## Key Ideas > [!abstract] Core Concepts > > - **Accountability enables growth**: Consequences help students learn self-regulation rather than enabling poor choices > - **Least intrusive principle**: Start minimal and escalate systematically, enabling student self-awareness before external control > - **Always follow through**: Consistent application prevents students learning they can avoid consequences ## Definition **Consequences**: Systematic responses to inappropriate behaviour that hold students accountable whilst teaching self-regulation and preparation for real-world expectations. ## Connected To [[Classroom Management]] | [[Script Language of Behaviour]] | [[Rules]] | [[Norms]] | [[Relationships and Regulation]] --- ## Least to most intrusive sequence A least-intrusive principle enables student 'behaviour awareness' rather than simply telling them what to do (Rogers, 2011). This approach develops self-regulation (Simonsen et al., 2008). 1. Begin with non-verbal cuing such as looking at the student or using fingers to indicate they should turn around. Progress to descriptive cuing: "Damien...Troy...you're fiddling with the window blinds, it's really distracting." 2. Then use simple direction: "Damien...Troy...leave the blinds (thanks) and facing this way and listening." 3. Follow with reminders: "Remember our rule for asking questions" or "Hands up without calling out." 4. Use direct questions: "What are you supposed to be doing now?" or "What were the instructions?" 5. Provide directed choice: "Your phone ... on my desk or in your bag, thanks." 6. Clarify the consequence: "Jayson I've asked you to put the phone away. If you choose not to I'll have to follow this up with you after." 7. Finally, apply consequence by asking the student to move, stay back after class, or leave the room (Lemov, 2015). Always follow through. Never cut a plea deal (Marzano et al., 2003). ## Three strikes system problem Giving students strikes for misbehaviour could mean up to 40 disruptions per class of 20 before any consequence is applied (three strikes per student equals 60 disruptions). For repeat-offenders, do not give strikes and immediately apply consequence. ## Reflection time (detention) Detain students after class to communicate severity and give opportunity to reflect (Rogers, 2011). Consequences should be natural and logical: sit silently if loud, write apology if rude, clean desks if graffitied (Brophy, 2006). For recurring issues, use a reflection framework: I was asked to reflect because I have difficulty with... This problem occurs under these conditions... I think this happens because... The problem affects me/others because... The skill I need to work on is... What you and your teacher can do to solve this... Follow-up conversations should tune in to feelings, focus on behaviour, give right of reply, work on agreement about future, have them read the reflection, and end with a clean slate. ## References Brophy, J. (2006). History of research on classroom management. In C. M. Evertson & C. S. Weinstein (Eds.), *Handbook of classroom management: Research, practice, and contemporary issues* (pp. 17-43). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Lemov, D. (2015). *Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to college*. Jossey-Bass. Marzano, R. J., Marzano, J. S., & Pickering, D. J. (2003). *Classroom management that works: Research-based strategies for every teacher*. ASCD. Rogers, B. (2011). *Classroom behaviour: A practical guide to effective teaching, behaviour management and colleague support* (3rd ed.). SAGE. Simonsen, B., Fairbanks, S., Briesch, A., Myers, D., & Sugai, G. (2008). Evidence-based practices in classroom management: Considerations for research to practice. *Education and Treatment of Children*, 31(3), 351-380. https://doi.org/10.1353/etc.0.0007 ---