1
Introduction
A Frightening Conclusion
I have come to a frightening conclusion.
I am the decisive element in the classroom.
It is my personal approach that creates the climate.
It is my daily mood that makes the weather.
As a teacher I possess tremendous power to make
a child’s life miserable or joyous. I can be a tool of torture
or an instrument of inspiration.
I can humiliate or humor, hurt or heal.
In all situations, it is my response that decides
whether a crisis will be escalated or de-escalated,
and a child humanized or de-humanized.
-Haim Ginot, Between Teacher and Child
Classroom management has received a great amount of attention in recent years and is
currently the number one problem for educators in America. When one attempt to define the
term classroom management, one immediately assumes it is the need to discipline negative
behavior in the classroom. What do I have to do to get students to apply themselves to their work
and stop fooling around and being disruptive? “Establishing a well-organized plan for classroom
management at the outset of the year is essential for a peaceful and calm classroom that is
conducive to instruction and learning for students with a variety of academic, social, and
behavioral needs” ( Capizza, 2009 p. 1). Although, students’ negative behavior and negative
attitude is a major component, classroom management is the concern of how things are done in
the classroom, rather than the concern of how students behave. Classroom management has no
2
penalties or rewards, where as discipline has penalties and rewards. From the student’s
perspective, effective classroom management involves clear communication of behavioral and
academic expectations, as well as a cooperative learning environment (Allen, 2010).
Many teachers devote a disproportionate amount of time and energy disciplining their
class rather than managing their class. According to Lemov (2010) great teaching is an art.
“Great art relies on the mastery and application of foundational skills learned individually
through diligent study (Lemov, 2010, p. 1).” An effective teacher has mastered the art of
managing their classroom. Let us consider a store owner. Store owners do not discipline a store;
they manage a store. Let us consider a coach. Coaches do not discipline a team; they manage a
team. Teachers do not discipline a classroom; they manage a classroom.
Effectively managing a classroom is possibly the most difficult aspect of the art of
teaching. Once a teacher loses control of their classroom, it becomes increasingly more difficult
for them to regain that control. Research shows that the time a teacher has to take to correct
misbehavior caused by poor classroom management skills results in a lower rate of academic
engagement in the classroom. In order for teachers to successfully teach and students to
academically succeed; an orderly classroom environment with minimum disruption to bring
behavior under control is needed. There must be a carefully planned technique system of
procedures, rules and routines that creates an atmosphere to learn. The teacher is the key variable
in the classroom. This study will examine the progressive ideology that students should be able
3
to govern themselves and the conservative ideology of a structured classroom environment and
their effects on students’ academic achievement.
4
Statement of Problem
Our public schools are failing our students, particularly minority students from lowincome backgrounds. As prospective educators, in an urban environment, the educational
inequality our students are facing is our greatest challenge. We are prepared and dedicated to
working towards closing the achievement gap between low-income students and high-income
students and preparing all students to succeed in college. Before we can do this we need to fully
understand why our inner-city schools are failing our children, particularly low-income minority
students?
There is a lack of classroom management being effectively enforced in elementary
schools, thus, making daily instruction more challenging for the teachers and learning more
challenging for the students. On a daily basis in-service and pre-service teachers are faced with
disruptive behavior in their classroom, which results in wasted instructional time. Public schools,
especially in urban areas do not spend a sufficient amount of time establishing routines, rules and
practicing procedures. Students should not be expected to learn and master classroom procedures
within the first week of school or be able to govern themselves. Well thought out and planned
procedures must be explicitly taught and practiced throughout the school year. Researchers
believe, when there is a clear set of classroom management techniques in line, teachers can
establish an effective learning environment.
5
“When teachers have a rich management and discipline repertoire, students become more selfdisciplined, minimizing the need to refer students to the office and maximizing instructional time
with greater opportunities to teach and learn” (Freiberg, Huzinec, & Templeton, 2009,p.77).
