Britt Bigley

September 29, 2011

Lee Canter: Assertive Discipline
Lee Canters Assertive Discipline is a behavioral /discipline theory that
teachers are using all over the world and on all different grade levels. Lee Canters
accomplishments in education, the summary of his Assertive Discipline model,
including the explanation of steps to implement his model, its effectiveness and the
arguments for and against the use of Assertive Discipline in the classroom will be
examined.
Lee Canters contributions to education have spanned close to 35 years. In
1976, Canter developed a behavioral management theory known as Assertive
Discipline (Canter, 2001). Canter was one of the first to acknowledge that behavior
management training was essential for teachers to take as part of undergraduate
and graduate level courses (2001). Since then, Canter and his wife have created
effective training programs for educators based around Assertive Discipline and
classroom management models. Canter has also published informational and
teacher planning books to help teachers implement lessons geared toward his
behavioral management theory. Canter and his wife are also co-founders of Canter
& Associates, a firm specializing in professional development for educators (2001).
Assertive Discipline has continued to be implemented by first year and veteran
teachers, administrators and used in both inner city and rural schools (2001).
Assertive Discipline is a positive, proactive behavioral management tool used
in educational classrooms. The central idea behind Canters Assertive Discipline
model is that the teacher is in complete control of the classroom and is vital in
directing classroom behavior (2001). Another key component of this theory is that

the teacher is proactive in establishing set rules and consequences as a way to

prevent unwanted behaviors (2001). Essentially, Canters model is a preventative
approach to behavior management, as the teacher is responsible for redirecting
unwanted behaviors before they become disruptive to the entire classroom.
In order for Assertive Discipline to be effective in the classroom, the teacher
must follow steps in implementing this behavioral management model: creating
rules and consequences, communicating rules and consequences, model expected
classroom behavior, and use appropriate response depending on expected or
unexpected behaviors. On the very first day of school, the teacher will establish a
discipline plan containing rules and consequences for the classroom. It is suggested
that this first step be a collaborative process, creating the rules along with the
students. The rules must be observable and these rules must always be in effect
(2001). The discipline plan will also set clear guidelines for consequences if a rule is
broken. There should be a defined discipline hierarchy, meaning specific
consequences established for breaking a rule the 1 st, 2nd, and 3rd time and a
consequence for a severe misbehavior (2001). The second step in the model is to
communicate classroom rules to the students by explaining the need for rules and
consequences and checking for students understanding (2001). This too should be
done on the first day of school to make sure all students understand the Discipline
Plan (rules) and the Discipline Hierarchy (consequences). The third step in the
Assertive Discipline model is to teach the students how to follow the rules. Teaching
students expected classroom behavior should also be done on the first day of school
and should continue throughout the year. The teacher becomes the primary subject
to model expected behavior. The last step, responding appropriately to a behavior is
continuously implemented throughout the school year as well. The appropriate

response from the teacher, either supportive feedback or corrective action, is

dependent upon the students behavior being expected or unwanted (2001).
Canter argues that there are definite benefits to his Assertive Discipline
model that both benefit the teacher and students. Using this proactive approach
the teacher develops a carefully planned behavior management system to use
when students are being disruptive (2001). The responses outlined in the discipline
hierarchy are aimed at stopping the disruption in the classroom so both the teacher
and students can get back to learning (2001). Prior planning also ensures that the
teacher does not become emotionally involved when disciplining a student, since
the proper response should come automatically (2001). An established discipline
plan will also protect the rights of the students in the classroom. The discipline plan
guarantees that each disruptive student will be dealt with in a consistent and fair
manner, because the teacher is reacting to the specific behavior and not the
student (2001). The consistency and fair manner in which behaviors are dealt with
will ensure positive relationships with students, an essential part of a students
ability and willingness to learn. Other benefits from this model are the inclusion of
parents and administrator support, placement of responsibility on students to act in
appropriate manner and an increase in students self-esteem (2001).
The criticisms of Canters Assertive Discipline suggest that the model is
authoritarian and does not consider the students best interest. One critic, Alfie
Kohn, states that Assertive Discipline is essentially a collection of bribes and
threats whose purpose is to enforce rules that the teacher alone devises and
imposes (Kohn, 1996). He summarizes it as a carrot and sticks model, dangling
rewards in front of students, otherwise known as control through seduction
(1996). Two other critics of Assertive Discipline, Richard Curwin and Allen Mendler,

