Glasser's Choice Theory Analysis

Choice Theory, a behaviour management learning theory under the leadership banner, is the work of Dr William Glasser, an American psychiatrist who favoured a behaviour approach to help his patients find solutions to their problems in the present rather than the classical psychotherapy which was more focussed on the subconscious mind (Edwards & Watts, 2004). The theory focusses on providing children with the tools and guidance to satisfy the needs that ignite their behaviour, whether that be through providing opportunities for autonomy, including fun in the teaching content, and/or making sure students feel like they belong in the class (Edwards & Watts, 2004). The theory possesses some limitations, including the immense dedication teachers

The implementation also needs more funding, resources, and school-wide support to reach potential effectiveness, as well as ongoing professional development as it is not a quick-fix solution. However, there are many positives to the theory, including providing a sense of autonomy and independence in students by allowing them to make their own decisions with guidance, and by promoting healthy relationships between teachers and students, and peer relationships. This promotion of relationships and trust prevents misbehaviour and student outcomes are improved as their self-esteem and ability to determine answers to their needs is honed. Finally, it equips students with values that are consistent with internal choice and motivation, quality work, personal responsibility, and needs satisfaction (Loyd, 2005). The learning environment can be positive if students experience the sense of autonomy and pride in their work, as they will have a desire to be at school and to do

Firstly, they both aim to teach kids how to behave properly and appropriately, and they both believe that the teacher is truly in control of the class (Edwards & Watts, 2004). They both encourage positive relationships between teacher and student as a preventative measure for inappropriate behaviour and to manage behaviour as it occurs (Edwards & Watts, 2004). However, there are more differences than similarities between the two theories. The way the teacher using the theories to back up their actions may use the same points but will deliver them differently. Using the above points as an example, teaching students how to behave appropriately using CT would be finding connective behaviours and maintaining them, whereas in AD this looks like modelling respectful behaviours and treating students with respect (Edwards & Watts, 2004). For the teacher to be in control of the class in CT, they are acting as a guide for the students and not as the authority figure seen in AD. By showing students the way and providing options creates a sense of autonomy and independence, unlike the teacher being completely in charge and allowing no freedom of choice for students (Edwards & Watts, 2004). Another vast difference between the two theories is Assertive