Educators need to consider whether they have eliminated all instructional impediments
and distractions in the classroom. It has been argued that establishing classroom
procedures/routines and utilizing actionable techniques, such as non-verbal cues and positive
framing, is extremely vital to an efficient and academically successfully classroom. Having
control of the two will lead to the ultimate instructional time in the classroom. Will making use
of every second in the classroom to instruct our students lead our students one step closer to
closing the achievement gap and one step closer to going to college? Will establishing
procedures and utilizing actionable techniques ensure academic success in your classroom?
6
Review of Related Literature
I.
The need for Classroom Management
When discussing tools to effective teaching that leads to authentic learning, no longer can
the term classroom management go without significant acknowledgment. Classroom
management is defined as a “multi-faceted concept that includes the organization of the
psychical environment, the establishment of rules and routines, the development of effective
relationships, and prevention of and responsive to misbehavior” (Garrett, 2008, p.35). Managing
behavioral issues have been problematic in classrooms across America for decades, and
although, this is a prevalent issue in schools, there remains a lack of intervention. According to
Capizza (2009), if you ask a group of teachers what they are most concerned about in their
classrooms or schools, it is likely that student behavior will come up as one of the greatest—if
not the greatest—issues. Urban schools are increasingly seeing more egregious student behavior,
which., suggests the urgent need for effective classroom management, specifically in urban
schools in high poverty area. It is believe that classroom management will be a greater challenge
in for urban schools in high-poverty neighborhoods because “the schools themselves are under
greater pressure to maintain a safe, orderly, academic environment, and teachers may not be
supported by the school’s administration in building this environment” (Weiner, 2010, p.307). It
is almost impossible for cooperating and pre-service teachers to successfully complete a lesson
7
because too much time is spent on addressing disruptive behaviors. As pre-service teachers in an
urban school, we have experienced, firsthand, the need for a more effective classroom
management system in the urban schools. A study conducted by Weiner (2010) to understand
why classroom management is such a problem in the urban schools, found that “so much in the
school environment undercuts the social norm required for high academics functioning in urban
classrooms, successful urban teachers must deeply embed classroom management in every
aspect of classroom life, making the teaching of social skills a reflexive part of instruction (p.
309). The ideal classroom environment will have “fewer disruptions during instructional time,
better teacher planning, classroom organization, and student engagement, (this will) allow for
more learning time” (Weiner, 2010, p.76).
Studies have also shown that in a quest to understand many classroom behaviors one
must consider classroom settings and qualities. Downer, La Paro, Pianta, and RimmKaufman (2005) argue that, “teachers in these higher-quality classrooms use proactive
approaches to discipline: they establish stable routines, monitor their students carefully to
keep them engaged, and manage behavior problems proactively” (380). In their study on
classroom settings and qualities to children’s behavior; three pertinent findings were
discovered. “First, classroom setting appears to be related to children’s engagement and
behavior toward peers. Second, as classroom quality is graded higher, the occurrence of the
problem behaviors (non compliance with teacher requests, off task behavior) is reduced in
structured teacher-directed classroom and whole class settings. Third, as classroom quality is
8
rated higher, the rate of children’s social conversation and cooperation with peers is greater
in small-group settings. These findings taken together, contribute to an understanding of the
ways in which teachers decisions regulate children’s classroom behavior” (Downer, La Paro,
Pianta & Rimm-Kaufman, 2005, p.389).
In Freiberg, Huzinec, and Templeton’s (2009) study, they used a program which
emphasizes preventing discipline problems before they begin and improving classroom climate.
They concluded in their study that when an instructional management program- Consistency
Management & Cooperative Discipline was implemented the elementary school students did
better than the control students in reading and mathematics. Higgins and Moule (2009) did a
study to compare an education program’s take on classroom management and what really goes
on at an urban school pre service students attended. The study notes that “They claimed that
strong emotions, strict guidelines, and consistency (strategies, boundaries, routines, etc.) led to
students feeling both safe and comfortable in the classroom” (p.135). The pre-service teachers
acknowledge the teachers to be “assertive, aggressive, and harsh” (p.135), but the strategies
yielded high academic expectations. In another study done to get student teachers conceptions of
classroom control, Johnson (2001) found that one of the student teachers thought “providing
them with fun lessons and unlimited choices, will allow for student growth and well-run
classrooms (Johnson, 2001, p.111)”.
