The idea of classroom management is to create and maintain a safe and orderly classroom which functions in such a way that students learn as efficiently as possible.  One author calls classroom management "the business of enforcing classroom standards and building patterns of cooperation to maximize learning and minimize disruptions" (Chemlynski, 1996, p.42).
     How can a teacher operate in his classroom to achieve such results?  Most models of classroom management attempt to accomplish student cooperation in learning by encouraging student responsibility, by increasing student involvement, or by fulfilling student needs.  This paper considers three models of classroom management which apply these principles.  The discussion concludes with my personal evaluation of these ideas and with my own plan for classroom management.
     One model of classroom management is the responsibility model. This model asserts that a system of rules, punishments, and rewards simply teaches students that it's okay to break rules as long as you don't get caught and that they shouldn't "be good" unless there's something in it for them.  Advocates of the responsibility model are also clear that consequences for breaking rules should support "nonviolence", meaning no corporal punishment, and that teachers should hold students accountable for their behaviors "by expressing approval and disapproval" (Curwin and Mendler, 1997, p. 13).  According to the responsibility model, discipline comes from teaching  children to make good decisions and providing them with good role models to imitate. If students are shown how they are expected to behave rather than simply reprimanded or punished, they are much more likely to modify their behavior in a positive fashion (Curwin and Mendler, 1997).
      According to the responsibility model, there are four factors that make up a good classroom atmosphere.  The first concept is warmth.  A teacher should show the students that they are wanted and that he wants to help them succeed in school.  Next, there should be clear limits. The teacher should have definite rules and explain consequences.  When students misbehave, the teacher should show the students what they or their classmates did wrong and why it was wrong. There should also be a democratic atmosphere where students are involved in making the rules and determining consequences for disobeying them.  According to proponents of this model, students are more likely to obey rules they themselves helped make.  In addition, the teacher should encourage development of the students' problem-solving skills.  He should talk privately to a student when a problem comes up, showing him how he should solve the problem.  Finally, the teacher himself should be an example in his behavior.  As one educator observes, "The best way to show correct behavior is to model it" (Curwin and Mendler, 1997, p.14), so if you do blow up, don't be afraid to apologize, and your students will do the same.
     Another model is called the classroom community model.  This model holds that students are more likely to control their behavior if they are encouraged to help make decisions, manage discipline, and solve problems as participants in their own classroom community.  In other words, "they behave not only because their teacher expects them to, but because their fellow community members expect them to" (Panico, 1998, p.28).  Like the responsibility model, this model allows students to set their own rules and punishments, but emphasizes more strongly the sense of student ownership of the class and learning.  In order to run their community, the community members find they have a need for student information known only to the teacher.  The adherents to the community model feel that "this information is necessary if students are to accept that fair is not always equal, and develop a sense of social responsibility" (Panico, 1998, p.30).  If an individual does not correct bad behavior, the teacher will share information about an individual's discipline problems with community members in order for the classroom community to provide help.  A further advantage in the community model leading to student self-discipline is the development of communications skills.  To participate in community meetings, students must be taught how to communicate and how to listen.  Once actively practiced, these skills result in the students' sense of responsibility to themselves, their classmates, and their community.   
     The last model of classroom management this paper will discuss is the control theory. The control theory claims that only about half of all secondary school students make any effort to learn (Glasser, 1986).  They don't work to succeed since they see no immediate payoff.  Advocates of the control theory believe students must be motivated by feeling a need to learn. Basic to the control theory is the idea that all motivation comes from within us, never from external sources.  We choose whatever options in life seem at that moment to best fit our needs or satisfy us.  This is a major break with the traditional stimulus-response or s-r theory which holds that behaviors may be caused by external stimuli.
