Rogers states that a discipline plan is a conscious awareness of what one can, and will do in a discipline transaction. Such a plan has a series of steps that define a given course of action: what one will do and what one will say. Rogers proposes 19 steps which are arranged in terms of their degree of decisiveness of teacher action.

The nineteen steps are, according to Rogers, the building blocks of a discipline plan. They are balanced by a teacher's encouragement, sense of humour, curriculum, personal manner and demonstrated care. Rogers recommends that when developing a discipline plan, it is important to develop it within your own personality and style. When using a plan, a teacher will be at different levels with different students in the same lesson. He also states that the significant point is to be prepared:

• prepared to better deal with frustration and uncertainty;
• prepared for likely (normal) disruptions;
• prepared not to get caught in long discussions;
• prepared to be decisive as may be necessary;
• prepared to enjoy teaching.

Rogers states that teaching is not all managing off-task behaviour, the more teachers work at the relationship-building, the easier it is to teach, lead, direct motivate and even correct. Students accept correction and direction far more positively when the relationship is human. He further states that the classroom environment should be fair as well as humorous now and then. Teachers should make lessons as interesting, and clear as can be, and to employ respect and encouragement within the classroom group.

Roger's Eight Protocols of Discipline:

1. Establish clearly the rights, rules, responsibilities with your class.
2. Intentionally minimise embarrassment and hostility.
3. Maximise students' choice over behaviour.
4. Develop and maintain respect
5. Be aware that our expectations affect our behaviour as classroom leaders.
6. Maintain a judicious sense of humour.
7. Follow up and follow through (consistency).
8. Utilise wider support (peers, admin, parents).

Roger's suggestions for Teacher Behaviour in Discipline:

• Maintain eye contact.
• Use a respectful voice tone (speak clearly and firmly).
• Watch proximity (not too close or overbearing in body language).
• Refer to the class fair rule. Avoid arguing, assert, take the student aside, give clear choice or follow up later
• Use appropriate assertion (match teacher behaviour to level of disruption).

For further information on Roger's approach to developing a discipline plan refer to:

Rogers. W. A., 1989, Making a discipline plan, Thomas Nelson, Melbourne.

Rogers states that there are many low level disruptions that proceed from a students desire to gain attention, these may include calling out, sulking, throwing tantrums, persistent butting in, clowning, etc. He recommends that a teacher should tactically ignore such behaviours for as long as he/she deems necessary. Rogers proposes that TIB is a difficult step to utilise because of the frustration a teacher might feel when the attention seeking behaviour exists. A natural occurence is for a teacher to do something about these behaviours.

However, Rogers states that TIB is doing something, teachers are deciding:

* Which behaviours we can appropriately ignore. He states however, that behaviour such as rudeness, arrogance, calling out, swearing, defiance, or aggression should never be ignored.

* How long they (teachers) are prepared to ignore.

* What we will do then (next step) if TIB is not achieving its purpose, namely negative reinforcement.

Students are aware when and why teachers are using TIB. TIB, of course, has to be balanced by giving positive reinforcement when such disruptors show on-task behaviour. Rogers states that when students are being tactically ignored, the teacher is giving a clue, a defacto choice to the disruptor, to get his/her attention the way the others are - reasonably on task.

Rogers states that a simple eye-message can convey that a teacher is annoyed, decisive, silently questioning, etc. Facial messages should be combined with our verbal communication to communicate assertion, annoyance, frustration, resolution, etc. A 'wink' with a smile, can often be a useful 'OK' message.

Rogers proposes that effective discipline seeks to prevent unnecessary conflicts arising. To casually ask a question or make a statement without making a big fuss gives the student an easy, face-saving opportunity to get back into on-task behaviour. Teachers will use this approach for low level dusruptions such as talking, vacant look, time wasting, etc. A statement or question is made as if by casual intent without any sarcasm or malice, such as:

"How's it working out?" or "Let's have a look at this É"

 

Rogers explains that a simple direction should express a teacher's intent clearly and simply, rather than getting involved in long-winded discussions. In all discipline, it is important to remember to use the student's personal name. It mitigates, as it were, the discipline transaction, as does "Excuse me MichelleÉ" "Please" or "Thanks".