II.
The Three Approaches to Classroom Management
9
Three approaches to classroom management, non-interventionist, interventionist, and
interactionist, currently in use in classrooms around the United States were closely examined
in Unal & Unal’s study. Although, the study was done to compare beginning and experienced
teachers’ perceptions of classroom management beliefs and practices at an elementary
school; the study revealed the “three approaches to classroom interaction,” (Unal & Unal
2009, p.257). The non-interventionist approach is used in a student centered environment.
The idea behind this approach is “for the teacher to demonstrate empathy toward students to
devise compromises in an effort to provide opportunities for students to self correct
inappropriate behaviors and learn to manage their own behaviors” (p.257). According to
Johnson (2001) the non-interventionist approach is also described as the nurturance
conception of classroom control where “fun lessons and letting students decide, at the
expense of classroom order (Johnson, 2001, p.111)”. The interventionist approach is the
exact opposite and typically used in a more traditional teacher centered environment.
According to Unal & Unal (2009), “the interventionist tends to take control of the situation
by implementing immediately a disciplinary tactic to control behavior.” Disciplinary tactics
used by interventionist teachers to control the environment may include isolation, physical
restraints, modeling, and reinforcement (p.257). Johnson (2001) describes this as a
dominance conception of classroom control where, the personal power and authority of
teachers is displayed by demanding students to listen, starting out strict and the use of
punishment to keep students behaving well (p.111). The interactionist is between the non
10
interventionist and interventionist. The interactionist approach to classroom management
strives to find solutions that are satisfactory to both teacher and student, employing some of
the same techniques as non-interventionists and interventionists (p.258). Johnson (2001) lists
this as the rule based conception to classroom control where, “emphasis is placed on the
importance of establishing and consistently enforcing class rules; well-planned, well-paced
lessons; and monitor students to prevent misbehavior from occurring” (p.111). This approach
still allowed teachers to be nurturing while applying forms of discipline. Unal and Unal
(2009) found “that neither beginner nor experienced teachers were found to be non
interventionist on any of the subscales of classroom management” (p.264). The beginner
teacher favored the interactionist approach while the experienced teacher favored the
interventionist, “none of the groups were in favor of allowing students to have full control or
to have the primary responsibility of developing their own rules” (Unal & Unal, 2009 p.264).
III.
Supporters of Teacher-Centered Classroom Management
The need for classroom management skills has not diminished during a time when school
reform has put the spotlight on academic testing and student achievement. There are many
theorists and practitioners who are in favor of implementing strong classroom management
practices. It is argued that an educator cannot be considered a highly-qualified teacher without a
mastery of sound best-practice strategies for managing classroom time, space, and student
11
behavior (Allen 2010, Clement 2010, Lemov 2010). Classroom management is essential for
academic success, therefore “creating the best learning environment possible is the primary focus
of the classroom teacher’s responsibility” (Martin, Mayall, Yin, 2006). According to LewisPalmer, Merrell, Reinke (2008), classroom management is directly tied to levels of student
involvement and academic achievement, making it an important component of teaching. When
Clement (2010) was immersed in her undergraduate teacher program 30 years ago professors
told their students that “if you write a good enough lesson plan, you won’t have discipline
problems.” Today, 30 years later, Clement (2010) tells teacher education candidates that, “you
will not even get to teach your perfectly written lesson plan if you don’t have a classroom
management plan in place.”
