Classroom Discipline Wong’s Pragmatic Classroom Kagan, Kyle, and Scott’s Win-Win Discipline Morrish’s Real Discipline
Strengths • Wong’s approach “pragmatic” where it is “built from practical ideas” pieced together from multiple sources (Charles, 2008, pg. 130). This theory does not fit with cookie cutter classrooms and can be modified to fit the teacher, content, or student group.
• Encourages the idea that “discipline problems” will “largely disappear” when the classroom management is in check (Charles, 2008, pg. 30).
• “Rules of behavior set limits” where they “create a work-oriented atmosphere” (Charles, 2008, pg. 133). Behavior issues are simply violations of procedure and have specific and logical consequences that were clearly laid out on the first day of school. • “Student needs” are strongly represented were the “primary goal” is to “help students develop long-term, self-managed responsibility.
• Encourages a spirit of teamwork between the teacher and student where the end result is where “students manage themselves responsibly” (Charles, 2008, pg. 151). • A precursor to Kagan’s win-win strategy because it “teaches students right from wrong,” high expectations of adult authority, “and encourages them to make choices about behavior that are sufficiently mature and experienced to do” (Charles, 2008, pg. 227).
• “To acquire essential [behavioral norms] skills, they need supportive guidance from enlightened, caring teachers” where it does not put the teachers and students on the same plane; however, it does not completely separate them.
Weaknesses • Requires intense planning and execution by the teacher to ensure that consistency of procedures is followed in order for this to succeed.
• If there needs to be a change in classroom management style in the middle of the school year, Wong gives little detail on how that should be handled. They focus heavily on the first day and