The Lyford Model of Classroom Management: Authentication through Continuing “Reflections from the Field”

Gordon Lyons^1*, Michael Arthur-Kelly¹, Margot Ford²

¹Centre for Special Education and Disability Studies, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.
²School of Education, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.

DOI: 10.4236/ce.2015.619211                

Abstract

The Lyford model of classroom management was first published as the centrepiece of an Australian undergraduate classroom management textbook in 2011. It was conceptualised and developed by the text authors, drawing on a qualitative analysis of their professional experiences, knowledge, beliefs and understandings. Consequently additional data were sought to test the legitimacy and rigour of the model. Each year the first author has called for “Reflections from the field”: short stories written by practicing teachers explaining what they understood their theoretical and practical approaches to classroom management were in their various teaching contexts. Over six years 54 stories have been gathered and progressively analyzed using a qualitative grounded theory approach. This very rich and growing source of data has consistently delivered substantial evidence supporting the authenticity and utility of the model. The model has “stood the test of time” in that it continues to both accommodate and embrace the evolving positions of the authors, and also of a growing number of exemplary practicing teachers. This paper commences with an introduction into the authors’ views on classroom management as a context for then describing and explaining the Lyford model, and the grounded theoretical process by which it comes to be. The continuing data source: the positions put by a growing number of practicing classroom teachers; is then described, followed by a brief explanation of the continuing grounded theoretical process of analysis. To illuminate this analysis, extracts are included from selected “Reflections from the Field”, with analytic breadth coming from a diversity of smaller extracts, and scope coming from one full Reflection. The authors then discuss various points of interest emerging from this continuing analysis, including suggestions to academic peers around teaching classroom management, and suggestions to their preservice and early service colleagues around doing classroom management.

Keywords

Classroom Management, Lyford Model, Grounded Theory, Praxis, Teaching Philosophy

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

[1]	Anderson, P. L. (2005). Case Studies for Inclusive Schools (2nd ed.). Austin, Texas: Pro-Ed.
[2]	Arthur-Kelly, M., Sutherland, D., Lyons, G. S., McFarlane, S., & Foreman, P. (2013). Enhancing Pre-Service Teachers Education Programs to Support Inclusion: Perspectives from New Zealand and Australia. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 28, 217-233. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08856257.2013.778113
[3]	Beamish, W., & Bryer, F. (2012). Co-Researching Best Practice in an Australian Special School: The Process of Participatory Action Research. Special Education Perspectives, 21, 21-33.
[4]	Board of Studies, Teaching and Educational Standards (BOSTES) (2014). Classroom Management and Students with Special Education Needs. Sydney: Author.
[5]	Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
[6]	Brophy, J. (1999). Perspectives of Classroom Management: Yesterday, Today and Tomorrow. In H. J. Freiberg, & J. E. Brophy (Eds.), Beyond Behaviourism: Changing the Classroom Management Paradigm. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
[7]	Buchanan, J., Prescott, A., Schuck, S., Ausbusson, P., & Burke, P. (2013). Teacher Retention and Attrition: Views of Early Career Teachers. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2013v38n3.9
[8]	Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through a Qualitative Analysis. London: Sage.
[9]	Childs, K. E., Kincaid, D., George, H. P., & Gage, N. A. (2015). The Relationship between School-Wide Implementation of Positive Behaviour Intervention and Supports and Student Discipline Outcomes. Journal of Positive Behaviour Interventions. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1098300715590398
[10]	Day, C. (1999). Developing Teachers: The Challenges of Lifelong Learning. Bristol: Taylor & Francis.
[11]	Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[12]	Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
[13]	Ewing, R., & Manual, J. (2005). Retaining Early Career Teachers in the Profession: New Teacher Narratives. Change: Transformations in Education, 8, 1-16.
[14]	Flick, U. (2005). An Introduction to Qualitative Research. London: Sage.
[15]	Flick, U., Von Kardoff, E., & Steinke, I. (2004). What Is Qualitative Research? An Introduction to the Field. In U. Flick, E. Von Kardoff, & I. Steinke (Eds.), A Companion to Qualitative Research (pp. 3-12). London: Sage.
[16]	Foreman, P. (2014). Chapter 1, Introducing Inclusion in Education. In P. Foreman, & M. Arthur-Kelly (Eds.), Inclusion in Action (4th ed., pp. 1-9). South Melbourne: Cengage Learning.
[17]	Godfrey-Smith, P. (2003). Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
[18]	Gore, J., & Parkes, R. (2008). On the Mistreatment of Management. In A. Phelan, & J. Sumsion (Eds.), Critical Readings in Teacher Education (pp. 45-60). New York: Sense Publishing.
[19]	Grundy, P. (1995). Action Research as Professional Development. Occasional Paper #1, Perth: Murdoch University. Innovative Links between Universities and Schools for Teacher Professional Development: A National Professional Development Project.
[20]	Henley, M. (2006). Classroom Management: A Proactive Approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.
[21]	Jones, V. F., & Jones, L. S. (2013). Comprehensive Classroom Management: Creating Communities of Support and Solving Problems. Sydney: Allyn and Bacon.
[22]	Killen, R. (2012). Effective Teaching Strategies: Lessons from Research and Practice (4th ed.). Melbourne: Social Science Press.
[23]	Kounin, J. S. (1970). Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
[24]	Ladwig, J. G. (2009). Working Backwards towards Curriculum: On the Curricular Implications of Quality Teaching. The Curriculum Journal, 20, 271-286.
[25]	Lyons, G. S., Ford, M., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (2011). Classroom Management: Creating Positive Learning Environments (3rd ed.). South Melbourne: Cengage Learning.
[26]	Lyons, G. S., Ford, M., & Slee, J. (2014). Classroom Management: Creating Positive Learning Environments (4th ed.). South Melbourne: Cengage Learning.
[27]	Manning, M. L., & Bucher, K. T. (2013). Classroom Management: Models, Applications and Cases (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.
[28]	Michail, S. (2011). Understanding School Responses to Students’ Challenging Behaviour: A Review of the Literature (Research Paper #5). Sydney: UnitingCare, Children, Young People and Families.
[29]	Newman, F. M., & Associates (1996). Authentic Achievement: Restructuring Schools for Intellectual Quality. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
[30]	O’Neill, S. C., & Stephenson, J. (2014). Evidence-Based Classroom and Behaviour Management Content in Australian Pre-Service Primary Teachers’ Coursework: Wherefore Art Thou? Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39, Article 1.
[31]	Odom, S. L., Brantlinger, E., Gersten, R., Horner, R. H., Thompson, B., & Harris, K. R. (2005). Research in Special Education: Scientific Methods and Evidence-Based Practices. Exceptional Children, 71, 137-148.
[32]	Porter, L. (2007). Student Behaviour: Theory and Practice for Teachers (3rd ed.). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.
[33]	Shulman, L. S. (1992). Towards a Pedagogy of Cases. In J. H. Shulman (Ed.), Case Study Methods in Teacher Education (pp. 1-30). New York: Teachers College Press.