A lack of effective classroom management practices leaves a breeding ground for
negative adverse behaviors in the classroom such as bullying, which results in less instructional
time, poor student performance. Classrooms that are managed in ways other than with an
authoritative style, a bullying culture can develop. There is a connection between how teachers
treat their students, which is expressed through their classroom management approaches, and the
presence or absence of bullying in a classroom. Classroom management practices contribute to a
context or culture that either promotes or discourages bullying (Allen, 2010). Not only are
teachers accountable for students’ academic achievement, but, they are also expected to provide
a safe and orderly learning environment; given these facts classroom management is an
understandable concern for novice teachers as well as experienced teachers (Rosas & West
12
2009). Studies that investigated the impact of classroom management and bullying discovered
that not only did classroom management correlate with whether bullying took place among
students, but they also discovered that there was a mediating variable related to whether bullying
occurred at all. The mediating variable was the social structure of the class. The social structure
included the informal relationships that developed in the class. When teachers care about
students, when they organize classrooms such that positive student relationships develop, and
when they manage learning and behavioral issues in positive, educative ways, students are far
less likely to engage or experience bullying (Allen, 2010).
Having strong authoritative classroom management practices will allow teachers to
achieve teaching excellence along both academic and social dimensions and may be the antidote
to two pressing educational problems (Walker 2009). According to Walker (2009) the number
of students who consistently experienced a classroom with high-quality instruction and a healthy
emotional climate was astonishingly low: 7%. Effective classroom management may be able to
reduce the nation’s depressing student dropout rates. It has been proven that academics are not
the only reason students drop out. Feelings of isolation and frustration also contribute to
disengagement (Roeser, Midgley, & Urfan 1996). Effective classroom management, according
to Walker (2009), may also stem the alarming rates of teacher attrition and burnout as well.
Student misbehavior is a factor in teacher burnout and the decision of novice teachers to leave
the profession (Allen, 2010). As many as 50% of new teachers leave the field within five years,
and 20% of those who stay say they would choose another profession if they could (NEA, 2003).
13
IV.
Supporters of Student-Centered Classroom Management
Although, there are many supporters of an authoritative, teacher-centered, approach to
classroom management, there are also those who favor a more progressive, student-centered
approach to classroom management. The argument against the traditional classroom
management practices is that teachers are not effectively managing their class or teaching their
students discipline. Dewey, Kilpatrick, and Montessori are amongst the theorists who believe
children learn discipline by taking responsibility of their own learning. Maria Montessori (1912)
is a firm believer that “discipline must come through liberty” (p. 53). “We call an individual
disciplined when he is a master of himself, and can, therefore, regulate his own conduct when it
shall be necessary to follow some rule of life” (Montessori, 1912, p.45). She states this is
something “difficult for followers of common-school methods to understand” (p.45). Montessori
(1912) worked to alter the hierarchy in a traditional classroom and move away from the
traditional authoritarian role of the instructor. Her method requires educators to be passive
observers who simply guide the students to knowledge as to not “suffocate the activity of (their)
pupils.”
Montessori’s pedagogy, as those of Dewey (1937) and Kilpatrick (1918), follows a belief
of constructivism rather than behaviorism. Montessori (1912) strongly encourages educators to
be observers of student’s activities and not restrict the student’s mobility with unnecessary
discipline. A student will learn when that student is actively engaged in an assignment, problem-
14
solving and constructing their own understanding. Learning does not take place as a form of
animal training or in hopes of receiving meaningless rewards. Choi and Lee (2009) mentions that
the techniques-oriented discourse and approach to classroom management oversimplifies the
issue by assuming that everything about classroom management is a well-structured problem (p.
103). The traditional, behaviorist, classroom management techniques have not caused significant
changes in student behavior. Rather, it has limited the ability of the learner to become selfdirected and self-disciplined, a necessary condition for the use of more complex instruction in
teaching and learning (Freiberg & Lamb 2009). Kilpatrick argues that if students are involved in
social aims and their own purposeful learning, they will naturally develop moral responsibility
and character education, (1918, p.47). According to Dewey (1916), much work in school consist
of setting up rules “by which pupils are to act of such a sort that even after the pupils have acted,
they are not led to see the connection between the result (Dewey, 1916 p.41).”
