Edpsy 399 OL - Spring 2000

Tom Anderson, Instructor

Leonard Fretzin

Forum 1 - Lesson 1

Date: Sun Jan 21 2001

Subject: Lesson 1 q1 On contracts

My introduction to behavior contracts began with the rude awakening many inexperienced teachers have during their first year of teaching. My preconception was that the hardest part of teaching Chemistry and Physics in a Catholic High School would involve developing a curriculum that would be effective in conveying the difficult ideas of these subjects.

But I found that discipline was a significant problem in some of my classrooms. Specifically, in one regular Chemistry class there were four students whose sole purpose in life appeared to be disrupting the educational process and making my life hell. I have since come to learn that it is estimated that up to 50% of classroom time in some schools is taken up with activities other than instruction, and that discipline problems are responsible for a significant portion of this lost instructional time (Cotton 1990).

It took me months to finally remedy this situation, and even then, it was not the resolution that I would have preferred. After trying the following behavior modification techniques:

deducting academic points for misbehavior;

sending these students out of my class numerous times;

sending students to the office or Dean of students;

making telephone calls to parents;

having conferences with parents;

and sending students to the principal (after more than one discussion of these problem students); the principal finally arranged that a behavior contract be drawn up and signed by both the student and his parent. The contract required the students to maintain proper behavior in my classes in accordance with generally accepted rules of classroom behavior.

In thinking about this experience I later came to the conclusion that what was being followed here was the legal requirements for a school administration to establish disciplinary consequences as determined by the courts. What needed to be established was a clear and documented case of student misbehavior and disruptive activities in continuous violation of school rules and policy.

In the end, these students all violated their contracts and were permanently removed from my class. This was fine with me, but it did not indicate success, but rather failure to favorably modify student behavior.

It has also been my experience that learning contracts for failing students do not seem to work very well, even when a good deal of personal time and attention is relegated to the student with problems of this sort.

Current research seems to indicate that behavior problems are minimal in schools in which there is an emphasis on the importance of learning, and intolerance of conditions which inhibit learning.

In contrast to poorly disciplined schools, staff in well-disciplined schools share and communicate high expectations for appropriate student behavior.

Rules, sanctions, and procedures are developed with input from students, and are made known to everyone in the school.

Student participation in developing and reviewing school discipline programs creates a sense of responsibility.

Principals of well-disciplined schools tend to be very visible in hallways and classrooms, talking informally with teachers and students. They assist teachers to improve their classroom management and discipline skills ( Stallings, J. A., and Mohlman, G. C. 1988)

Although my experiences to date do not supply evidence of the efficacy of using either behavior or learning contracts, research seems to support the development and use of contingency contracts, which specify the sanctions students will face if they do not behave in accordance with the terms of the contract. (Allen 1981)

However, teaching self-control skills in conjunction with the behavior modification approach offered by contracts seems to be a prerequisite to the effectiveness of this approach. (Brophy 1986 p. 191).

The experts advise teachers to instruct students with behavior problems in self control skills and how to observe their own behavior, at the same time, reinforcing them for success. These thinkers believe that teachers should 'collaborate' with misbehaving students to develop contingency contracts that help to stimulate behavioral change.

If we only had the time we need - or fewer problem students!

Allen, S. A Study to Determine the Effectiveness of a Positive Approach to Discipline

System for Classroom Management. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the

American Educational Research Association, Los Angeles, CA, April 1981.

Brophy, J. "Classroom Management Techniques." Education and Urban Society (1986): 182-194.

Bruning, R. H., Schraw, G. J. & Ronning, R. R. (1999). Cognitive Psychology and

Instruction, 2nd Ed. Merrill, Englewood Clift, NJ

Cotton, K. Instructional Reinforcement. Close-Up No. 3. Portland, OR: Northwest

Regional Educational Laboratory, 1988.

Stallings, J. A., and Mohlman, G. C. School Policy, Leadership Style, Teacher

Changes, and Student Behavior in Eight Schools. Mountain View, CA: Stallings

Teaching and Learning Institute, 1981.