Planning for Intervention – Responding to unproductive behaviours in

the primary classroom:

Introduction:
It is evident from an abundance of research that managing student behaviour is necessary for a safe
and functioning classroom where students are enabled to reach their potential. According to Good
and Brophy (2008, p. 94), the key to successful management of classroom behaviour is preventing
undesirable behaviour before it occurs. However, those who work closely with children will know,
unproductive and undesirable behaviour is sometimes inevitable. In fact, the issue is currently larger
and more imperative than ever. Rapid social and societal change has led to an increase in childhood
misbehaviour, aggression, and violence, as well as anxiety, mental health issues, social concerns and
anger management issues (Hyde et al 2017, p. 148). These matters directly affect students’ ability to
behave appropriately and as a result, their academic performance. The purpose of this essay is to
discuss a range of intervention strategies from low-level techniques to more complex approaches,
and to link some of the intervention strategies to specific types of misbehaviours.

Approach to intervening when responding to unproductive behaviours

Why do students misbehave?
Insight into the causes of students’ undesired behaviours, will provide the educator the best chance
of successfully developing methods to reduce them (Patron & Bisping 2008, p. 61). Generally,
challenging behaviour occurs for a reason, we all behave in what we believe is the best way to
achieve what we want. For some students this may be that they simply find acting out more
interesting than the lesson, they may not understand the task, or they may not be receiving the
assistance they need. For some students the fear of failing is a good enough reason to choose the
path of disruption in order to appear as though they do not care (Jones 2011, p.302). Hyde (et al
2017, 148) believes that students who display challenging behaviours often lack the social skills
needed to develop successful relationships with peers.

Additionally, inappropriate student behaviour is often a response to a dysfunction in one of the four
elements of the classroom set up. Williams (2013, p. 11) devised the 4S Conceptual Framework of
Classroom Management. His framework breaks apart the classroom setting, systems, students and
self to support teachers in ensuring the classroom is set up for successful learning.

Responding to misbehaviour?
The task of responding to unproductive behaviour is perhaps one of the most demanding,
overwhelming, and least rewarding, aspects of teaching (Jones 2011, p. 297). The goal for teachers is

TIARNA SAID 110186242 | Managing Learning Environments EDUC 3007 - Assessment 3

Planning for Intervention – Responding to unproductive behaviours in
the primary classroom:
to provide students with the skills and strategies they need, to ultimately manage their own
behaviours. This is referred to as self-regulating and is one of the key principles to managing learning
environments; ‘Self-regulation is preferable to external control as it builds learner capacity’ (MLE
Course Principle #2) Walker compares two primary teaching styles; authoritative vs. authoritarian;
and describes them as nurture vs. control (Walker 2009, p. 122). According to Jones (2011, p. 298)
authoritarian methods (control methods) become less effective as children get older. Authoritative
methods (nurture methods) aim to provide more care and guidance and are generally more
respectful to students. Learning environments where students feel respected and supported will set
them up for success; ‘Children’s learning is best supported when their teachers use authoritative
approaches involving care and guidance’ (MLE Course Principle #3).

When responding to challenging behaviour it is most important to, remain calm and select an
intervention which is appropriate to the behaviour. Different levels of intervention are outlined
below. Remember, students can be involved in the process of decision making. This is a good
example of sharing the power and enabling students to become self-regulating.

Different levels of intervention

Least disruptive interventions
A large factor of successful classroom management is the teacher’s ability to deal with minor
disruptions before they escalate into major problems. Jones (2011, p. 303) suggests a large range of
minor interventions which will be least disruptive to the class such as; scanning the room constantly,
positioning self to see the entire class, and stating expectations clearly.