According to Freiberg & Lamb (2009), a person-centered classroom creates a balance
between the wants of the teacher (the W) and the efforts and needs of the students (the E),
forming a collective classroom WE, including all persons in a classroom. A teacher-centered
approach to classroom management fails to create that balance. Teachers and students are urged
to jointly construct a context that is, an “ongoing dynamic accomplishment of people acting
together with shared tools” (Doyle, 2009 &Russell 1997). To achieve the goal of order (i.e.,
student cooperation), a teacher must organize classroom life and recruit, invite, persuade, or
convince the students to join forces with her or him in participating in events for specific periods
15
(Doyle, 2009, p. 158). A person-centered classroom management approach is argued to facilitate
higher achievement, have more positive learning environments with stronger teacher-student
relationships than teacher-centered or traditional classrooms (Doyle 2009, Freiberg & Lamb
2009). According to Doyle (2009) the classroom is not simply a background or a container for
teaching and learning, a neutral and synthetic space in which teachers and students happen to be.
Classrooms, rather, are systems of interrelated activity segments that are tangible and powerful
partners in construction of what happens in these environments (Doyle, 2009, p. 157).
It is also argued that there is a need to establish “culturally responsive classroom
management practices.” Literature on classroom management has paid very little attention to the
issue of cultural diversity. Researchers, such as Milner & Tenore (2010), have argued that
classroom management and diversity are inseparable.
“Consequently, teacher concerns about classroom management are sometimes exacerbated in
urban settings, where student’s languages, experiences, ethnicities, religions, and abilities may be
highly diverse and may or may not be shared by the teacher (Milner & Tenore, 2010, p. 561).
According to Milner & Tenore (2010), Teachers are sometimes pressured and closely monitored
by their administrators to follow a set frame of referral, discipline, and management, which can
make it difficult for teachers to employ culturally responsive classroom management. Teachers
can experience less than ideal support from administrator; consequently, their students may
believe that the teachers “forget to care” about them. In a highly structured classroom
environment we run the risk of teachers giving information and students having little (if any)
voice and perspective in the learning environment. A study conducted by Poulou (2009)
revealed that skills which facilitate interpersonal and intrapersonal relationships such as ones
16
related to mutual respect, inclusion, influence or attentive listening are more frequently exercised
than skills that promote a sense of community, according to teachers and students’ perceptions.
This approach can result in a vicious cycle that is tantamount to Freire’s (1998) notion that
students are often passive participants in their own learning, with teachers constantly attempting
to pour knowledge or information into “empty vessels.”
“The systemic and institutionalized nature of teachers’ work in urban and diverse schools
seems to follow several layers. The administration taking their cues from the
superintendent who is interpreting national and state guidelines, for instance, has set of
policies and expectations about how teachers’ classes out to run (e.g., quietly, orderly),
which creates a dilemma for teachers. Optimal learning can occur without student seated
in silence. Teachers, in turn, in their attempts to meet institutional expectations develop
and implement management strategies that reify systems of oppression and voicelessness
among students. Students, in turn, resist these systemic parameters, and chaos,
disconnections, and (mis)management result. The desire for order and control (Noguera,
2003) on the classroom level can be connected to teachers’ goal to improve test scores.
Teachers prepare students to follow directions and to “obey” orders for the world of work
(Anyon, 1980), and these decisions can be motivated and shaped by institutional and
systemic pressures far beyond teachers’ control, (Milner & Tenore, 2010, p. 569-570).”
V.
Supporters of a hybrid of Teacher-centered and Student-centered classroom management
There are theorists and practitioners who seek to marry the two schools of thought.
