Managment Article Response: The Sociology of Classroom Discipline by Leo Leriche

This article is very introspective because it questions the why and how educators discipline students. My initial thought towards school discipline was that school prepares students for the rules and social norms of the outside world. However, Leriche says that school is an unnatural social setting where people are grouped, expected to sit and listen for hours. Most careers do not operate with such restrictions. The article links curriculum and instruction to discipline. Leriche is opposed to the traditional instruction and claims it can harm students’ development. I think he sees traditional instruction as too restrictive; the teacher will lecture, students listen, students memorize, and students repeat what they memorized. Leriche favors an interactionist curriculum where students and teacher engage in a more dialogue based education. I agree more so with the interactionist method because I think it engages students and if students are engaged they will not become disruptive. The traditionalist educators take a “Crime and Punishment” approach to discipline where students have specific punishments for specific misbehavior. I like the idea of having a system or policy that students and teachers understand. This can save on instruction time. That being said, this looks like a short term solution for discipline. What if the punishments don’t work? What if there is a bigger problem? The interactionist approach is more empirical. The teacher and student discuss the reason for misbehavior and work together to find a solution. I think this method is great for the “repeat offenders” that fail to respond to the traditional approach. Leriche also notes that the traditional approach to discipline needs to establish rules with the class on the first day of school. I’ve had professors at Eastern that suggest the same idea. Students need to be part of the rule making process and teachers need to be flexible on rules because, “that suggests that institutions are more important than the people in them” (79). Leriche addresses the importance of demonstrating positive behavior or the “do” norm. The “do not” norm makes students feel like the teacher doesn’t trust them. The difference between a rule and a norm is the level of expectation. Rules are rigid and strict. Norms are acceptable patterns of behavior. Norms allow for some leniency as students are progressively learning how to behave. I’ve observed this in my classroom. My cooperating teacher will give warnings and punishment depending on the severity and frequency of the behavior. The most common problem is students talking too loudly during work time. The teacher will give at least one warning (sometimes more) and then move the student outside the classroom. I think the overall idea is to have a system but don’t let the system run everything. Leriche believes that by sharing the power with students will encourage them to have self discipline. And I agree.