Rogers proposes the use of SDs early in a discipline transaction:

* Establish eye contact

* Speak clearly, firmly, briefly

* Repeat if necessary

* Expect compliance

 

* "Paul, put the scissors away now!"

* "Maria, pack up the sewing machine please".

Rogers states that it is useful sometimes to break into a disruption cycle, such as a student who is off task or two students talking, with a question. One way of achieving this is by the teacher moving up alongside the student/s and asking:

* "What is happening here?" or "What is going on?" or

"What are you doing?"

Rogers proposes that with this step the teacher simply restates the rule to the student or quietly reminds them of the relevant rule. RRs can be employed one-to-one, to whole group, or to a small group. RRs remind the disrupting student/s of an established rule.

A what question is an attempt to get some feedback from the student. Why questions are rarely helpful when a student is in a group. Rogers proposes that why questions are better used when taking the student aside or in contracting, conferencing steps. Most students say "nothing" in answer to a what question. At that point it is better to simply inform the student about what was heard or seen (teacher's feedback to the student).

Rogers states that teachers can often anticipate a disruption or problem, they can then distract or direct the student. He suggests teachers can do this by:

* Inviting assistance.

* Asking a question.

* Simply moving close to the potential disruptor while working with other students who might be nearby.

* Asking them questions about their work.

* Giving them a task.

* Inviting another student to work with the disruptor.

* Asking the student to move before a possible disruption occurs.

According to Rogers, appropriate, judicious humour can sometimes take the heat out of a problem. Rogers cites an example of a student who drops a pencil box and shouts "sh-t". The teacher could say "where?" Most students accept repartee or the little bon mot. However, Rogers warns not all teachers can use this step. It relies on a judicious sense of humour and a ready wit, but is very effective, maintaining a good working relationship with students while keeping the heat down.

Rogers suggests that with some students who are late, upset, teasing others, not settling down, etc. (after appropriate warning) should be called aside. He suggests that the teacher quietly call the child over from the group and speak to him/her away from others. He states that TCA minimises hostility and embarassment, gives time for a brief discussion and allows the student right of reply if they feel unjustly targeted. He also suggests that the teacher be sure that the child knows what he/she should be doing before he/she is asked to go back to their workplace, seat or group. If the child is upset it may be appropriate to have a cooling off period before resuming work.

Rogers suggests that this step would only be used where the child is clearly engaged in significantly dangerous behaviour to themselves or to others.

Rogers warns that PI should be used with extreme digression and only in line with school policy and Education Department guidelines. Rogers further warns that we need to remember that corporal punishment has been abolished.

Rogers explains AMSs as the way teachers state their concerns or feelings about the disruption as it affects the rights of class members (including the teacher's rights). AMss distinguish between the student and his/her action, Rogers cites an example of using what he calls "I" messages to convey the teacher's feelings "Paul. I'm really angry at what you have said. You do yourself no credit by swearing like that." AMs states one's rights, or protects others' rights by concentrating firmly and decisively on the effect of the disruption. AMSs can be addressed to the whole group, or on a one-to-one basis, but are most effective when used infrequently.

Rogers proposes that when a student will not settle down at his/her regular seat he/she is given a choice (SC) to work quietly or move. He proposes that if the student continues to behave incorrectly, he/she is asked to move across to an isolation desk and work there. This is not a 'time-out' but a form of logical consequence.

Rogers suggests that if a student argues, procrastinates or becomes tiresomely quarrelsome (the classroom lawyer), wanting to take the teacher everywhere rather than take responsibility, the teacher can repeat the SD, RR or SC. Rogers defines "Blocking' as a verbal stratagem that reasserts a teacher's fair direction using the same form of words -repetitively.

Rogers cites some examples of using this "blocking" strategy, they are:

* Teacher: "David, go back to your seat please."

* Student: " But I was just gettin' a pencil!" (for the third time thinks the teacher).

* Teacher: "OK. Back to your seat please."

* Student: "You're always picking on me" (teacher baiting time).

* Teacher: (Not drawn) "Just get back to your seat David."

