Disruptive Classroom Behavior

Words: 1600
Pages: 7

(White et. al., 2001) Therefore, these students are not allowed to be removed from the classroom just because of their mental disorder. Studies show that children with mental disorders find it hard to cope in a normal classroom. (Rosenburg and Jackman, 2003) These students are off-task and are not involved in the instructional process. For example, students with ADHD (attention deficit hyperactive disorder) are hyperactive and impulsivity and in a classroom setting these sympthoms disrupts the class. (Rosenburg and Jackman, 2003) Mental disorders in children greatly influence negative behavior.
Effects of Negative Behavior Disruptive behavior in the classroom produces poor academic results. The outcome of the negative behavior is lower academic
…show more content…
PAR is management system that helps with behavior through comprehension and a well thought out school-wide behavior plan. PAR is a term used to describe a process -based model. This model includes a collaborate of teachers, administrations, parents, and related services joining together to produce a school- wide, individualized approach to discipline. (Rosenburg and Jackman, 2003) PAR targets these areas; PREVENTS re-occuring behaviors, ACTS to respond to following or breaking the rules consistently, RESOLVE many of the issues that cause the behavior. PAR was tested at 12 schools. All schools had negative behavior problems. In 10 of the schools it was a noticeable decrease of office referrals and suspension ranging from 3% to 54 % in a single year. PAR is now implemented in at least 50 schools. (Rosenburg and Jackman, …show more content…
(2007) tested a social skill strategy for problem behavior in an urban elementary schools. The strategy used was Cool Tool. Cool Tool is used to measure the socially appropriate or inappropriate, and on/off-task behaviors. Cool Tool is a six-week social skills strategy that teach classroom expectations and skills. Two teachers were chosen to take part in the study. Each behavior recorded was given specific amount of points. The teachers were taught during the six weeks, to give praise instead of reprimands. Students were given constant feedback about their behavior. The results examined whether Cool Tool assisted with decreasing the problem behavior, and which praise and reprimands worked best with the negative behaviors. The results revealed that it was a reduction of problem behaviors. It also showed the frequency of praise or reprimands by teachers during interactions with students. The negative effects given by disruptive behavior was reversed when implementing a structured social skill strategy. (Ultey et. al.,