Consider your CSEL intervention case study. Are there tools from a behaviorist view for either encouraging productive behaviors or discouraging undesirable behaviors that you could apply to the case? What are they?
Looking back at the middle school CSEL case study, I believe there are several approaches to productive behavior. I had originally mentioned giving Cherie attention, but not necessarily giving her the attention she desired. The suggestion was to call her out in class and move her to the front of my classroom which is sometimes embarrassing for a student at the middle school age. However, this action may not encourage good behavior always, because it is not taking anything away from Cherie that would be desired, if that makes sense. In a behaviorist view, students learn by changes in behavior- and although Cherie might be embarrassed by having to get up in front of the class to move, there is no contrast in that the other students are praised for good behavior.
Clearly Cherie's "funny" behavior is affecting the students learning because they are more concentrated on her. Not allowing the class to receive their "music note" sticker for the day, (in hopes of getting 10 for a music game choice day) for those contributing to Cherie's bad behavior would hopefully catch their attention. Walking around and handing out free "2 minute" ipad usage pass for good behavior, the ones not laughing at Cherie, may also catch the class's attention. (iPad time is something I have observed in my field experience in the music classroom)
Now, compare the interventions that you have identified above with what you think might work from a cognitive or constructivist viewpoint (you may need to Google for ideas but it's okay to just speculate based on your prior knowledge). How do they compare to behaviorist tools? What are the benefits of each theory, and what are the deficits? Which theory might play a larger role in how you determine classroom management?
Knowing now that a constructivist viewpoint is developing knowledge through experience, a Cherie-type situation might be difficult to handle through a constructivist view pertaining to classroom management. Because in constructivist learning theory, the teacher is more passive and acts a facilitator, I am finding it difficult to provide examples how to handle issues that arise in classrooms through a constructivist view. All classes are different, but it some cases, giving students more leeway might in fact cause more disruption because of the students' freedom and them being responsible for their own behaviors. In a behaviorist classroom, it is pretty clear what is expected, and the punishments that will ensue with bad behavior.
I did find something that is encouraging for people like myself who find the constructivist theory attractive --especially for me, as a "special area".
"Structure is one of the conditions of freedom. Yet we cannot leave it at that, for paradoxically there can be no freedom without some element of constraint. Thus within the structure of a learning situation there are always some constraints--yes, even in the most apparently "free" classroom, . . . . Students are constantly making language choices. Still, they are not "free" in any radical or idealized sense . . . there is a lot of structure . . . (p.116).
What Sheridan is saying here is exemplified in a constructivist class. Unless kids are provided with behavioural parameters, nothing gets accomplished because they don't know what it is they're really supposed to do. But once these behavioural parameters are established, there can be a lot of choices within.
The paradox about student centered instruction is the more control you turn over to the students the less you need to worry about control, and, in fact, the students are quite able to look after themselves and, even more, look after each other. In a constructivist classroom, control comes from students' involvement in responsibility rather than external imposition, freeing the teacher to focus on students learning, a profitable situation for both students and teachers.
Actively and interactively involved students, negotiated curriculum, and redistribution of power, control, and responsibility all contribute to a relationship between students and teacher that promotes a situation where learning thrives. With the development of a constructivist philosophy, a teacher of any discipline is able to create a classroom environment within which students are able to become autonomous learners."
Master's Thesis entitled "The Road to Knowledge is Always Under Construction: A Life History Journey to Constructivist Teaching".
Audrey Gray
I think finding a balance is key. This will be probably one of the greatest challenges for me as a future music educator. In my field experience, students often see music class as "fun time" or "play time". Obviously classroom management issues will arise when there is singing, dancing, playing instruments, etc. And although I want my students to have fun while learning, I need to approach all my classes in a way that it can be a social, interactive environment, but still enforce respect and appropriate behavior.
I certainly think we "specials" can expect appropriate behavior WHILE having fun in our areas. In some ways, we are a "break" from traditional learning methods, and we can really capitalize on that difference to make our areas both excellent and fun.
ReplyDeleteI think one way to approach a constructivist classroom with a music class is through the idea that the class is an ensemble, and everyone contributes something that makes it work. It's obvious when someone is singing the wrong note, or not keeping time, and it's almost natural to structure your class that way (if it's an ensemble like band or choir). You would have to contextualize it in such a way that it makes sense to multiple worldviews, but I've noticed that students who feel like they are a part of a community take ownership in the community. Just a thought.
ReplyDelete