 

Rogers states that empty threats are pointless. He further states that it is far better to put the student into a context where he/she has to choose the responsible alternative. Choices enable students towards some measure of self control.

Choice over one's own behaviour is central to self discipline, self control and tolerance to frustration. Rogers proposes that when a teacher phrases this 'step', within the context of a choice, he/she (the teacher) is challenging the student to take responsibility for his/her (the student) behaviour.

Rogers states that it is important when using an SC that it be phrased as a choice, not a threat. Simple choices should be preceded by appropriate warnings or RRs or SDs or QAF approaches.

Rogers proposes that when a teacher gives a simple choice, he/she are saying that the situation is significantly disruptive; it is a form of final warning. Giving choices in conflict situations is also a way of defusing the conflict by putting the responsibility back onto the student. An example might be "Jason, if you won't work by the fair rules of our room, we'll have to ask you to leave". The teacher may add "It's your choice."

Rogers states that the TOR is used to give the student time to cool off, settle down, or perhaps to experience isolation as a result of on-going disruption. It is time for the student to reflect on his/her behaviour during which they do nothing at the isolation desk, or in the case of a small child, a corner in the classroom. Students are made aware they can come back to their activity whenever they are ready to work by the fair rules.

Rogers warns that TOR is a serious step and should be used judiciously. The normal length of time out of the classroom is between 5 and 15 minutes. Rogers suggests using TOR prefaced with a simple choice.

Rogers recommends using CISY towards the end of the lesson, this is done to remind the student that you will keep them back to explain their behaviour. It is a way of following up and following through. It assures the student that the teacher is geniune and consistent.

"What are you going to do about your behaviour Nathan?"

"What is your plan so you don't our class rules?"

"How can I help you with a plan?"

 

Rogers proposes that if the student is being dealt with outside of class (having been exited) then this approach to questioning is more effective because it focuses on a student's responsibility. It can be combined with conflict resolution and reflective istening, but the final stages need to move to "What are you going to do about your behaviour?"

Steps beyond councelling, contracting, and parent conferencing may include:

* Suspension

* Welfare/support group

* Part-time school attendance

* Regional support (from psychologist, specialist teacher, social worker, etc.)

* Inquiry procedures.

 

When a student's behaviour is so disruptive that other student's rights are being infringed, or a teacher's right to teach is being significantly disrupted, then a teacher may need to exit the student/s. Any exit procedure would have obviously been preceded by steps aimed at enabling the child to manage their own behaviour.

Rogers suggests that teachers may need to exit a student for:

*Aggressive behaviour that will not settle down

* Fighting

* Continual disruptive noise or clowning around

* Dangerous behaviour

* Tantrum behaviour that will not settle down after appropriate ignoring

* Or any behaviour that overtly continues to disrupt the learning/ behaviour rights within the group.

•  
  * Will it be a properly organised time-out process?

  * Sent to the Deputy Headmaster?

  * Sent to a coordinator?

  * Notify the child's parents.

  * Consequential warning?

  * Time out is essentially, time away from the group to rethink one's behaviour and come up with an agreement to work by the fair rules, or to follow consequences.

(i) Who actually exits the child?

It is problematic if it is left to the teacher, as a class could contain any number of students to manage. It is especially difficult where the student is very aggressive or angry. Rogers states that some schools may allocate a senior person, or the teacher in the next class may quickly step in and remove the child (if in doubt refer to the school policy regarding this aspect).

 

(ii) What will happen to the exited student?

(iii) What will be required of the student to re-enter the classroom?

* Verbal contract, verbal assurances?

•  
  The teacher needs to be assured that a clear exit procedure is school policy (the school ought to have a policy regarding this aspect). Rogers states that the teacher may need back-up, and some work on pre-exit steps where an unhelpful pattern is observed (i.e. being exited for low-level or badly-handled disruptions).

  Rogers suggests that the student must realise that being exited is a serious matter, and that he/she must renegotiate their entry back into the room on a clear understanding of their rights and responsibilities. At all times the exited student should be spoken to in the language of responsibility and choice.

(iv) If a student has a pattern of being exited - what then?