Consequences
Authors Name
Department, Institutional Affiliation
Course Name
Professors Name
Date
Consequences
It is known that after the establishment of procedures and rules, the educator or the teacher is required to come up with the consequence development to enhance tracking the response of student’s behavior towards the use of procedures and rules (Delamont, 2017). Through consequence development ahead of time, the educator will be aware on how to address the behavior response hence the students will understand when and what to expect. For consequences to work best they must be specific and clear, the consequences must relate directly to procedures and rules, the consequences must possess hierarchy of alternatives, and finally consequences must be logical and natural within school environment (Pollard, 2017). However, there are two types of consequences that is positive and negative consequences which are required to be elaborated by the teacher to the students hence make awareness. Positive consequences are known to be serving in increasing the student’s ability to follow the classroom procedures and rules (Pulinx & Agirdag, 2017). Negative consequences are known to be the decreasing power of students to break rules and involved in disruptive behavior.
Therefore, it is clear that a healthy consequences and rules system is very important in enhancing a culture of academic and respect achievement within the classroom. The students required a chance to understand and internalized consequences and rules before engaging themselves in learning goals of the year (Sanchez & Jouneau-Sion, 2017). The teacher should help the students to understand, demonstrate, and illustrate why the rules and procedures are necessary within the school. Therefore, the principle of consequences enhances the students an opportunity to learn responsibilities as a result of a mistake, judgment rely on reward and punishment, and consequences which are known to be delivered with empathy enhances the student opportunity for individual on their choices responsibility. However, it is known those classroom environments which are designed on punishment and reward system are known to be relying on threat and judgment to create order. Upon perceiving threat, the brain starts to operate differently. Under threat through punishment or lack of reward the reaction of the brain is known to be different.
The teacher should have three intentions for consequences delivery (Annury, 2017). The punish intention whose goal is known to creating guilty in children to feel bad or wrong about themselves. The save intention whose goal is to ensure children are not under discomfort intense feeling since they are known to be uncomfortable to us. Finally, the teach intention whose goal is to enhance the children to reflect, feel, and be responsible to face their consequences.
References
Annury, M. N. (2017). Promoting multilingualism in the classroom: A case study of ELT Program. Vision: Journal for Language and Foreign Language Learning, 6(1), 96-104.
Delamont, S. (2017). Interaction in the classroom: Contemporary sociology of the school. Routledge.
Pollard, A. (2017). Reflective teaching–the sociological contribution. In Sociology and teaching (pp. 54-75). Routledge.
Pulinx, R., Van Avermaet, P., & Agirdag, O. (2017). Silencing linguistic diversity: The extent, the determinants and consequences of the monolingual beliefs of Flemish teachers. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 20(5), 542-556.
Sanchez, E., Young, S., & Jouneau-Sion, C. (2017). Classcraft: from gamification to ludicization of classroom management. Education and Information Technologies, 22(2), 497-513.
Serholt, S., Barendregt, W., Vasalou, A., Alves-Oliveira, P., Jones, A., Petisca, S., & Paiva, A. (2017). The case of classroom robots: teachers’ deliberations on the ethical tensions. Ai & Society, 32(4), 613-631.