Effective classroom management according to Trussell (2008), is implementing positive
behavior support (PBS). Positive behavior support is a general term that refers to the application
of positive behavioral interventions and systems to achieve socially important behavior changes
in our classroom (U.S. Department of Education, 2000). Lemov (2010), provides educators with
49 techniques that will assist a teacher in setting his/her classroom for success. According to
Lemov (2010), there’s one suitable percentage of students following a direction given in your
17
classroom: 100 percent. If you don’t achieve this, you make your authority subject to
“interpretation, situation, and motivation.” A teacher’s goal is to get 100 percent compliance so
that you can teach. This is one of the popular techniques in Lemov’s book that takes into
consideration the teacher’s authority as well as the student’s emotions. Lemov provides teachers
with six levels of the least invasive forms of intervention to achieve 100% compliance without
out the constant, time-consuming disruptions. The first least invasive form of intervention is the
nonverbal intervention, which can be a gesture or eye contact with off-task students while doing
something else. Positive group correction is the second least invasive intervention. This is a
quick verbal reminder to the group about what students should be doing and not what they
shouldn’t be doing (e.g., We’re following along in our books rather than You shouldn’t be
writing now). Anonymous individual correction is a quick verbal reminder to the group that
makes it explicit that not everyone is where they need to be: “We need two people to track the
speaker.” Private individual correction is when and if you have to name names seek to correct
privately and quietly. Lightning-quick public correction when you are forced to make individual
student corrections during public moments limit the amount of time a student is onstage:”
Jennifer I need your eyes,” is quick, confident and effective. The ideal situation in a class,
according to Lemov, is to solve a case of noncompliance quickly successfully and with the least
possible disruption to the whole class. The sixth and final form of intervention is the most
invasive form, consequences. If a situation cannot be addressed quickly and successfully
without a consequence, the consequence must be given so that instruction is not interrupted
(Lemov, 2010, p. 174).
18
Although, endless studies have been done on all three approaches to classroom
management it is still our responsibility as action researchers to evaluate which approach is the
most effective approach to classroom management and which approach to classroom
management will lead to the academic success of our students.
Statement of Hypothesis
HR1: Over a period of 6 weeks, Ms. St. Pierre and Ms. William will plan and deliver a
series of lessons to a first grade class in two different settings (charter school and public school).
For the first half of the study, 2 weeks, the teachers will implement a progressive, studentcentered classroom environment; where the students are allowed to govern themselves. During
the second half of the study the teachers will implement a conservative, teacher-centered
classroom environment; where a military style of discipline will be used. During the final 2
weeks the teachers will implement a hybrid of teacher-centered and student-centered classroom
management; where the students have procedures to follow and the teachers utilize actionable
techniques to manage the students’ behavior.
The two teachers will assess their students in the form of test and other written work to
ascertain which classroom management method yielded the best academic performances. The
two teachers will also do a comparative study to determine if their findings were similar.
19
HR2: Using classroom management procedures and techniques during three-four 3045min lesson a week for a 6 week period will increase academic success in reading and writing
for 1st grade students at PS X in Manhattan and X Charter School in Brooklyn.
20
Method
Participants
The researchers selected two first grade classrooms, one at a charter school and the other
a public school to conduct the action research. X Charter school is located in Brooklyn, NY and
PS X is located in New York, NY. Both classrooms have a total of 24-28 students.
The research will take place within a six week period. The first two weeks of the study
the teachers will implement a student-centered classroom management approach. The next two
weeks of the study the teacher will implement a teacher-centered classroom management
approach. The final two weeks of the study the teachers will implement a hybrid approach using
the Lemov techniques. After each approach the teachers will assess the students’ academic
achievement.
Instruments
There will be two surveys one for student and one for teacher. Surveys will be distributed
to students in both schools to get students feedback on some of the techniques they prefer in the
classroom. The goal of the survey is to assess how the students feel about the use of techniques
and/or having the choice to self-discipline.
The second survey will be completed by the teacher. The goal is to assess the teacher’s
take on what classroom management approach seems to be working in terms of achievement.
21
The action research will be from 6 weeks covering a series of ELA phonics, reading and
writing lessons four to five times a week for 30-45 minutes. Running records and writing pieces
will be analyzed from both schools to determine the results.
Experimental Design
Procedure
22
References
Allen, K. P. (2010). Classroom management, bullying and teacher practices. The Professional
Educator, 34(1).
Clement, M. C. (2010). Preparing teachers for classroom management: The teacher educator’s role.
Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 77(1), 41-44,
Choi, I. , & Lee, K. (2009). Designing and implementing a case-based learning environment for
enhancing ill-structured problem solving: classroom management problems for
prospective teachers. Educational Technology Research and Development, 1-31.
