LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction
Managing the modern Australian classroom-learning environment with students from such diverse
backgrounds, each with their own individual needs and behaviours, can be a complex and challenging task
for teachers (Lyons, Ford, & Slee, 2014). There are so many different internal and external factors that
influence and contribute to the dynamics of the classroom, which can present a challenging task for
teachers in managing the learning environment to allow them to adequately deliver the Curriculum content
(Williams, 2013) (Appendix 1).

This literature review explores explicit strategies from research in the course readings, in conjunction with
key theoretical concepts, core course principles, and Williams’ (2013) 4S Framework, to focus on how
teachers can establish and maintain a learning environment to promote productive student behaviour, or,
prevent unproductive behaviour in the classroom (Sullivan, Johnson, Owens & Conway, 2014) (Appendix
2).

What is productive student behaviour?

Angus et al (2009) articulates that productive behaviours are those that support academic progress. In the
last 2 decades, research has confirmed that there is a well established link between; student behaviour,
student engagement and academic achievement, thus, it is important for teachers to manage the learning
environment in a way that promotes achievement in students school work by managing and supporting
students behaviour and engagement in the classroom (Angus et al, 2009) (Sullivan 2009).

Contrary to productive behaviours, unproductive behaviours are described by Sullivan et al (2013) in three
different ways; disengaged, uncooperative and low level disruptive (Appendix 3). Burden (1993) identified 4
categories of behaviour that coincide with Sullivan et al (2013) unproductive behaviours labeling them as
hyperactive, inattentive, conduct disorder and impulsive, which teachers reported as being the most
consuming of their time, energy and attention (Williams 2013). These behaviours also reflect that of Borich
(1996) who uses 3 categories in his hierarchy of misbehaviours; mild, moderate and severe, that were the
most troublesome as reported by teachers, with mild representing those of the 3 levels of unproductive
behaviours as researched by Sullivan et al (2013). Angus et al (2009) explains that there are various
individual, school and out-out-school factors highly contribute to these unproductive behaviours, and
therefore, depending on which of these factors are influencing the behaviour and dynamics in the learning
environment, will depend on which methods are employed by the teacher as the most appropriate in
managing the classroom environment to promote productive student behaviours (Williams, 2013)
(Appendix 1).

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

Why is it so important?
One of the greatest and most common concerns, as reported by teachers, is managing the classroom, and
the feeling of losing the ability to do this well, has often lead to teachers who leave the profession due to
burnout or job dissatisfaction (Cothran, Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy, 2003) (Sullivan, Johnson, Owens &
Conway, 2014). This coincides with Sullivan, Johnson, Owens & Conway (2014), who claim that student
misbehavior can have a negative impact on the resilience of early career teachers. Williams (2013) also
addresses the link between early career educator’s classroom management abilities and the persistence
with or desertion of their careers.

These reports highlight the significance and importance of employing strategies to be able to manage the
classroom and students behaviour adequately. Sullivan, Johnson, Owens & Conway (2014) suggest having
a focus on engagement to manage behaviour rather than punishment, which can promote better learning,
and should be a priority. Teachers can consider the physical environment, curriculum and resources and
their teaching to engage students in learning activities (Sullivan, Johnson, Owens & Conway, 2014). This is
described in more detail in the following paragraphs using Williams (2013) 4S framework to outline specific
strategies of classroom management to promote productive student behaviour in each domain (Appendix
2)

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

In what ways can teachers establish and maintain a learning environment to promote
productive student behaviour, that is, to prevent unproductive student behaviour?

SETTING
The physical classroom setting has a significant influence on student productivity during lessons and
activities (Williams, 2013). Jones (2011) supports this in that students’ motivation to learn and their
behaviour can be impacted by the classroom arrangement. The classroom layout also impacts the
teacher’s response time to disruptive behaviours (Jones, 2011). Williams (2013) emphasizes that to
establish and maintain a well-managed classroom, teachers should physically arrange the classroom and
construct a plan specifically for the students in the class, in order to prevent unproductive behaviour.