who have their own model for classroom behavioral management called Discipline
with Dignity, argue that Canters model is severe and rigid in disciplining minor
infractions, and does not account for the behaviorially-at-risk students (Charles,
2002). Curwin and Mendler disagree that Assertive discipline is a proactive
approach to classroom behavior. They argue that a true proactive approach would
teach students self-regulation and management of behaviors, having a student self
correct before behavior occurs (Charles, 2002). In an article entitled Conventional
Systems of Classroom Discipline, Donald Blumenfeld-Jones (1996) states that
Assertive Discipline makes unfavorable cases of specific people repeatedly,
ultimately saying the same names appear consistently on the chalk board
(Blumenfeld-Jones, 1996). This response separates these students from the rest of
the group making the correction of the behavior punitive and isolating, something
no teacher should purposefully do to a student (1996).
In order to effectively evaluate the Assertive Discipline model in the
classroom, the teacher must implement different strategies. One strategy is to have
the students practice the rules while the teacher monitors and analyzes students
reactions and behaviors (2001). Another strategy is to ask questions to your
students (i.e. when transitioning, What does a good transition look and sound
like?) to check understanding (Canter, 2002). A good teacher will always reevaluate his or her supportive feedback and corrective actions, discuss with another
teacher and determine if adjustments should be made to the discipline plan and
discipline hierarchy based on the needs of the class (2002).
Canter insists that Assertive Discipline can be effective on any educational
level, with minor changes to supportive feedback and corrective actions. As with
any framework or premade lesson plans, Assertive Discipline guidelines need to be

adapted to fit each specific classroom. For example in Early Elementary classrooms,
rewards can come in the form of a sticker, a ticket for a prize, and a note sent home
parents (Canter, 1992b) Corrective actions in Early Elementary classrooms could be
moving a child away from the group, moving student closer to the teachers desk or
a note home to the parent (1992b). In Secondary Education, rewards can come in
forms of certificates, student of the week posters, or a pass for a privilege in the
classroom (Canter, 1992a). Consequences in Secondary Education would take the
form of writing in a behavior journal, staying after class or after school, or being
sent to administrators office (1992a).
There are parts of Assertive Discipline that I will use once I am a teacher. I
agree with Canter that there must be clear rules and consequences set in place,
which will not only help the students but will also help me to properly handle
difficult behavioral situations. I do think that it is the teachers responsibility to
teach and guide students in exhibiting positive behavior, and that sometimes it is in
the class best interest to redirect smaller unwanted behaviors in order to prevent
distractions while learning. I have learned a few good strategies to help re-direct
student behaviors in a positive way, for example using positive repetition, scanning
or consistent praise to persuade students to use appropriate behavior. I have also
found strategies to positively correct students if they are showing unwanted
behaviors, such as giving the look, coming into physical proximity, and
mentioning off-task students name in a lesson, which all give the student a subtle
prompt to get back on task. The Lee Canters Assertive Discipline workbooks also
provide great resources for lesson plans on behavioral management and copies of
different reward and consequence systems. Overall, I think the Assertive Discipline
model is a great way to effectively manage student behaviors in a positive and

proactive manner, and I will be using certain strategies from the model in my
teaching career.
Overall, I believe Kate and I worked really well, and have fully grasped the
concept of Assertive Discipline and through our presentation have effectively
passed our knowledge onto the students in class. Kate did a great deal of the
organizing of what was needed to present and who would provide which information
as well as creating the format for the power point. I integrated the use of visuals,
mostly for the steps in implementing Assertive Discipline mainly because I felt that
a visual with verbal explanation would help the audience to understand the steps
more clearly. I was also in charge of getting information on the steps, model
summary, and secondary supportive and corrective responses. I also had access to
behavioral charts and plans so I brought them in for the class to better understand
what can be used to correct behavior. The power point was a collaborative effort,
but I do have to say that Kate put a great deal of work into the presentation,
probably more than I contributed.

Canter, Lee and Marlene., (1992a). Assertive Discipline Secondary Workbook:

Grades 9-12. Santa Monica, CA, Lee Canter & Associates.
Canter, Lee and Marlene., (1992b). Assertive Discipline Elementary Workbook:
Grades PreK-6. Santa Monica, CA, Lee Canter & Associates.
Canter, L. & Canter, M., (2001). Assertive discipline: positive behavior management
for today's classroom. 3rd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Canter & Associates, Inc.
Charles, C. M. ,(2002). Building Classroom Discipline. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Blumenfeld-Jones, D., (April, 1996). Conventional systems of classroom discipline
(the patriarchy speaks).Journal of Educational Thought, 30, 5-21.
Kohn, A., (20, November, 1996). Beyond Discipline.
Retrieved from http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/discipline.htm
Lee , C., (2002). Responsible Behavior Curriculum Guide: An Instructional Approach
to Successful Classroom Management. Los Angeles, CA: Canter & Associates, Inc.