Retrieved from E-Journals database.
Capizza, A. M. (2009). Start the year off right: Designing and Evaluating a supportive classroom
management plan. Journal of Focus on Exceptional Children, 42 (3), 1-12. Retrieved from EJournals database.
Dewey, J (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. In
F. Shultz, S.O.U.R.C.E.S: Notable selections in Education , pp. 39-44.
Downer, J. T., La Paro, K. M., & Pianta, R. C., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E. (2005). The Contribution
of Classroom Setting and Quality of Instruction to Children’s Behavior in Kindergarten
Classrooms. The Elementary School Journal, 105(4), 377-394. Retrieved from E-Journals
database.
23
Doyle, W. (2009). Situated practice: A reflection on person-centered classroom management. Theory
Into Practice, 48, 156-159.
Garrett, T. (2008). Student-centered and teacher-centered classroom management: A case study
of three elementary teachers. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 43 (1), 34-47.
Freiberg, H. J., Huzinee, C. A., & Templeton S. M. (2009). Classroom Management—a Pathway
to Student Achievement: A Study of Fourteen Inner-City Elementary Schools. The
Elementary School Journal, 110(1), 63-80. Retrieved from E-Journals database
Freiberg, H. J. , & Lamb, S. M. (2009). Dimensions of person-centered classroom management. Theory
Into Practice, 48, 99-105.
Hertzog, N. B. (2007). Transporting pedagogy: Implementing the project approach in two first
grade classrooms. Journal of Advanced Academics, 18(4), 530-564.
Higgins, K., & Moule, J. (2009). “No More Mr. Nice Guy”: Preservice Teachers' Conflict With
Classroom Management in a Predominantly African-American Urban Elementary
School. Multicultural Perspectives, 11 (3), 132-138. Retrieved from E-Journals database.
Johnson, V. (1994). Student Teachers' Conceptions of Classroom Control. Journal of
Educational Research, 88 (2), 109-117. Retrieved from E-Journals database.
Kilpatrick, W. H (1918). The Project Method. Teachers College Record
Lemov, D. (2010). Teach like a champion: 49 Techniques that put students on the path to
24
college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lewis-Palmer, T. , Merrell, K. , & Reinke, W. M. (2008). The classroom check-up: A classwide teacher
consultation model for increasing praise and decreasing disruptive behavior. School Psychology
Review, 37(3), 315-332.
Martin, N. K. , Mayall, H. & Yin, Z. (2006). Classroom management training, teaching experience
and gender: Do these variables impact teachers’ attitudes and beliefs toward classroom
management style? Paper presented at: The Annual Conference of Southwest Educational
Research Association. Austin, TX.
Milner, H. R. , & Tenore, F. B. (2010). Classroom management in diverse classrooms. Urban
Education, 45(5), 560-603.
Montessori, M. (1912). The Montessori Method. Schocken Books, Inc.
Poulou, M. S. , (2009 ). Classroom interactions: Teachers’ and students’ perceptions. Research in
Education, 82, 103-106.
Rosas, C. , West. M. (2009). Teachers beliefs about classroom management: Pre-service and in-service
teachers’ beliefs about classroom management. International Journal of Applied Educational
Studies,5(1), 54-61.
Trussell, R. P. (2008). Classroom Universals to prevent problem behaviors. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 43(3), 179-185.
Unal, Z. , & Unal, A. (2009). Comparing Beginning and Experienced Teachers' Perceptions of
25
Classroom Management Beliefs and Practices in Elementary Schools in Turkey. The
Educational Forum, 73 (3), 256-270.
Walker, J. M. T. (2009). Authoritative classroom management: how control and nurturance work
together. Theory Into Practice, 48, 122-129.
Weiner, Lois. Why Is Classroom Management So Vexing to Urban Teachers? Theory into Practice, Vol.
42, No. 4, Classroom Management in a Diverse Society (Autumn, 2003), pp. 305-312.