University of the People

EDUC 5240: Creating Positive Classroom environments

Instructor: Dr. Amanda Nugent

AY2022 – T2

Written Assignment Unit 2

Classroom Discipline: Assertive or Cooperative?

November 24, 2021

1
 Classroom Discipline: Assertive or Cooperative?

Classroom discipline is believed to be a integral part of creating a positive learning environment

and a key component of effective classroom management. Discipline refers to the techniques and

strategies that teachers use to manage the behaviors and attitudes of students in the classroom.

There are various models and theories of discipline which emerged and claims to be highly

effective. No two discipline models are as seemingly disparate as Lee and Marlene Canter’s model

on Assertive Discipline and that of Linda Albert’s model on cooperative discipline. This study will

compare and contrast these two discipline models, discussing each model’s approach to achieving

optimal classroom discipline.

The concept of assertive discipline was first suggested by Lee and Marlene Canter in 1976. This

teacher-centered classroom management approach believes in the rights of teachers and students to

work in a safe, calm and professional environment (Drew, 2019). The assumption of assertive

discipline is that teachers must act assertively to ensure that their rights are met as teachers. The

Canters emphasized that teachers have the right to create a classroom environment that promote

student learning, establish the required expectations for students’ behavior in the classroom and

expect students to comply with these expectations. Those rights include the right to teach, the right

to learn, and the right to establish a positive and supportive environment, which facilitates student

learning (Sandidge, 2009).

The main idea of implementing the assertive discipline model is the creation of a classroom

discipline plan by the teacher and implementing it at the beginning of the academic year. The

discipline plan should include the following three major components: classroom rules, types of

positive acknowledgements for students who obey the rules, and a series of consequences for

students who disobey the rules (Sandidge, 2009). The classroom rules should be limit to five or six

rules. These rules should tell students the exact appropriate desired behavior. The class rules should

be essential for learning and teaching but should not violate the students’ rights in any way

2
(Institute for Cognitive Behavior Management, 2016). Furthermore, teachers must set positive

recognition for students who obey the rules, so that appropriate behaviors are encouraged in a

positive way. Teachers should publicly acknowledge the positive behavior of a student in front of

the whole class (Drew, 2019). Students should be aware of the hierarchical consequences for non-

compliance of classroom rules. Teachers should set three to six negative consequences, each of

which is more punitive and restrictive than the previous one. The negative consequences should be

administered every time a student continues to misbehave (McIntyre, n.d.). Chris Drew (2019)

emphasized in his article, that trust is extremely important when implementing the assertive

discipline model, since it is easier for students to cooperate when they trust and respect their

teachers.

Applying this theory to a scenario where a student disrupts the lesson by making noises in the class

while the teacher is explaining the content. The teacher would first give the student a warning and

state the misbehavior of the student that resulted in the warning. If the student then continues to

disrupt the lesson by making noises after the warning by the teacher, the teacher will then give the

student a demerit as per the code of conduct of the school. If the student continues after the first two

consequences where administered the teacher would then phone the parents of the students. It is

important that the students know beforehand what the consequences of if they decide to break the

rules.

There are several positive aspects of implementing the assertive discipline model, according to

Drew (2019).

• Establishes a calm and positive learning environment which benefits student learning.

• Canter (1978) argues it will lead to an 80% drop in classroom disruptions.

• There will be less elevated behavior issues (such as sending a student to the head teacher or

the principle’s office).

• The focus on structure could be advantageous to students with autism who often crave order

and certainty.

3
 • Students have very clear behavioral guidelines which minimizes ambiguity.

Drew (2019) suggested the following negative aspects of the assertive discipline model:

• The individual differences of students and individualized plans for students with special

needs are often ignored.

• The underlying cause of misbehavior is often overlooked by the teacher who has a fixed

discipline policy. The reason behind the misbehavior of the student is not identified or

addressed.

• Students are expected to be passive learners when it comes to behavior rather then being

actively involved in discussing and negotiating rules.

