Discipline

Keith Brown
First published in Issue 146, Dec 98/Jan 99

All teachers would like to have well behaved classes. After all, teaching a class with little or no discipline problems is a great joy. The reality is that for any given class there will be some discipline problems. While it is common to put the blame on students or the educational policy of a particular institution, the fact is that many teachers are the cause of their discipline problems. How well behaved a class is depends to a large extent on how well a teacher can encourage good disciplinary habits in class. Therefore, the greater amount of responsibility for discipline lies squarely on the teacher’s shoulders. This paper will attempt to dispel some of the misconceptions concerning discipline and briefly offer some suggestions on how to handle discipline problems without hindering learning.

First, it must be determined what is meant by discipline. For many people the image of strict rules and harsh punishments immediately come to mind. This is an extremely narrow definition of discipline that is better left for excessive breakdowns in accepted behavior.

A more workable definition of discipline consists of two parts. The first is: "a code of conduct which binds a teacher and a group of students together so that learning can be more effective." (Harmer, 209-210)

The second sees discipline as some form of punishment meted out to those that break the code of conduct.

Thus the goal of discipline can be seen as a way to guarantee a learning environment that is free of annoying distractions, but not so restrictive that it stifles creativity in learning. Herein lies the problem of classroom discipline: how to maintain control without hampering student’s freedom.

Discipline is not a way of forcing students to conform to a set of rules, instead it is freedom inside the boundaries of control. (Biao, 1996) The boundaries are the rules that teachers make which define proper classroom behavior. Even though it is usually an unspoken desire, students want some sort of order in class and expect the teacher to be the one who maintains that order. What teachers must do is to define the boundaries before problems arise.

One of the biggest mistakes that can be made is to assume that students already know how to behave in class. After all, unless the students are very young children they most likely have had some previous schooling and have developed some sense of what is acceptable and not acceptable classroom behavior. But even if they had prior schooling, students of all ages, especially young students, will consciously or unconsciously challenge their teachers at the beginning of a new term to see what the boundaries are. Because of this it is necessary for a teacher to make clear to students how they are expected to behave in class. (Lindsy, 1990) Merely going over a list of what is expected is not enough. Action is needed. A firm posture must be presented and maintained until is it certain that adequate control has indeed been established.

How does a teacher know when the desired level of control has been achieved? A large part of the answer depends on if the class "feels right" to the teacher (which is something that every teacher has to determine for himself or herself); but as a rule of thumb, if classes proceed smoothly and students follow instructions promptly without complaints then a teacher can be reasonably sure that control has indeed been established.

Here is an example of what can happen when control is not firmly established. At the beginning of a term, the teacher explains in general terms how students are expected to conduct themselves. The teacher assumes that the students already have some idea because they have had prior schooling. In the coming weeks students, being students, intentionally or unintentionally test the teacher to see what they can get away with. For the first few weeks the teacher deals with all errant students but soon tends to look the other way assuming that any wayward student will realize that they are doing wrong and sooner or later will correct themselves. At this stage the teacher relaxes his guard and only deals with the obvious students. Later on the teacher further relaxes his firm posture and becomes friendlier toward the students. It is at this point that some students take the teacher’s actions to mean the edge of the boundaries has been reached and they can engage in behavior that has not yet come up in class, but is potentially "wrong." Class discipline starts to fade leaving the teacher bewildered, wondering what happened, and perhaps regarding many of the students as undisciplined, bad, or with some other negative label.

What happened in the above example is that the teacher did not wait long enough to make certain that control had been established, resulting in a class with too much freedom and not enough control. The students took the teacher’s lack of action as a signal that they have some freedoms that the teacher never intended for them to have. A good sense of order was not established.

What must be realized is that the establishment of order is not automatic; it takes time. Months or even the better part of a school year may pass before the desired level of control is established (Protherough, Atkinson & Fawcett), but when it is established classes can proceed smoothly for the rest of the term.

The danger is that some teachers try to establish control by becoming too authoritarian. In this case the teacher tries to establish himself or herself as the absolute authority in the class. This type of teacher is typically caricatured in the media as the all-seeing, strict disciplinarian. This style of teaching is in itself not bad and is, in fact, necessary in some instances. But it takes a very talented and determined teacher to successfully conduct classes in this manner.

This type of teacher usually has strong opinions about what is and is not allowed in a classroom. The problem is that these opinions often take into account only one type of student and one type of learning. All other forms are not acceptable and need to be eliminated often at the expense of squashing a student’s motivation to study. This method tends to unjustly reward students that fit the mold and punish those that do not. This is control without freedom. What frequently happens in this type of situation is that some students resist being forced to fit the mold and rebel in any way they can. They may even band together to disrupt class just to upset the teacher or become impassive rebels that think they can do what they want. When this happens it becomes very difficult to continue teaching a "normal" class. That is why only a very talented and determined teacher can successfully teach this way. It is one strong will against other strong wills.

