Assessment schools (Ball et al., 2012). TheAssessment schools (Ball et al., 2012). The

Assessment 3: Policy Development Issues related to student behaviour are becoming a shared concern, especially as ‘behaviour is one of the dominant discourses of schooling’ (Ball, Maguire, & Braun, 2012, p. 98). In many countries there is a growing sense of social and moral panic about students’ behaviour in schools (Ball et al., 2012). The media reflects society’s unease by consistently reporting widespread public and political concern over allegedly negative and deteriorating student behaviour in the nation’s public schools (e.g. Barr, 2009; Cameron, 2010; Donnelly, 2009; Watson, 2012).  In Australia behaviour in schools continues to attract political and public attention nationally and internationally as concerns about uncontrollable and disorderly students prevail. Too often this media and political commentary is used as a means of drawing attention to Australia’s poor international testing results such as the PISA. Education Minister Simon Birmingham recently called for a “zero tolerance approach to bad behaviour” and that”improvements were needed to return Australia to near the top of the international rankingsas Australia continues to sit below the OECD average for classroom discipline” (The Australian, March 15th 2017). Politicians, educational systems have developed a plethora of policies, strategies and practices that promote a sense of ‘control’. Earlier international research (Wubbels, 2007) suggests that the ‘problem’ has been overplayed. Yet what do we know and what have we learnt about the nature and extent of problems related to student behaviour in today’s schools? The 2008 Melbourne Declaration on Educational Goals for Young Australians includes two goals: firstly, that Australian schooling promotes equity and excellence; and secondly that all young Australians become: successful learners; confident and creative individuals; and active and informed citizens. With respect to the latter, the Melbourne Declaration, states that “schools should assist students to: have a sense of self-worth, self-awareness and personal identity that enables them to manage their emotional, mental, spiritual and physical wellbeing; have a sense of optimism about their lives and the future; develop personal values and attributes such as honesty, resilience, empathy and respect for others; relate well to others and form and maintain healthy relationships; be well prepared for their potential life roles as family, community and workforce members; and embrace opportunities, make rational and informed decisions about their own lives and accept responsibility for their own actions.” Establishing consistent national standards to improve learning outcomes for all studentsshould therefore be regarded as a positive move. The ‘Personal and Social Capability’ in the Australian Curriculum for example involves students in a range of practices ‘including recognising and regulating emotions, developing empathy for others and understanding relationships, establishing and building positive relationships, making responsible decisions, working effectively in teams, handling challenging situations constructively and developing leadership skills.’Additionally, The National Safe Schools Framework (as part of a broader Student Resilience and Wellbeing Policy) includes a set of guiding principles to assist school communities develop positive and practical student safety?and wellbeing policies. Key elements of the framework include Board & Principal leadership commitment to a safe school; a supportive and connected school culture; positive behaviour management; early intervention and targeted support; and partnerships with families and community.Establishing frameworks and policies therefore is a prerequisite in creating an engaging learning environment. These frameworks and policy statements are the rules and regulations that articulate and monitor what is acceptable behaviour and how to manage them. The characteristics of a school behaviour management policy need to reflect within the policy the vital and complex area of managing or responding to the behaviour management of students.Whilst it is acknowledged that there are challenges facing schools, behaviour management policies should draw attention to the reasonable steps that can and should be implemented to meet the learning needs of students. This how ever must be achieved within a framework of best practice and evidence-based behaviour support. This should involve a preventive, student-centered, and positive approach with well-established evidence-based targeted intervention programmes to meet the individual needs of students in consultation with the various stakeholders which must also involve student viewpoints.In light of the Melbourne Declaration educational sectors and individual schools should focuson a framework that includes: 1. best practice in behaviour management in school settings. ?2. the practicality of the policy and practice frameworks for the development, implementation, monitoring and review of evidence-based behaviour management strategies.3. supportive school leadership  This paper will review the two-page Behaviour Management Policy of a non-government schools. It will further include some suggestion that may enhance the policy. The policy states the expected values within the school environment. The policy proposes that all students are to display appropriate patterns of behaviour whilst at school. This is accomplished through positive praise and rewards as well as sanctions. Furthermore, the rationale indicates that the policy is applied and enforced by all members of the school community.  The word “appropriate” is used throughout the policy without articulating what is actually meant by the use of this word throughout the policy. Furthermore, the policy only refers to behaviours that are deemed to be extreme or unacceptable behaviour but there is little clarity on what is described by extreme. Additionally, the policy is explicit in its philosophical beliefthat suspension of students from school is a key component of the school’s welfare and discipline policies.  The school’s position is that suspension is an important safeguard where a student’s behaviour harms or threatens the safety of others. There is, however, limited research evidence that shows that implementing suspensions reduces disruptive classrooms and whole school inappropriate behaviour. The school could consider a restorative practices approach which differs from administering punitive measures in that the ultimate aim is reflectionrather than punishment or a school-to-prison pipeline mentality. In reviewing the policy, it is important to note that student behaviour does not exist in isolation. But rather that it is influenced by a range of internal and external factors and that students should not be necessarily held responsibility for their behaviour. Research however shows that suspensions exacerbate challenging behaviour for students, particularly those with disability or trauma.  