The Urban Review

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 181–196 | Cite as

A study of staff development programs for improving school discipline

  • Irwin A. Hyman
  • Dolores Lally
Article

Abstract

This paper reports two phases of an ongoing study of the effectiveness of teacher training programs related to school discipline. An exhaustive review of efficacy studies of programs such as Reality Therapy, Teacher Effectiveness Training, and Human Relations Training revealed serious methodological weaknesses. Most studies indicated programs involved teacher attitudes towards more humane discipline, but there were few demonstrations of actual behavior change in students. After phase 1, programs were examined for teaching strategies and processes taught to teachers to improve school discipline. A list of 38 processes were identified and each program examined for their presence. Phase 2 reports the incidence of these processes across programs and suggests further approaches to using these data for continuing research.

Keywords

Behavior Change Actual Behavior Teaching Strategy Teacher Training Efficacy Study 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alschuler, A.School discipline: A socially literate solution. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1980.Google Scholar
  2. Amundson, N. E. TA with elementary school children: A pilot study,Transactional Analysis Journal, 1975,5(3), 250–251.Google Scholar
  3. Amundson, N. E.Transactional analysis with children, Vancouver, British Columbia, 1976.Google Scholar
  4. Aspy, D. N. The effects of teacher offered conditions of empathy, congruence, and positive regard upon student achievement.Florida Journal of Educational Research, 1969,11, 39–48.Google Scholar
  5. Berenson, D. H. The effects of systematic human relations training upon classroom performance of elementary school teachers.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 1971,4, 70–85.Google Scholar
  6. Boller, Jon D., and Boller, Joyce D. Sensitivity training and the school teacher: An experiment in favorable publicity.Journal of Educational Research, 1973,7, 309–12.Google Scholar
  7. Bowers, N. E., and Soar, R. S.Studies of human relations in the teaching-learning process vs final report: Evaluation of laboratory human relations training for classroom teachers. A project supported by the cooperative research program of the U. S. Office of Education, 1960.Google Scholar
  8. Carducci, R.A comparison of I-messages with commands in the control of disruptive classroom behavior. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Nevada, 1975.Google Scholar
  9. Carter, T. A.A structured human relations program for teachers. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists, Las Vegas, March 1974.Google Scholar
  10. Cherry, J. H. A study of reality therapy as an approach to discipline in the classroom,Dissertation Abstracts International, 7609906-abstract, 1976.Google Scholar
  11. Children's Defense Fund.School suspensions—Are they helping children? Washington, D.C., September 1975.Google Scholar
  12. Cleveland, B. F.Measuring the impact of Gordon's teacher effectiveness training on the types of verbal responses and attitude change of pre-school teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1973.Google Scholar
  13. Copeland, P. S.Affective education: Effects of transactional analysis training on seventh grade students. Texas A & M University, 1975.Google Scholar
  14. De Santis, J. R.The effects of transactional analysis on self-concept laws of control and behavior in suspended high school students. Georgia State University, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. Dillard, J. W.An investigation of the effects of teacher effectiveness training on the types of verbal responses and attitude change of pre-service teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, 1974.Google Scholar
  16. Duncan. R. L., Jr.A study of the humanizing effects of an inservice teacher effectiveness training program on elementary and secondary teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Western Colorado University, 1975.Google Scholar
  17. Engle, P. L., Keepes, B. D.Glasser's schools without failure: A three-year evaluation. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Convention, New Orleans, Louisiana, 1973.Google Scholar
  18. Eysenck, H. J. The effects of psychotherapy: An evaluation.Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1952,16, 319–324.Google Scholar
  19. Fine, V. O.The effects of an interpersonal skill training program on affective interpersonal behaviors of student-teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Hawaii, 1975.Google Scholar
  20. Friere, P.Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder, 1972.Google Scholar
  21. Gang, M. J.Empirical validation of a reality therapy intervention program in an elementary school classroom. Doctoral dissertation, August 1974-abstract.Google Scholar
  22. Galloway, N., Thornton, R. W., and Evans, J. H.Student/teacher interaction as a function of teacher training. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Convention, San Francisco, April 1976. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 124 525.)Google Scholar
  23. Garrison, C., and Fischer, R. Introducing TA in the public school system.Transactional Analysis Journal, 1978,8(3), 240–242.Google Scholar
  24. Glass, G. V. Primary, secondary and meta-analysis of research.The Educational Researcher, 1976,10, 3–8.Google Scholar
  25. Glasser, W.Schools without failure—1977. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of School Administrators, Las Vegas, February 25–28, 1977.Google Scholar
  26. Harbin, S. L.The effects ofa teacher workshop in transactional analysis on teacher flexibility in thinking, locus of control, flexibility in use of ego states, and on teacher-pupil interactions. University of South Carolina, 1975.Google Scholar
  27. Hefele, T. J. The effects of human relations training upon student achievement.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 1971,4(2), 52–69.Google Scholar
  28. Hesterly, S. O.The leaders guide to the parent package—A TA program for parents of winners. Little Rock, Arkansas, 1974.Google Scholar
  29. Hesterly, S. O. et al.How to use transactional analysis in the public schools, Little Rock, Arkansas, 1974.Google Scholar
  30. House, E. R., Glass, G. V., McLean, L. D., and Walker, D. F. No simple answer: Critique of the follow-through evaluation.Harvard Educational Review, 1978,48(2), 128–160.Google Scholar
