Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

EDUC 4206
Professional Inquiry Project: Findings
(PIP Report)
Inquiry Question: What are the most effective strategies to combat low-level disruptive behaviours?
Focus
The focus of this inquiry project has been around ‘Managing Challenging Behaviours’ which comes under the Australian
Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (ATSIL) standard 4.3. As outlined by the descriptor, managing challenging
behaviour can be established through negotiating clear expectations with students and addressing disciplinary issues in a
fair, prompt and respectful manner (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership 2018).
The focus has been refined to cater for ‘low-level disruptive behaviours’ which can range from actions deemed as: non-
compliant, distracting, slightly erratic, students being impulsive, unresponsive to instruction, being unprepared and lack of
motivation towards learning experiences.
These low-level disruptive behaviours can have an impact on the overall classroom environment and learning atmosphere.
Where the individual displaying these behaviours can be affected in terms of their learning capabilities and other students
can be victim to these distractions, in reference to their engagement.
Justification of teaching behaviour, context and curriculum area
As an educator, managing behaviour is a crucial factor within our practice, as expectations and rules need to be
established and adhered to in order to facilitate a positive learning environment. Upon the completion of the ‘Self-
Review’ task, this focus area stood out as a strand which needed improvement and this was attained through building on
existing knowledge to add, refine and extend on teaching strategies around behaviour management.
Within my classroom context, five students have been identified as having mild to moderate behavioural issues with
observational jottings and reports providing an overview of distracting elements which affect classroom flow and impacts
on learning. Therefore the exploration, implementation and reinforcement of strategies will be crucial towards the
management of this focus group, whilst introducing a structure with the aim of promoting positive behaviours as an
attainable goal.
When referring to the research literature surrounding the topic of challenging behaviour and low-level disruptions I have
included six theorists outlining certain concepts. These are crucial towards the understanding of behaviour and the
influence it has on additional factors within a student’s learning environment.
Effective Classroom Management (Williams 2013)
Early Expectations (Jones & Jones 2010)
Mixture of Verbal and Non-verbal strategies (Sapon-Shelvin 2010)
Positive interpersonal relationships (Everston & Weinstein 2010)
Specific Praise (Bohn, Roehrig & Pressley 2004)
Organisation of the classroom and resource-rich environment (Good & Brody 2008)

110151301 1
 Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Design and data collection techniques

The original design method consisted of four created proformas, those being: a frequency chart, student feedback sheet,
mentor observation sheet and a self-reflection. These were outlined in detail within my proposal and were created with an
aim to gain different perspective, insight, constructive criticism and opinion surrounding my behavioural management
strategies [Refer to Figure 1].
Data collection was done every Tuesday and Wednesday for five weeks. I monitored how my behaviour strategies and
management was between two subject strands, those being ‘Mathematics’ and ‘Literacy’. Tuesday involved a double-
lesson of Literacy and on Wednesday there was a double lesson of Mathematics’ [Refer to Appendix 1]. My data
collection was a great success as I used both methods of qualitative and quantitative research to assist in documentation,
whilst obtaining constructive criticism through charts, trends, scales and comments
Modifications were done surrounding the total amount of proformas I actually used. Within the first week after having
trialled the ‘student feedback sheet’ with the reception class, I found it very difficult to obtain critical feedback from that
age group even though I had created a basic outline which catered for my focus group. Especially at that age range where
they aren’t able to give critical feedback on my behavioural strategies and don’t have effective reasoning to decode why
certain actions were required or necessary for the management of behaviour. Therefore modifications were needed in my
approach and I eliminated the ‘student feedback sheet’ as a data collection tool.
Further modifications were made surrounding the ‘mentor observation sheet’, where I had originally planned to gain
insight and critical feedback on each strategy she observed (i.e. non-verbal actions, set expectations, vocal tone, specific
praise, etc.). However due time constraints she provided more of an overview about my practice within the set lessons.

Figure 1

110151301 2
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Data Results & Analysis

