This book includes a plain text version that is designed for high accessibility. To use this version please follow this link.
in his meta-analysis entitled The Critical Role of Classroom Management that Kounin’s stud- ies and findings have been supported by subsequent studies (p. 5). His acknowledgement of maintaining student interest and engagement to increase learning validates the need to keep students engaged in purposeful and meaningful curriculum.

Freedom

Classroom freedom suggests that students are free to make choices in their academics and their behavior. In a well-managed classroom, freedom also implies that students accept responsibility for their actions and hold themselves accountable for their own learning. Free- dom might take the form of a student deciding which three academic assignments to com- plete out of the five suggested. It could imply that students have the behavioral freedom to choose to complete their work during class or complete the unfinished work during the after lunch “free time.”

Freedom does not mean lack of control but rather, by giving students some freedom, the teacher is empowered. By providing controlled freedom, the students gain a sense of owner- ship in their classroom. Marzano (2003) suggests that this controlled and free environment is a teacher balance between domination and cooperation. Teacher domination provides struc- ture for learning to take place while cooperation allows for negotiation and cooperation with students to develop. It is in this learning community of shared ownership and commitment that students then become free to make choices, accept responsibility, and remain account- able. In this type of environment excuses are not acceptable.

William Glasser recommends that teachers never ask students “why” they are choosing a cer-

tain behavior. “Why are you talking?” “Why are you out of your seat?” “Why” leads to excuses.

Rather than ask why, the focus needs to center on what the student is doing. The teacher might ask instead, “What are you doing?” Once the behavior has been identified, the stu- dent can then evaluate the usefulness of the behavior. If the behavior is not useful in helping reach his goals, he is then encouraged to develop a plan to change the behavior.

If students do not make good choices in their behavior and actions, they need to understand the consequences that follow. Richard L. Curwin and Allen N. Mendler (2001) believe that stu- dents need to be taught they are responsible for their own behavior through the use of conse- quences rather than punishments. Consequences come about as a logical result of an action or lack of action. They can be either positive or negative but both imply that a choice has been made. Punishment has a demeaning connotation that takes away dignity and self-esteem.

Curwin and Mendler further support the idea that by giving students ownership in the class-

Virginia Educational Leadership

Vol. 7 No. 1

Spring 2010

22 Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73
Produced with Yudu - www.yudu.com