Contrary to the views of Donnelly (2017), “If standards are to improve, especially for disadvantaged students, Australian classrooms must embrace a more disciplined environment where teachers are authority figures who engender respect.” A recent article by Professor Tamsin Ford, University of Exeter Medical School entitled; “An exploration of the impact of school exclusion on children’s mental health and well-being: a mixed methods approach, highlighted that the exclusion from school is a complex issue that can involve difficulties socially, emotionally and/or academically for students. This approach to discipline and behaviour management is premised on?a positive approach as it focuses on practices that promote positive student behaviour, such as engagement in learning and pro-social behaviour, rather than on punitive punishment.  The school should consider best practice in supporting student behaviour which involves implementing a preventive, student-centered, and positive approach as recommended by the ACT expert panel on students with Complex Needs and Challenging Behaviours, (op cit, p151” observed that when:  ?”discussing challenging behaviour, the starting point, and the priority for investment, should be on ?positive behaviour support and evidence based targeted interventions to meet individual needs. ?This is established best practice, and is a preventive approach.’Additionally, the school could implement a data gathering exercise in which it collects data for analysis based on unproductive student classroom behaviours using the index of community socio-educational advantage (ICSEA). This approach would enable the school to measure the average level of educational advantage of the school’s student population against the type of behaviour. The analysis of meta data could provide the school with invaluable information related to behaviour management based on students’ family backgrounds, occupation, school and non-school education. Teachers in schools from the ? 900 ICSEA value have reported significantly higher instances of anti-social behaviours than teachers from the remaining ICSEA categories. In light of the significant role that a school’sgeographical location plays in the educational advantage or disadvantage the school may find it beneficial to have reliable and consistent data which will allow it to evaluate and analyse its management of behaviour management for future policy development. The ACT expert panel identified key components of a proactive and student-centeredapproach to students with complex needs and challenging behaviour, and which ‘extensive research has shown will significantly reduce but not eliminate the need for reactive measures’, including, among other things: a) Identifying individual needs b) Giving priority to relationshipsc) Fostering wellbeing and demonstrating in practice the links between wellbeing, learning and behaviourd) Personalising learning and using distinct pedagogies when students need them Teaching to engage and support behaviour ?e) Teaching social and emotional skills f) Focusing on prevention and proactive approaches g) Collaborating at all levels  Additionally, the school may wish to consider the Positive Behaviour for Learning (PBL)which is a multi-leveled prevention-based framework commonly implemented in schools both nationally and internationally.  The three main components of the PBL are:  a) prevention and early interventionb) multi-tiered support, andc) data-based decision making.  PBL advocates for an ‘explicit, structured, team-based, problem solving process for developing schools’ capacities to assess and address behaviour issues’. The main is to increase student equity by providing access to learning for?all students. The PBL recognises the function of behaviour when linking academic success and?social skills. It is based on the premise that by replacing behaviours that are more conducive to learning rather than labelling students schools can go a long way in eliminating the various factors that reinforce inappropriate behaviour. Historically, classroom behaviour management has focused on controlling students’ behaviour. In this context behaviour management addressed the actions taken by teachers to establish order, and as a means of re-engaging students with learning. Whilst punitive measures might initially bring about some student compliance, over time these practices build resentfulness, and consequently relationships then breakdown. A framework for developing and enacting humane behaviour policies and practices in schools by the Australian Research Council Linkage Project (2014) entitled ‘Punish them or engage them? identified that acentral theoretical premise guiding this study is that engagement in learning directly influences student behaviour.According to Steer 2005, “Consistent experience of good teaching promotes good behaviour”. But schools also need to have positive strategies for managing student behaviour that assists students understand their school’s expectations These expectations should beunderpinned by a clear range of rewards and sanctions, which are applied fairly and consistently by all staff. It is also critical to teach students how to behave – good behaviour has to be modelled and learned and as such schools must adopt procedures and practices that assists students to learn how to behave in society. The Steer Report (2005) together with the teachings of Social Emotional Aspects of Learning states that “To enable the most vulnerable or disengaged children to gain full benefit from strategies in behaviour management, schools need the capacity to provide high quality support to the child and to the parents. Without that capacity schools will be unable to meet the aspirations contained within the Children’s Plan.”In an article published by PPTA states “A teacher’s capacity to manage the classroom learning environment is the single most important factor in determining the quality of learning”. Empowering teachers to do a good job should therefore be central to school governance and management. The relevant educational authorities and school governancehave the responsibility to resource schools adequately so that quality learning can occur.”Additionally, “Quality professional development can improve classroom effectiveness in managing behaviour. Schools should have a coherent approach to professional development that is embedded in the school’s culture. Schools should be discerning about the quality ofprofessional learning offered.”