praise, stars, candy,smiles, paper money, tokens, or free time. On the other hand, the use of negative reinforces increasesthe behavior by removing a stimulus that is unpleasant or undesirable.

An example of a negative reinforcer might be removing a child from time-out after theyhave changed their behavior by settling down and expressing remorse (Ozmon & Craver,

2003; Wardle, 2003). Research regarding rewards and reinforcers indicates that they do not have tobe given every time, they can be given intermittently and still receive the same desired outcome(Grossman, 1995; Kaiser & Rasminsky, 2003; Ozmon & Craver, 2003).Skinner believed that it was important to consider the long-term effects of immediate positivereinforcement. He cautioned that immediate positive reinforcement could have negative long-termeffects. Therefore, Skinner stressed the importance of examining the cultural or environmentalcontingencies critically in light of possible consequences (Skinner, 2002).

Glasser

The work of William Glasser also has contributed to the field of early childhood educationwith regard to classroom management. His early work began in psychotherapy, where hedeveloped an alternative to conventional psychotherapy. This approach is known as reality therapy.In reality therapy, the present reality of current situations is assessed instead of focusing on22uncovering the conditions in one's past to determine what contributes to the inappropriate behavior(Glasser, 1965).

The basic premise of reality therapy is that an individual must face reality and takeresponsibility for his or her actions. The goal is to guide the individual toward competent functioningby assisting him or her to effectively deal with the environment to fulfill personal needs (Glasser,1965; Larrivee, 2005). According to Glasser, an individual needs to love and be loved and feelworthwhile to him/herself and others in order to have his/her psychological needs met (Glasser,1965).

The goal of reality therapy is "to teach the ill/irresponsible person responsible behavior.Thus, therapy and the teaching-learning process are the same" (Larrivee, 2005, p. 151). Glasserapplies his concept of reality therapy to the classroom setting and maintains that regardless of astudent's background or socioeconomic status a student comes from does not make him or her

exempt from behaving appropriately. In addition, Glasser believes that all students are capable ofcontrolling their behavior and that the behavior they exhibit is by choice. Furthermore,teachers should not excuse irresponsible behavior. Instead, they should assess the situation andthe behavior the student engaged in and its impact rather than why the behavior occurred (Glasser,1965; Larrivee, 2005).

To intervene with reality therapy, the student needs to know that the teacher cares about himor her, the teacher must be able to accept the student while rejecting the irresponsible behavior andthe student must fulfill his or her personal needs in order to learn responsibly (Glasser, 1969). Inaddition, both the teacher and the student must commit to a cooperative interchange. Thisprocess requires that teachers direct instruction, promote discussions, conduct conferences, and plangroup sessions and meetings. The teacher must provide emotional support while maintaining his or23her focus on the problem and devising a way to resolve it. This process can be achieved by guidingthe student toward responsible behavior by initiating an interview or individual conference with thestudent (Glasser, 1969; Larrivee, 2005).Student conferences/meetings are an important process according to Glasser. According toGlasser (1965), teachers should hold three types of meetings. The first of which is a meetingconcerning students' social conduct in school. The second is known as an open-ended meeting so thatboth the teacher and the student(s) can discuss intellectually important subjects that have been raisedby the students. The third type of meeting should be one that is concerned with how well thestudent(s) is/are progressing relative to the curricula (Glasser, 1969). Group meetings and one-ononeconferences between students and teacher are important tools for leading students to be ableto rationally choose how they will behave during school activities (Cangelosi, 1993; Glasser,1969).According to Glasser, classroom rules are essential and should support the learning process.Both the teacher and the students in the class should establish classroom rules and expectations.

Rules and consequences should be strictly adhered to and students must be able to predict bothdesirable and undesirable consequences with regard to their choices in behavior (Glasser, 1969).

Gordon

Teacher Effectiveness Training (TET)

Teacher effectiveness training (TET), conceived by Dr. Thomas Gordon (1974), stresses the establishment of positive working relationships between teachers and students in an atmosphere of openness and trust. Teachers reduce disruptive student behavior by using clear verbal and nonverbal communication strategies. The key to this approach is identifying who owns the problem – the teacher or the student. For example, if students continuously talk as the teacher tries to teach, the teacher owns the problem because he or she is kept from reaching the goal of teaching. On the other hand, if the teacher feels annoyed by a student’s behavior or if the teacher wishes a student would change his or her behavior, the problem likely belongs to the student. The student who says he or she hates the teacher or hates the subject owns that problem. When teachers own the problem, they send an I-message which tells students how they feel about the situation and invites students to change or correct the situation – for example, “I am angry with this continuous talking in class,” “I am disappointed in your behavior at the assembly,” or “I can’t hear myself think with the noise in this classroom.” If the process works, the student (or class) should see the harm being done and change his or her (or their) behavior. If an I-message does not correct the problem, however, the teacher and student (class) are in a conflict situation. When this happens, Gordon recommends using a “no-lose” problem resolution strategy. After the teacher and student identify the problem, they cooperatively generate possible solutions. Then they evaluate these ideas, rejecting those that are unacceptable to either party. Punishment is not a viable option because the students would be placed in a losing situation. Next they rank the remaining ideas, select the best solution, and decide how to implement the solution so that both parties are satisfied. They assess the results and try alternate solutions if needed.

When a student owns a problem, the teacher listens actively and empathetically to counsel, support, and encourage the student to express his or her views. Instead of offering a solution, the teacher focuses upon the student’s perspective and helps the student find his or her own solution.

Referenceshttp://www.broward.k12.fl.us/research_evaluation/researchresults/544/544FinalDissertation.pdf

www.sagepub.com/mooreteachingk8/study/chapter/.../74554_03ee1.doc