Teachers can set up the class using Williams (2013) guiding principles, which underpin the learning
environment; safe, appropriate, visible and accessible. These principles by Williams (2013) can be applied
in regards to the topography of the learning environment, or the physical landscape, which coincides with
Jones (2011) who suggests arranging the classroom in a way that ensures the teacher has maximum
ability to move around and engage in positive interactions with students. Jones (2011) supports Williams
(2013) principle of accessibility through ensuring that the teacher is easily “accessible” to the students.
Jones (2011) explains a need for the classroom arrangement to be “appropriate” to the given activity
students are engaging in, for example, if students are undertaking group work, the table set up should be
set up in a way that facilitates the academic work they will be completing (Williams, 2013). Williams (2013)
emphasizes that teachers should also ensure that seating arrangements are carefully and strategically
planned so that students are set up in a way the best supports their individual productivity and achievement
in the classroom with minimal distractions. Jones (2011) and Williams (2013) both support the need for the
classroom to be set up in the safest possible way, ensuring that the classroom allows students to move
freely to assigned areas or activity zones where they will need to either work or collect materials and
resources. Jones (2011) encourages teachers to provide numerous resources that are visible and readily
accessible to students, which are diverse in nature and represent different cultural backgrounds of class
members (Williams, 2013) (Jones, 2011).

Williams (2013) explains that the modern day classroom is a multidimensional space and should be
carefully planned based on the specific group of students at hand, with the ability to be flexible if changes
must be made and to ensure social interactions promote the most productive environment for all students.

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

SYSTEMS
Cothran, Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy (2003) emphasize how critical the start of the school year is in
developing and managing an effective learning environment for promoting productive student behaviours
for the entire year, with reports from students explaining that more positive student behaviour was a result
of the teacher setting early, clear expectations and consequences. Jones (2011) supports this notion
explaining that effective teachers are those who create positive and supportive classroom environments
from the beginning of the school year (Good & Brophy, 2008). Bohn, Roehrig & Pressley (2004) add that
putting in the groundwork at the beginning of the year can make the classroom more orderly and promote
higher achievement by midyear (Good & Brophy, 2008).

Bohn, Roehrig & Pressley (2004) believe that effective teachers develop routines, procedures and general
behavioural expectations that support a safe and positive learning environment (Jones, 2011). Jones
(2011) and McDonald (2013) discuss the importance of involving students in the process of developing
these classroom rules, procedures and behaviour standards. If students have a high involvement in
creating them and discussing the value of having them, they are more likely to abide by the rules, self-
regulate their behaviour and manage their behavioral choices because they contributed to creating them.
Bohn, Roehrig & Pressley (2004) support Jones (2011) in advocating the need to discuss classroom rules
with students and giving them a role in creating them as it emphasizes student ownership of the classroom
(McDonald, 2013). Jones (2011) not only stresses the need for teachers to explicitly teach procedures they
expect students to follow during specific activities, but also the need to monitor and review them as
required. Cothran, Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy (2003) on the other hand, mention that the teacher’s ability
to communicate the rules and procedures early and enforce them consistently is more important than the
actual rules and consequences themselves.

Jones (2011) indicates that there are approximately 30 major transitions each day in a primary school class
and if not developed to be smooth and efficient, can take up a significant amount of teaching and learning
time. Jones (2011) adds that teachers who are effective at developing good flow in the classroom, see
higher rates of on task student behaviour and hence improved academic achievement. The ability to have
this flow prevents those low-level disruptive behaviours that can hinder student productivity.

Good & Brophy (2008) suggest that to be successful and most effective, the systems mentioned in this
section need to be established, applied, and maintained consistently and all aspects of good classroom
management must occur together as a system in order to maximise productive student activity.

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

SELF
Sullivan, Johnson, Owens & Conway (2014) state that of all the unproductive behaviours, disengaged
behaviours are extremely prevalent and are some of the most difficult to manage, therefore teachers need
to adjust their instructional processes and teaching pedagogy to engage students and reduce unproductive
behaviours. Williams (2013) supports this by mentioning that classroom management is at the core of
teachers work and is unavoidable in this profession, thus, it is extremely important to be effective in this and
teachers must be very prepared.

Teachers have the ability to prevent unproductive behaviours by employing the use of antecedents, which
can be achieved through adapted or varied teaching methodology utilising a multimodal approach in
delivery of content to increase student engagement and promote productivity (Williams, 2013). Research
explained that students value fun in school and the classroom and Cothran, Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy
(2003) explored this notion by explaining that effective teachers planned for student fun within the subject
to increase engagement hence, productive behaviour, but also emphasized the need to balance control
and fun.

Bohn, Roehrig & Pressley (2004) explain that teachers can teach students in a way that builds learner’s
capacity to self-regulate their behaviours and make appropriate choices about their behaviour based on
consequences that followed. Research conveys the teacher, not as the classroom manager, but as the
developer of self-regulating students and Bohn, Roehrig & Pressley (2004) emphasize the importance of
developing this in both behavioral and academic situations during the first few days of school. Cothran,
Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy (2003) explored the notion that most students taught by effective teachers were
self-regulated and were not only on task, but moved on to new tasks independently when it was
appropriate. Williams (2013) supports self-regulation however urges teachers to give students opportunities
to learn this.

McDonalds (2013) research made it clear that students wanted teachers who were cooperative; supportive
and caring, as well as dominant. Employing an authoritative approach works best in the classroom
according to McDonald (2013), as teachers are an authority figure, so they need to demonstrate that
authority however they need to do this without being inflexible or threatening towards students to achieve
positive outcomes.

Good & Brophy (2008) suggest that effective teachers employ problem prevention strategies including
“withitness” and “proximity” (Jones, 2011) (Williams, 2013). Withitness involves teachers being in a position
to regularly monitor the classroom and identify quickly those who are on task or off task, meaning they are
able to intervene before students become completely disengaged from the activity, giving the impression to
students they are “with it” (Williams, 2013) (Good & Brophy, 2008). “Jones Zones” (2007) or Jones 3 Rules
of Movement (2007) underlying proximity, emphasize the need to use movement as a camouflage for
dealing with disruptive behaviour but also as a way to keep students engaged by stimulating the brain when
changing everyone’s visual fields. Kounin’s Do’s and Don’ts (1970) coincide with withitness and proximity in
EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197
that they are essential for good classroom management and are in conjunction with the Positive Learning
Framework by McDonald (2013) (Good & Brophy, 2008).

In summary McDonald (2013) states that effective teaching is deliberate and planned to develop a quality
and meaningful learning environment where lessons are characterized with a sense of purposefulness,
teachers have clear and high expectations for student achievement, there are agreed behaviour guidelines
and hence, all students are actively engaged.

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

STUDENTS
Sapon-Shevin (2010) and Kohn (2006) emphasise the need to create a sense of community and cohesion
in the classroom in order to help students feel socially and emotionally safe, nurtured and become powerful
and engaged in their learning to promote productive behaviour. Sapon-Shevin (2010) explains that even for
the most capable teachers, building a sense of community takes time, patience, effort skill and dedication
but the time spent is never wasted (Kohn, 2006). When students feel safe in their classroom community,
they are more likely to relax, take risks, learn and connect with others, therefore establishing a strong
classroom community sets students up for powerful academic achievement (Sapon-Shevin, 2010) (Kohn,
2006).

For teachers to create this cohesive classroom community, it is important to build strong relationships with
students, as well as facilitate students to build relationships with each other (Sapon-Shevin, 2010) (Lyons,
Ford, & Slee, 2014). Cothran, Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy (2003) agreed in saying that effective class
managers developed strong relationships with students. Research by Cothran, Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy
(2003) reports students who said they also want teachers who really genuinely cared about what they were
teaching and about the students. The students said the effective teachers demonstrated this by
communicating with students, actively listening to students and taking more time to get to know them
(Cothran, Hodges, Kulinna & Garrahy, 2003).