How a teacher reacts to breaches of discipline will often determine if discipline problems will continue or not. Discipline works best when it is meted out immediately and fairly. Immediately, to make it clear that the breaking of the rules will not be tolerated. Fairly, to show that no one is above the rules. There may be times when a teacher mistakenly punishes the wrong student. When that happens a sincere apology must be given to the wronged student.

Discipline must be consistent. A constant changing of methods and techniques of disciplining only conveys an impression of inconsistency which is detrimental to maintaining discipline because it means that the rules are always changing. What is important is to not overreact to what the students do but to retain a calm and steady appearance. One thing to keep in mind is that many students do things just to see the teacher’s reaction. The best thing to do is to keep a cool head and deal with the problem with little or no emotion. Giving in to students’ desires and putting on a good show (yelling or overreacting) will make the teacher an entertainer, and only encourages students to do more things to upset the teacher. This is true even when discipline is severe or heavy-handed.

Since most things that students do are nothing more than mere nuisances they should be treated as such. That is to say the degree of punishment needs to fit the crime. One way to deal with minor problems is to do nothing. This method should be used sparingly though because if left alone more persistent problems could develop. Often all that is needed is to call attention to the problem. Statements such as "Tom, could you please be quiet," or "It is time to pay attention now", are sufficient to solve many problems. This focuses the attention of the entire class on the problem student and brings into action the dynamic forces of peer pressure and its accompanying humiliation which usually is enough to stop the trouble, because most students do not want to made the fool in front of their peers. If necessary a few words of correction can be given to remind the offender of proper classroom conduct.

It must be stressed that a student must never be insulted nor made an example of when being disciplined, especially if the student is being disciplined in front of other students. This may cause the one disciplined to harbor a deep hatred of the teacher that may break out in more serious problems later. Instead, deal only with the action at present and any possible consequences. Don’t attack character. Don’t punish more that necessary. Whenever possible let other students deal with the problem student in their own way on their own time; just bring the problem to everyone’s attention.

More persistent problems such as game playing or constant talking can be dealt with in three ways. One is as mentioned above. Another is to remove the item that is causing the problem. Some students when they get bored start playing with pencils, watches, calculators, or other things. Sometimes this is fine as long as they keep quiet when doing so. But if their playing with such items begins to disturb others the teacher must request that the item either be put away or given to the teacher to be returned later. Sometimes a student is so absorbed in what he is doing that he doesn’t notice what a nuisance he has become. In that case, depending on age, the teacher may approach the student without warning and demand the offending item or even just take it without a word. Again peer pressure is put into action here. The problem student is singled out for all the class to see.

The last way is to remove the problem student from the class. Separation from the group at large is effective because it excludes the offender from the group, singles him out, and reduces him to a nobody with no audience to show off in front of. If the offense is minor have the offending student sit in a predetermined part of the class with only the necessary items to continue studying. This way the student can still receive instruction but without the temptation to talk to others or play with something (Wadden & McGovern 1989:12). In more severe cases the offender can be sent to the hallway or any such place where they are completely isolated from the group. This also provides an opportunity for the teacher to lecture the offender in private if necessary. If any task is to be accompanied with this isolation it must be one that does not make a student look stupid or, if possible, one which the student or class has predetermined as appropriate penance. Severe problems such as constant repetition of unacceptable behavior, determined refusal to cooperate, or violence must be dealt with by administers. This will take the responsibility for discipline off the teacher and put it on someone that has the resources and authority to better able to deal with it.

Proper classroom discipline is largely the responsibility of the teacher. The key is to devise a set of rules that gives students the freedom to learn in their own way, but within the boundaries of a reasonable amount of control. The freedom is needed for learning; the control is needed to ensure that all have an opportunity to exercise that freedom.

Bibliography

Biao, Zuo. 1996. "Misconceptions: clarifying the concept of control." English Teaching Forum. 34 3/4 (July-October).
Brivati, Stephen. 1997. "Do teachers like teaching English?" IATEFL Newsletter 137 June - July.
Harmer, Jeremy. 1983. The practice of English language teaching. New York, Longman
Haycraft, John. 1978 An introduction to English language teaching. Essex, Longman
Lindsay, Angus. 1990. "Teacher stress: butterflies, lemmings, and stunned mullets." The Language Teacher. 14/4 (May).
Marck, Rebecca Ann. 1990. "Stepping stones and stumbling blocks to English education in Japan". The Language Teacher. 14/1 (January).
Protherough, Robert; Judith Atkinson and John Fawcett. 1989. The effective teaching of English. New York, Longman
Wadden, Paul & Sean McGovern. 1993. A user’s guide to classroom management. In a handbook for teaching English at Japanese colleges and universities. New York, Oxford
Wadden, Paul and Sean McGovern. 1989. "Streamlining EFL class administration and organization: A user’s guide for university instructors in Japan." The Language Teacher. 13/10 (October).