Student Discipline the Behavioral Matrix

Student Discipline

The Behavioral Matrix and Corrective Action

How should an administrator respond to a teacher who, during the first week of use, refers a student who demonstrates an Intensity I Offense on the Behavioral Matrix to the office? How should an administrator respond to a teacher who continually does this, even after specific feedback and correction?

Under the terms of a school-wide behavioral matrix, the teacher is equally responsible as the student for adhering to collective values and strategies. Therefore, a teacher who defies this matrix to bring an Intensity I offender to the principal's office must be admonished for attempting to shift disciplinary responsibilities. Indeed, under the terms of this strategic disciplinary approach, Intensity I refers to "behavior problems in the classroom that teachers handle with a minimum of interaction or intervention (e.g., using physical proximity, a social skills prompt, reinforcing other students' appropriate behavior, giving a non- verbal cue to the student)." (p. 7) A habitual failure to understand this may require the teacher to engage in a workshop concerning the finer points of corrective action at every level of the Behavioral Matrix.

How can a school's administration and discipline committee maximize the entire staff's consistent use of the social skills program, the Behavioral Matrix, and the time-out process?

Just as with students, accountability of teachers is the key to successful implementation of the behavioral matrix. The best way to maximize the staff's use of the strategies discussed here is to ensure that training is comprehensive, that there is a high level of administrative support and that positive reinforcement strategies are fashioned to reward those teachers who exhibit a particular commitment to the program.

How can a school's administration and discipline committee move a school faculty from wanting to punish student misbehavior to focusing on the use of strategic interventions that eliminate the misbehavior and replace it with pro-social behavior?

The goal of corrective action is to promote consequences over punishment. But this may not always be readily attainable for teachers. This is why a school's administration must take steps to alter the culture of punishment that often defines school disciplinary terms. For instance, classes may be rewarded for achieving certain standards of behavioral stability with field trips, assemblies or even just ten minutes of extra recess as part of a schoolwide program. This can help make it substantially easer for teachers to promote corrective actions rather than punishments, creating a socio-cultural pressure for adherence throughout the classroom.

Module 3 Activity: Behavioral Matrix Analysis

Intensity I:

Intensity I Behavior, also identified as Annoying behavior by the Behavioral Matrix, refers to the general gamut of disruptive, distracted and limitation-challenging behaviors exhibited by most students at one time or another. Unless chronic, such behaviors will not typically be considered highly problematic and thus justify corrective actions that also limit the disruptions to the general flow of the classroom.

Using the Behavioral Matrix to identify the most commonly problematic Intensity I behaviors in the middle school setting, we can see that most offenses are minor in nature but do require confrontation. According to the responses in the Behavioral Matrix, the most common behavior issues related to passive and off-task behavior, denoting that at points, some students would struggle to pay attention, listen to instructions or stay on task.

In addition to this distracted behavior, students would exhibit tendencies toward disruptiveness as well. Some students were prone to calling out answers without being called on, a sign of enthusiasm that must be encouraged even as the offending behavior is constructively corrected. Other behaviors such as teasing or talking to other students without permission during class time may be met with a more stern corrective intervention, though still along the continuum of low-intensity responses.

Especially in the case of these low-intensity offenses, the preferred methods for corrective response are always those of the least intensity. The goal especially at this Behavior Intensity level is to provide corrective action rather than punitive. This can be initiated by the use of visual or non-verbal prompts, proximity or even a subtle verbal warning. The goal is to alert the student to the 'annoying' behavior and to demonstrate that this behavior won't be accepted without yet resorting to punishment.

For the student that insists on either becoming distracted easily or distracting other students with teasing, pestering or general speaking out of turn, it may be appropriate to take steps such as relocating the student to another part of the room. As the Behavioral Matrix demonstrates, this is one of a number of measures that a teacher has to demonstrate that there will consequences for unacceptable behavior. It is also important to differentiate this concept of consequences from the concept of punishment.

Intensity II:

As the findings from the Matrix worksheet show, there is some crossover behavior Intensity I and Intensity II behaviors. For instance, the proclivity toward teasing and pestering behavior or the tendency to talk out of turn in class are both at the top end of the Intensity I spectrum. If chronic or in greater severity, these behaviors may be regarded as Intensity II or Inappropriate Behaviors. This crossover also applies to the corrective measures recommended, including the suggestion to move the disruptive student's seat.

Other aspects of the Intensity II level of behavior demonstrate the same crossover but with implications of greater frequency or intensity. For instance, the worksheet indicates that chronic socializing with peers and inappropriate volume or tone of voice are common trespasses at the Middle School level. Additional behaviors highlighted in this worksheet would be teasing and its far more severe counterpart in bullying. Certainly bullying or engaging in verbally threatening behavior represents an escalation of negative behavior and denotes the need for stronger pro-social skills.

These prosocial skills largely inform the corrective actions suggested within the continuum, with a specific focus once again on consequence. However, here, with the increased intensity of the offense there is also an increased intensity of consequence. In this case, punishment begins to enter into the strategy, with such basic measures as the loss of extra privileges or recess time becoming appropriate. The workbook denotes that many teachers prefer to use the loss of free time as a graduating scale for dealing either with different levels of behavioral severity or the frequency of an individual's misbehaviors.