?”A framework for developing and enacting humane behaviour policies and practices in schools” by the Australian Research Council Linkage Project (2014) entitled ‘Punish them or engage them? Identifying and addressing productive and unproductive student behaviours in South Australian schools’, provided a framework for schools in which they could develop and implement whole school policies that promote authentic student engagement. Toby Stevens (2013) stated in his thesis that “Students experiencing Social, emotional and behavioural difficulties (SEBD) presents a challenge to teachers as individuals and schools as organisations in enabling children experiencing such difficulties to make progress within the school curriculum, as well as minimising the potential negative effects such difficulties can have on the on the progress of other students.”   American independent filmmaker John Cassavetes (1929-1989), in acknowledging his capacity for facilitating engaging, emotional performances from his actors, once stated that “the only talent that I might have is to get you to express yourself the way you want to, not the way I want you to!” Cassavetes’ directing model is actor centred. This is similar to the model used for student-centred teaching.  The aim is to understand the actor (student) as a whole, and tailor their acting (learning) accordingly. Just like a film there is a script (curriculum) to follow and as teachers provide direction (classroom structure).These teachers put the students first and are driven to facilitate student autonomy rather than teacher control.  In dealing with student behaviour schools should take into account the personal, historic, and contextual factors of the student. These factors help shape the way the students think, interact and respond to others at school.Figure 1 demonstrates influences in a student’s life. It has been divided into three areas – the classroom, the school, and the broader society. Figure 1 Influences on Student Behaviour in SchoolsFigure 1: Clusters of Influences on Student Behaviour in Schools The ecology of the classroom has been recognised as having a powerful influence on student behaviour. The physical setting of the learning space has a significant impact on the social interaction between students and staff.  In the report “Punish them or engage them” (2012), Anna Sullivan et al developed theecological model of student behaviour for the following reasons:  a) It explicitly acknowledges the complexity of student behaviour at school; b) It challenges faulty explanations of student behaviour that attribute blame to single causesc) It shifts the focus of attention away from ‘naughty’ or ‘troubled’ studentsd) It demands that more sophisticated explanations of student behaviour be e) developed at the expense of simplistic, pathologising explanationsf) It implicates more ‘actors’ in ameliorating the effects on student engagement &g) behaviour of unfair and disrespectful policies and practices.  According to the report written by the University of South Australia 2013, “Classroom factors have long been recognised as powerful shapers of student behaviour. For example, the physical setting of a classroom has a major influence on the nature and extent of social interaction that occurs between students. Similarly, classroom rules that limit the movement of students are often intended to reduce these interactions and promote academic on-task behaviours. The knowledge, skills and dispositions of teachers also have a major impact on the classroom environment and can positively or negatively affect the behaviour of students.” In addressing behaviour management in a coherent manner the school whose policy was reviewed should consider the relevance of, and their willingness to implement reform in the following: 1. relevant policy and practice enhancements ?2. best practice in complaint handling and dispute resolution (in the context of the current limited independent complaint handling and oversight options available in relation to complaints about non-government schools) ?3. professional development and training ?4. data collection and analysis, and ?5. interagency collaboration as a means of a shared agreement on best practice and policy. ?The Wellbeing Framework for Schools (2015) requires schools to have a planned approach to support?the wellbeing of all students. The framework is pro-social and strengths-based, and assists schools to strengthen students’ cognitive, physical, social, emotional and spiritual development. The framework identifies that educators need to understand the potential wellbeing has to bring about positive change, what is required to foster wellbeing, and how it can become a powerful force in students’ learning and development. It also states that student wellbeing is ‘enhanced when schools connect with and draw on the expertise, contribution and support of their communities.The Student Welfare Policy provides a framework for school communities to review student welfare, including discipline; determine key issues for action; and develop and implement student welfare actions and the school discipline policy. In order to minimise behaviour management issues, schools should firstly define the meaning of student wellbeing. According to Wellbeing Framework for Schools, wellbeing encompasses the following domains; cognitive, emotional, social, physical and spiritualwellbeing of the student. Wellbeing is therefore dynamic and is integral to educational outcomes of students in the present as well as focussing on their long-term outcomes within however the context of a quality teaching and learning environment. Student Behaviour Management Policy should be well articulated and developed in consultation with school community members. The policy should consider the following four components: 1. the discipline code or school rules2. strategies and practices to promote positive student behaviour, including specific measures to maintain a climate of respect3. strategies and practices to recognise and reinforce student achievement; and 4. strategies and practices to manage inappropriate student behaviour.  Educators are well aware of the well-established link between student engagement, student behaviour and academic achievement (Angus et al., 2009; Hattie, 2003; Marzano , 2003). In developing policy however, schools should use terms such as ‘productive’ and ‘unproductive’ behaviours (Angus et al., 2009) rather than the terms ‘appropriate’ and ‘inappropriate’ behaviours, which are more commonly used in literature to reflect the link between behaviour and teaching and learning.  References The Australian, March 15th 2017 Sheldon Rothman, “The changing in influence of socioeconomic status on student achievement: Recent evidence from Australia”, 2003 Kevin Donnelly, Director of the Education Standards InstituteThe Australian, October 9, 2013 Joy Burch MLAACT Minister for Education and Training November 2015 Best Practice Behaviour Management A view from the literature Patty Towl M Ed (Otago) September 2007   8