My data collection tools provided me with a lot of evidence to critically analyse in terms of comments and statistical data.
It allowed me to view the impact my teaching had on individuals, whilst analysing trends or any improvement my
behaviour management program had towards my educational pedagogy.
Progression was monitored and analysed at the end of each week. Through this, information and trends were identified as
positive or negative and from this I could improve areas of weakness and modify my strategies to promote positive
behaviours. Whilst also limiting low-level disruptions for my focus group.
An example of this was within weeks 1-2, where I had a lot of inconsistencies in terms of setting expectations, empty
threats and not utilising my vocal tone adequately [Refer to Appendix 2 & 3]. I had documented a high tally of disruptive
behaviours therefore producing a high frequency results within my chart. My mentor also observed this as something that
needed improvement on and provided me with strategies around referring to class models (i.e self-managed vs co-
managed), whilst also telling me to redirect their attention via enabling them to co-teach any instruction. This process
allowed me to reflect at the end of the day/week and reflect on three processes, these being: what was a success, what
needs refinement and what was a complete failure.
‘Empty Threats’ were a problem for me as an educator when I made attempts to decrease disruptive behaviours for the
whole-class and towards my focus group. I struggled when students began talking over me, but due to my vocal tone
being quite loud, I slightly ignored this issue. I viewed this as a minor issue as the delivery of instruction, dialogue and
basic communication was still present and effective for the whole-class, but my mentor gave me constructive criticism
and stated I should address this issue with a focus around disrespect and as a distracting trait [Refer to Appendix 2, 3 & 7].
Therefore I modified my vocal strategy and experimented with different tones, so when I did raise my voice in
conjunction with someone’s name, it gained the student’s attention and allowed me to model what was required of them in
terms of appropriate behaviour. This was evident in my statistical data where the trends of high frequency are lowered in
the latter weeks, as students familiarise themselves with my presence, classroom expectations and non-verbal actions (i.e.
silence, eye contact and proximity) [Refer to Appendix 8].
The introduction of ‘Rotations’ in both curriculum areas of Literacy and Mathematics were also deemed successful in
terms of modifying my practice and strategies to lower elements of disruptive behaviour. Due to catering for a mixed R/1
class, my approach to learning experiences needed to ensure engagement and interest from my focus group. Through
engagement and interest towards a learning experience their productivity would be at an increase, therefore producing a
sustainable working environment and limiting any challenging behaviours. Rotations of three learning experiences in one
lesson, built up anticipation and allowed easy transitions between block periods. Rotations were implemented with more
consistency in the latter weeks and the line graph in Appendix 8 supports this via its low frequency levels for disruptive
behaviours in weeks 3, 4 and 5.

110151301 3
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Reflection
When reflecting on what could be improved upon for my PIP, an increase in sample size for my focus group would allow
for more accurate and validated data. This is in reference to the sample size being predominately male and variations
would exist when extending this sample size to females.
Another factor to consider, is extending the focus to unproductive and defiant behaviours to critical analyse different
stages of behaviours.
When analysing the results on a week-to-week basis, to see the gradual improvement in lowering disruptive behaviours
through the bar chart in Appendix 8. It has enabled me to answer my inquiry question and gain an understanding around
some of the effective strategies which were successful:
 Establishing early expectations and referring to them on a consistent basis.
 Refer to class models and reinforce it within the classroom environment (Self-Managed vs Co-Managed)
 Specific praise
 Classroom arrangement of student desks and resources
 Assigned groups and pairings
 Rotations for Literacy and Maths
 Non-Verbal techniques (Eye contact, silence and proximity)
 Vocal Tone
Conclusion
In conclusion my professional inquiry project was a great success due the large scope of evidence I gathered and critically
analysed on a week-to-week basis. Through interpreting the information and data gathered over the five week period, it
allowed me to make rationale judgements about particular behaviour management strategies which were effective within a
classroom environment. Through this I was able to improve my practice as a teacher in identifying what was a success,
whilst learning from my failures, in order to continually modify my educational pedagogy.

Word Count: 1511

110151301 4
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

References List
Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership 2018, Australian Professional Standards for Teachers, ATSIL,
viewed 25 September 2018,
< https://www.aitsl.edu.au/teach/standards>.
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.
Everston, E & Weinstein, C 2006, Handbook of classroom management: research, practice, and contemporary issues,
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey, United States of America.
Good, T & Brophy, J 2008, Looking in classrooms, Allyn and Bacon Publishers, Boston, United States of America.
Government of South Australia 2010, South Australian teaching for effective learning framework guide, Department of
Education, South Australia, Australia.
Grundy, S 1995, Action research as professional development, Innovative Links Project, Western Australia, Australia.
Jones, V & Jones, S 2010, Comprehensive classroom management: creating communities of support and solving
problems, Pearson/Merrill Publishers, New Jersey, United States of America.
Sapon-Shelvin, M 2010, Because we can change the world : a practical guide to building cooperative, inclusive
classroom communities, Corwin Press, California, United States of America.
Williams, D 2013, Constructing a theoretical practical and philosophic approach to managing learning environments,
Pearson Australia, New South Wales, Australia.

110151301 5
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018
Appendices
Appendix 1 – Weekly Data Collection Outline

110151301 6
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Appendix 2 – Week 1 Evidence

110151301 7
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 8
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 9
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Appendix 3 – Week 2 Evidence

110151301 10
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 11
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 12
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Appendix 4 – Week 3 Evidence

110151301 13
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 14
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 15
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Appendix 5 – Week 4 Evidence

110151301 16
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 17
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 18
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Appendix 6 – Week 5 Evidence

110151301 19
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 20
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 21
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Appendix 7 – Mentor Evidence

110151301 22
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 23
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 24
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

Appendix 8 – Data Analysis

110151301 25
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 26
Akash Krishna University of South Australia 2018

110151301 27