Building a strong repore with students helps in creating a sense of security and trust in the classroom that
allows for student growth and exploration, as well as being confident to take risks. (Sapon-Shevin, 2010).
Lyons, Ford, & Slee (2014) express relationships and communication combine to form one of positive
practices in the Lyford Model necessary to build a positive learning environment and to help prevent
disruptive and unproductive behaviours and also that effective communication is a fundamental component
in building these healthy relationships. Sapon-Shevin (2010) add that students are not forced to be friends
however are given multiple opportunities to connect with one another through a academic and daily tasks
and are encouraged to work cooperatively and collaboratively rather than competitively hence there is a
strong emphasis on “we” and “our” in the classroom.

Sapon-Shevin (2010) states that the benefits of creating cohesive classroom community from day one with
strong foundation of building positive relationships between peers and teachers cannot be overlooked
(Lyons, Ford, & Slee, 2014). Allowing all students to feel included and accepted in the classroom is one of
the first steps for students to feel safe and confident in taking risks, promoting productive behaviour and
displaying academic success in the classroom (Sapon-Shevin, 2010) (Lyons, Ford, & Slee, 2014).

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

CONCLUSION
This literature review addressed four key components in the classroom by Williams (2013) that teachers
need to consider for effective classroom management in promoting student productive behaviour; setting,
systems, students and self. The research addresses that the strategies and methods are only guidelines
and it will really depend on the diverse range of abilities and disabilities, personalities, skills, dynamics
qualities and attributes of students that will determine which ones are selected to implement into the
specific classroom.

2,034 words

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

REFERENCE LIST

Angus, M, McDonald, T, Ormond, C, Rybarcyk, R, Taylor, A, & Winterton, A, 2009, ‘Trajectories of

classroom behaviour and academic progress’, A study of student engagement with learning.

Bohn, C, Roehrig, A, & Pressley, M, 2004, ‘The first days of school in the classrooms of two more effective
and four less effective primary-grades teachers’ The Elementary School Journal, vol. 104, no. 4, pp. 269-
287

Cothran, D, Hodges Kulinna, P, & Garrahy, D, 2003, ‘This is kind of giving the secret away…: students’
perspectives on effective class management.’ Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 435-444

Good, T, & Brophy, J, 2008, ‘Management 1: Preventing problems’, Looking in classrooms vol. 10, Boston,
MA, Pearson, Allyn and Bacon Publishers, pp. 71-97

Johnson, B., & Tonkin, L, 2009, ‘Changing Childhoods? Insights into the lives of 8-11 year olds’, Report to
the Department of Education and Children's Services

Jones, V, 2011, ‘Developing standards for classroom behavior’ in Practical Classroom

Management, Boston, MA: Pearson, pp. 103-144

Kohn, A 2006, ‘The nature of children’, Beyond discipline: From compliance to community. pp. 1-11

Lyons, G, Ford, M, & Slee, J, 2014, ‘Chapter 3 Relationships and communication’, Classroom
management: Creating positive learning environments vol. 4, South Melbourne, Vic, Cengage Learning.

McDonald, T, 2013, ‘Proactive Teacher Behaviours’, Classroom management: Engaging students in

learning, South Melbourne, VIC, Oxford University Press, pp. 106-154

Sapon-Shevin, M, 2010, ‘Schools as communities’, Because we can change the world: A practical guide to
building cooperative, inclusive classroom communities vol. 2, pp. 21-44, Thousand Oaks, CA, Corwin

Sullivan, A, 2017, Managing Learning Environments Lecture, University of South Australia

Sullivan, A, Johnson, B, Conway, R, Owens, L, & Taddeo, C 2013, ‘Punish Them or Engage Them?
Teachers’ views on student behaviours in the classroom’, Behaviour at School Study

Sullivan, A, Johnson, B, Owens, L & Conway, R 2014, ‘Punish Them or Engage Them? Teachers’ Views of
Unproductive Student Behaviours in the
Classroom’, Australian Journal of Teacher Education, vol. 39 no. 6, pp. 43-56

Williams, D, 2013, Background Basics. Adelaide, SA: University of South Australia. pp. 1-24

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

APPENDIX 1 – 37 Contributing Factors to Unproductive Student Behaviour

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

APPENDIX 2 – 4S Framework

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197

APPENDIX 3 – Behaviour at School Study

EDUC 3007 The University of South Australia Student ID: 110136197