     Pavlov's famous experiment with a tethered dog illustrates the s-r theory.  Always after ringing a bell, Pavlov fed the dog.  Finally, the dog began to drool whenever it heard the sound.   Pavlov concluded that the bell, an external stimulus, was responsible (s-r theory).  However, the control theory contends that the salivation was caused by the dog's hunger and its association of the bell's sound with the fulfillment of that need (both internal stimuli).  Furthermore, the control theory holds that all motivation fits into one of the following five categories: The need to survive and reproduce, the need to belong and to love, the need to gain power, the need to be free, and the need to have fun (Glasser, 1986).  Applying these principles to the classroom, the control theory suggests that teachers should analyze their curriculum, teaching style, and classroom atmosphere; asking themselves whether these satisfy students' needs, whether students see their needs as being fulfilled by the gaining of knowledge that is taking place in school, and whether the teacher is satisfied.  For a student to be motivated, he must have a positive and satisfying mental picture of the classroom activities.  According to Glasser, "what students do in school is completely determined by the pictures in their heads" (Glasser, 1986, p.39).  If any of these pictures fail to fulfill a student's five basic needs, he will remove that picture and replace it with one that is more fulfilling.  Therefore, the goal of the control theory is to encourage children to make an effort by satisfying their needs.  This goal is accomplished by using "learning teams", small groups of students who work together as an interdependent group to satisfy the entire group's needs.  Furthermore, the teacher is to view himself not as a worker, but as a modern manager, ready to share his power with the students.  The teacher should also be continually on the lookout for new and better ways of satisfying student educational needs.  This awareness will enable the teacher to reevaluate any unfulfilling teaching techniques.
     Each of the classroom management models discussed contains some key components to effective classroom management.  For example, most models agree that the teacher must be his students' example of good behavior, and all believe that there are consequences of bad behavior.   However, each model incorrectly insists that the student should be involved in decision making, especially on the disciplinary level and that the teacher should share power with the students.  It is the teacher not the student who must set the atmosphere of his classroom, make the decisions, and establish the rules.  Parents and teachers have been set over students by God, and these authorities are given the responsibility not only to make the rules but also to enforce them with punishment.
     While all models of classroom management speak of punishment, none of them consider corporal punishment to be an option.  The general consensus on corporal punishment is that it "is unnecessary and can cause physical and psychological damage to children (Osborn, 1989). However, Proverbs 29:15 teaches us that "The rod and reproof give wisdom: but a child left to himself bringeth his mother to shame."  Therefore, corporal punishment is very clearly taught as one kind of punishment to correct a child's misbehavior, rather than allowing him to make his own rules and set his own limits.  Even though a teacher's good example will undoubtedly influence the students positively, because of our sinful natures, that example will not prevent disobedience.  Wrong behavior must be dealt with daily, and the consequences of that behavior must be in the form of punishment.
     One writer of books dealing with educational theories believes that students must be encouraged to develop self-discipline with consequences that maintain a student's dignity (Hunter, 1990).  A teacher who maliciously humiliates a student publicly shows no love or concern for the student's learning right behavior.  However, it is not always proper to reprimand students in private, as we are told in Scripture, "Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear" (I Timothy 5:20).  A fear of hurting the child's self-esteem is not mentioned. In fact, we use punishment out of love and for the good of the child.  God warns us, "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou beatest him with the rod, he shall not die.  Thou shalt beat him with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell" (Proverbs 23:13,14).
     My own plan for managing the classroom includes prevention of misbehavior as well as punishment of disobedience.  I believe that a teacher can prevent idleness, inattentiveness, and other inappropriate behavior in class when he is well-prepared and concerned about the material he is presenting.  Students will become interested and involved in learning subject material which they know their teacher considers valuable.  While corporal punishment is not an option in today's schools, I think students should learn that punishment is more serious than indicated in non-threatening terms like "consequences" and "reinforcement".  Instead it is the just result of disobeying rules.  Misbehaving students should be dealt with promptly, consistently, and firmly.  Contrary to popular opinion, most students respect a strong disciplinarian, because they desire a well-structured, orderly atmosphere with rules and guidelines for direction just as adults do.  Finally, since punishment is designed to set us on the right path, it can only bring benefits to the classroom.  Scripture tells us, "Correct thy son, and he shall give thee rest; yea, he shall give delight unto thy soul" (Proverbs 29:17).
     Works Cited