On the other hand, Linda Albert suggested Cooperative Discipline theory which focuses on

building a positive relationship between stakeholders, such as students, parents, and administrators,

which is essential to establish collaborative classroom environment that minimizes misbehaviors

and conflicts in the classroom. According to the Cooperative Discipline Model by Linda Albert, the

reason why children misbehave is that they want something. The first step the teacher needs to take

is determining what the student wants. Baker et. al. (n.d.) further explains that three are four goals

of misbehavior: attention-seeking, power-seeking, revenge-seeking and avoidance of academic

failure. As students have the freedom to choose the way they behave, Albert suggests that teachers

best influence them through establishing a sense of belonging by three C’s: helping students feel

capable, showing them how to connect with others, and helping them to contribute to the class

(Charles, 2005, p.205). In addition, teachers should work in collaboration with students and parents

in formulating a code of conduct which specifies how everyone should behave and interact

(Charles, 2005, p.208). This collaboration will promote a sense of belonging, thus misbehavior can

be reduced without having to confront and administer a conflict resolution plan as the last resort. In

contrast to the assertive discipline model where the teacher sets the consequences when the

classroom rules are transgressed, the cooperative model emphasizes that teachers should also work

4
cooperatively with students to develop a set of consequences for when the classroom rules are

disobeyed (Charles, 2005, p.201).

For a similar case in disrupting a lesson by making noises, cooperative discipline will take a

completely different approach. The teacher would discuss the behavior of the child by asking

questions to make sure the student grasp that their behavior is inappropriate. The student may

disagree with the teacher, for which the teacher would implement problem-solving in collaboration

with the student when disagreements occur. The teacher would identify the reason why the student

is disrupting the lesson by making noises, which in this scenario would be a method of seeking

attention. Once the teacher identifies the reason why students misbehave, they can put strategies in

place to prevent future disruptions. The teacher could incorporate the student as part of the lesson,

by having the student hand out facts sheets or pointing to relevant information on a poster. The

teacher could provide attention to the student by noticing and complementing positive behavior.

Charles (2005) suggests the following positive aspects of Albert’s Cooperative Discipline:

• Cooperative Discipline helps the student achieve their ultimate goal of belonging, which in

turn reduces their amount of misbehavior.

• Albert developed approximately 70 proven procedures for dealing with misbehavior,

procedures that stress teaching proper behavior rather than punishing transgressors.

• A clear rational has been provided for Cooperative Discipline and a detailed guideline for

implementing and maintaining the program.

• The importance of strong support form administrators and parents is recognized and

suggestions for ensuring that support is provided.

Negative aspects of Albert’s Cooperative Discipline:

• Cooperative Discipline is more complicated to implement and time-consuming since it

requires teachers to delve more in the matter and implement individualized discipline pan

which specifically cater students’ needs.

• In low socio-economic areas, it is often difficult to obtain cooperation from parents.

5
Both of these theories promote effective discipline within the classroom, however the cooperative

discipline model takes into account the ultimate reason why a student misbehaves. It does not only

address the immediate behavior of the child but takes into account the need the child is trying to

satisfy. “The Cooperative Discipline is a process that promotes collaboration. Building a strong

partnership with students and parents is essential to maintaining a positive discipline program that

works” (Baker et. al., n.d.). This quote emphasizes the importance of building relationships with

students which results in greater success of discipline within the classroom. As students collaborates

in the creation of classroom rules, they would be more accepting of these rules and are more likely

to obey these rules. Cooperative discipline would be very effective to build students’ self-discipline

and conflict resolution skills that they would need in the long run. Cooperative discipline will be

more effective if the students are the main focus, as it is not only promoting a safe and orderly

learning environment but also giving each student “a good chance of learning to behave responsibly

as well as achieving more academically” (Charles, 2005, p.202).

References:

Baker, K., McCallum, K., McGibbon, M., Steves, N., & Zirpolo, J. (n.d). Cooperative discipline

model Linda Albert. Retrieved from

https://vrogersmanagementprofile.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/3/13836263/linda_albert_summ

ary_3_pages.pdf

Charles, C.M. (2005). Chapter 12: Linda Albert’s Cooperative Discipline. In Building Classroom

Management (9th ed.). Retrieved from

http://faculty.washington.edu/cadavis1/503%20Readings/AlbertChapter.pdf

Drew, C., (2019, December 6). 11 Key Features of Assertive Discipline Theory.

HelpfulProfessor.com. Retrieved from https://helpfulprofessor.com/assertive-discipline/

6
Institute for Cognitive Behavior Management. (2016, December 12). Assertive Discipline. The

Library of the Institute of Cognitive Behavior Management. Retrieved from

https://cognitivebehaviormanagement.com/practice-tools/procedure-teacher-

techniques/teacher-technique-01-assertive-discipline/

Sandidge, R.F. (2009). Assertive discipline. In E.M. Anderman & L.H. Anderman (Eds.).

Psychology of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia (pp. 166-168). Macmillan Reference

USA (Gale, Cengage Learning).

McIntyre, T. (n.d.). Assertive Discipline. Behavior Advisor. Retrieved from

http://www.behavioradvisor.com/AssertiveDiscipline.html