These kinds of interventions can be used as preventative strategies, or for regular unproductive
student behaviours. For example, a student who is rarely organised for class, arriving without books,
pencils etc, will benefit from having expectations made clear throughout the school day. The
educator could write on the whiteboard each morning, which lessons are on the schedule for the
day and the specific items that will be needed for each lesson. ‘Learning environments that are
predictable, in which expectations are clear and scaffolding is employed best support children’s pro-
social behaviour’ (MLE Course Principle #6)

Low level interventions

Low-level interventions aim to nip unproductive behaviours before they escalate into disruptive
behaviours which are passed on to others. Again, Jones provides an extensive list of low-level
intervention strategies. Some of these strategies include:

TIARNA SAID 110186242 | Managing Learning Environments EDUC 3007 - Assessment 3

Planning for Intervention – Responding to unproductive behaviours in
the primary classroom:
- Proximity control - moving closer to the off-task student
- Make contact – ask if student needs assistance
- Increasing interest in the lesson
- Using eye contact
- Call on the student to increase their involvement
- Place a small note on the students’ desk
- Use a signal such as a finger to the lips or pointing to the class rules
(Jones 2011, pp. 304-305)

It is important to consider that an inappropriately angry teacher response will only increase tension
and worsen the disruptive behaviour. The key factor in implementing these approaches successfully
is to remain calm and ensure that the teacher response appropriately matches the student
behaviour.

Low-level interventions can be used for mild misbehaviours such as talking without raising hand,
getting out of seat, fidgeting with small items etc (Williams 2013, p.15). For many of these
misbehaviours, making eye-contact or sending a simple signal will serve as a reminder for the
student to adjust their behaviour. A student who is disrupting those around him, will benefit from
the educator making contact. Checking in with the student positively will help him return to the task
quickly and smoothly. Jones (2011, p. 304) suggests placing a small note such as a sticky note on the
students’ desk either to request she meets with you for a chat after class, to provide her with a
strategy to solve the problem, or to simply write something positive about how well she is working
to increase motivation in the task at hand. Additionally, placing a pencil on the desk of a student
who is off-task is a low-level method to remind him what he should be doing.

Complex interventions/Specific focus

Perhaps the most demanding situation is when a student is displaying defiant, aggressive or violent
behaviour. Often, the student will need to be removed from the classroom, however Jones believes
there is a series of steps that can be taken first to de-escalate the problem (Jones 2011, p. 309).
Firstly, it is necessary to mention that by law, the educator has a duty of care to all students, and
before taking any action, must ensure the safety of the class is priority (Newnham 2000, p. 5).

Jones cautions educators against getting trapped in a power struggle with the student, and instead
ensure your requests are made clearly, politely, and firmly (Jones 2011, 309). Methods which focus
on problem solving are most effective in creating positive, safe, school environments. Some
suggestions are listed below:

TIARNA SAID 110186242 | Managing Learning Environments EDUC 3007 - Assessment 3

Planning for Intervention – Responding to unproductive behaviours in
the primary classroom:
- Send an I-message
- Provide options
- Review the consequences
- Restorative justice
- Sometimes it is best to walk away
(Jones 2011, p. 312)

Some examples of when the educator can use these kinds of interventions is when conflict has
arisen between two or more students. Restorative justice involves the educator playing the mediator
between the students and scaffolding them to solve the problem. Role-modelling I-messages
empowers students to assert their needs, wants and feelings to solve their conflicts. Jones (2011, p.
312) also cautions, educators are human too, and sometimes the best option is to walk away, and
regain a calm demeaner before attempting to solve the problem. This aims to avoid escalating the
problem or saying something that will later be regretted. Other examples of complex behaviour
requiring specific focus is property destruction/theft or skipping class (Williams 2013, p.15). These
misbehaviours will require the consequences being laid out to the student and providing him options
to right the wrong that has occurred, e.g. repair/return the broken property, write an apology letter,
make up the missed class time after school.

Substantiate the approach

The three levels of intervention approaches outlined above work as a hierarchy. The more severe
the behaviour the more severe the intervention will need to be. The common theme throughout the
three levels of intervention is the idea that learning environments are characterised by high
expectations (MLE Course Principle #7). Through high expectations, students are enabled to make
choices suitable for themselves, recognise right from wrong, and generate skills to adjust their own
behaviour to suit the situation. The following quote from McDonald is one which rings true;

‘Blindly obedient citizens are not the citizens we need in society, we need active citizens who
understand right from wrong, and act accordingly’ (McDonald 2013).

The duty of respecting young people, and implementing strategies of shared-power with students, is
more of a state-of-mind than a task that needs to be completed. It is done through small gestures
day after day. Gestures like displaying trust in students to create a set of class guidelines,
demonstrates a power-with relationship in the classroom. This teaching practice links to course

TIARNA SAID 110186242 | Managing Learning Environments EDUC 3007 - Assessment 3

Planning for Intervention – Responding to unproductive behaviours in
the primary classroom:
principle #8 which supports the idea of shared power in the classroom. Respective educators will
avoid placing labels on students such as ‘troubled’, ‘challenging’, or ‘violent’. Speaking positively to
and about students goes a long way. A positive classroom culture is created when teachers foster a
sense of inclusion and community (Hyde et al 2017, p. 160).

Finally, one aspect that is yet to be discussed is collaboration with parents. True collaboration is a
process of direct interaction and shared decision making to reach a common goal (Porter 2007, p.
291). Teachers and parents share the task of educating children and have a common interest in the
needs of the child. Parents have the best understanding of their child’s social and emotional well-
being, and they have an important role to be the child’s advocate, while teachers have the task of
considering the needs of the entire class. Educators should use and value parents’ expertise and
welcome input from other parties such as colleagues, school leaders, and the students themselves.

Conclusion
The essay statement used as the title; ‘Planning for Intervention – Responding to unproductive
behaviours in the primary classroom’ has been reflected throughout the essay. The importance of
responding to undesirable and unproductive classroom behaviours has been backed up with
relevant literature. Several key strategies to take away from this essay from low-level to complex
interventions include; scan the room, use proximity control, make contact, use signals or eye
contact, place a small note on students’ desk, send an I-message, and walk away when necessary.

The goal for teachers is to provide students with the skills and strategies they need, to ultimately
manage their own behaviours. Respectful learning environments move beyond rewards and
punishments and aim to build citizens who have experienced responsibility in the classroom. The key
message for the educator to successfully manage undesired behaviours is to remain calm, and select
a thoughtful and purposeful intervention approach, which is solution-focused, and appropriately
matches the level of behaviour observed.

Word Count – 1894 (Reference List not included)

Reference List
Good, T.L & Brophy, J.E 2008, Management I: Preventing problems, Looking in classrooms 10th edn,
Pearson Allyn and Bacon Publishers, Boston.

TIARNA SAID 110186242 | Managing Learning Environments EDUC 3007 - Assessment 3

Planning for Intervention – Responding to unproductive behaviours in
the primary classroom:
Hyde, M Carpenter, L & Dole, S 2017, Diversity, inclusion and engagement 3rd edn, Oxford University
Press, Melbourne.

Jones, V.F & Jones L.S 2011, ‘Responding to violations of rules and procedures’ in Practical classroom
management, Pearson, Boston.

McDonald, T 2013, Proactive teacher behaviours, Classroom management: Engaging students in

learning, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.

Newnham, H 2000, When is a teacher or school liable in negligence? Australian Journal of Teacher
Education, vol. 25, no. 1, p. 5.

Patron, H & Bisping, T 2008, Why students misbehave in class: An empirical analysis of classroom
incivilities, Mountain Plains Journal of Business and Economics, General Research, vol. 9, no. 2, pp.
61-74.

Porter, L 2007, 'Collaborating with parents and other experts to resolve school-based behavioural
difficulties', Student behaviour: theory and practice for teachers.
UniSA Managing Learning Environments (MLE) 2018, Course Outline; Course Principles, viewed 03 rd
November 2018, <https://my.unisa.edu.au/public/CourseOutline/ViewOutline.aspx?id=24396>.

Walker, J 2009, Authoritative classroom management: How control and nurturance work together,
Theory into Practice, vol. 48, no. 2, pp.122-129.

Williams, D 2013, Background basics, Adelaide: University of South Australia.

TIARNA SAID 110186242 | Managing Learning Environments EDUC 3007 - Assessment 3