  31. Hoffmann, F. J. Use of the Adlerian model in secondary school counseling and consulting.Individual Psychologist, 1975,12(2), 27–33.Google Scholar
  32. Hyman, I., and Wise, J. (Eds.).Corporal punishment in American education. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  33. Hyman, I.An analysis of studies on effectiveness of training and staffing to help schools manage student conflict and alienation. (NIE-p-78-0063). Washington, D.C. National Institute of Education, 1979. (Available from the National Center for the Study of Corporal Punishment and Alternatives—The School.)Google Scholar
  34. Jensen, K.Schools without failure in Madison, Wisconsin: A case study. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Convention, New Orelans, Louisiana, February 1973.Google Scholar
  35. Jones, F. H., and W. H. Miller. The effective use of negative attention for reducing group disruption in special elementary school classrooms.Psychological Record, 1974,24, 435–448.Google Scholar
  36. Kazdin, A. E. The application of operant techniques in treatment, rehabilitation and education. In Soloman L. Garfield and A. D. Bergin (Eds.),Handbook of psychotherapy and behavior change. New York: John Wiley, 1978.Google Scholar
  37. Kelly, F. D., Croake, J. J.The application of Adlerian theory to school phobia. Paper based on a presentation at the annual meeting of the American Society of Adlerian Psychology, Chicago, May 1977.Google Scholar
  38. Kozuma, H. Summary of research on individual education.Journal of Individual Psychology, 1977,33(2a), 371–380.Google Scholar
  39. Kushner, G. J.Time-out for behavior problems in the classroom. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Association of School Psychologists, New York, March 1978.Google Scholar
  40. Loeber, R., and R. G. Weisman. Contingencies of therapist and trainer performance: A review.Psychology Bulletin, 1975,82, 660–668.Google Scholar
  41. Long, Lejnette, Paradise, Louis V., and Coleman, Susan. The effect of facilitative communication training on teacher response quality.Psychology in the Schools, 1978,15, 95–98.Google Scholar
  42. Masters, J. R., and Laverty, G. E.The effects of a “schools without failure” program upon classroom interaction patterns, pupil achievement and teacher, pupil and parent attitudes: Summary report of first year of the program. Pennsylvania State Department of Education. Washington, D.C.: National Center for Education Research and Development, February 1974 or 1973.Google Scholar
  43. Masters, J. R., Laverty, G. E. and Hayes, R. B.The effects of a “schools without failure” program upon classroom interaction patterns, pupil achievement and teacher, pupil and parent attitudes: Summary report of the first year of program. U. S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1975.Google Scholar
  44. McCormick, B. G. Evaluation:Schools without failure. South Bay Union School District, Imperial Beach, California.Google Scholar
  45. Meyers, J., Martin, R., and Hyman, I. (Eds.) School consultation, Springfield, Ill.: C. C. Thomas, 1977.Google Scholar
  46. Miller, John P. The effects of human relations training on teacher interperson skills.Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 1973,XIX, 37–47.Google Scholar
  47. Morse, W. C.Videotape training packages in child variance. Unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, 1978.Google Scholar
  48. Muirhead, M., and Fong, J. An analysis of visitor's responses,Journal of Individual Psychology, 1977,33(2a), 366–70.Google Scholar
  49. National Institute of Education.School crime and disruption: Prevention models. Washington, D.C.: June 1978.Google Scholar
  50. Nelson, J., and Koehler, A.Adlerian elementary school counseling project. Elk Grove, Calif. Elk Grove Unified School District, 1978.Google Scholar
  51. O'Leary, K. D., and O'Leary, S. G. Behavior modification in the school. In H. Leitenberg (Ed.),Handbook of behavior modification and behavior therapy. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1976.Google Scholar
  52. Project Glasser, Wayne County Intermediate School District, Detroit, Michigan,Project report, 1977.Google Scholar
  53. Purl, M. C., and Dawson, J.An analysis of some of the effects of “schools without failure” seminars on participating schools. Riverside Unified School District, Riverside, California, August 1971.Google Scholar
  54. Saudargas, R. A. Setting criterion rates of teacher praise: The effects of videotape feedback in a behavior analysis of a follow-through classroom. In G. Semb, et al. (Eds.).Behavior analysis and education, University of Kansas, Department of Human Development, 1972.Google Scholar
  55. Shaffer, Warren F., Hummell, Thomas J., and Rhetts, John E.Design and evaluation of a human relations training program. The Psycho-Educational Center, University of Minnesota, Research Memorandum Number 100, 1974.Google Scholar
  56. Stormer, G. E., and Kirby, J. H. Adlerian group counseling in the elementary school: Report of a program.Journal of Individual Psychology, 1969,25(2), 155–163.Google Scholar
  57. Smith, B. J.Can a transactional analysis-related program be used to increase spontaneity in day care children? Texas Eastern University, May 1977.Google Scholar
  58. Smith, M. L., and Glass, G. V. Meta-analysis of psychotherapy outcome studies.American Psychologist, 1977,32(9), 752–760.Google Scholar
  59. Tafoya, R.Conflict management project: Statistics pertaining to case forms catalogued at Oakridge Elementary, Jebediah Smith Elementary, Pacific Elementary and Freeport Elementary, Sacramento City Unified School District, 1977.Google Scholar
  60. Taylor, W. F., and Hoedt, K. C.Behavior modification in the natural environment. New York: Academic Press, 1969.Google Scholar
  61. Tuites, A. Practical application of Adlerian principles in a preschool setting,Individual Psychologist, 1976,13(2).Google Scholar
  62. Walton, F. X.Excerpts from project win over: A project for high schools. Campbell County Comprehensive High School, Tennessee, 1976.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Agathon Press, Inc. 1982

Authors and Affiliations

  • Irwin A. Hyman
    • 1
  • Dolores Lally
    • 2
  1. 1.The National Center for the Study of Corporal Punishment and Alternatives in the SchoolsTemple UniversityUSA
  2. 2.Department of School PsychologyTemple UniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations