Anderson (2018) says that while our decisions about consequences feel “private,” they are also “public” because they impact other people in the school—so teachers should consider how their discipline decisions might affect the broader school community. How, practically, might you coordinate with other teachers?

I agree with Anderson that choosing consequences should be grounded in reason rather than emotion ((2018,  pg.32). When we respond emotionally, we risk making inconsistent or punitive decisions that don’t support long-term growth for students. Instead, acting with clear reasoning allows us to remain fair, predictable, and supportive of student development. The best way to establish that reasoning is through collaborative, reflective practices.

A Professional Learning Community (PLC) is an ideal structure to help ensure consistency in our responses to student behaviour. Within a PLC, teachers at the same grade level or even across adjacent grades can align on shared expectations, discuss appropriate consequences, and analyze the effectiveness of their approaches. This helps eliminate the guessing or personal bias that sometimes creeps into discipline decisions, and it ensures students experience consistency, even when they move between classrooms, and/or have supply coverages.  

Practically, during my previous practicums I observed coordinating with other teachers could involve:

• Regular PLC meetings to review behaviour trends, share strategies, and refine school-wide or grade-level expectations.

• Creating a shared behaviour matrix that outlines consistent consequences for common misbehaviours, ensuring equity across classrooms.

• Reflective discussions where teachers explore what’s working, what’s not, and how their decisions impact both individual students and the broader classroom environment.

• Coordinating across different grade levels working with teachers in the grade above and below to build developmental consistency in behaviour expectations and consequences.

Ongoing reflective practice within the PLC is essential. It allows us to ask important questions:

• Are our consequences helping students learn?

• Are they fair and consistent?

• What message are we sending to the rest of the class?

As Anderson (2018) pointed out consequences are public, they send a message not only to the student involved but to the entire class, and sometime extends to the entire school. Therefore, choosing the right response requires understanding both the limits and possibilities of consequences. They can guide, teach, and reinforce expectations, but they won’t “fix” behaviour in isolation. Consistency, collaboration, and reason-based decision-making are what ultimately lead to a positive school culture. I find this connects closely to Peter Nelmes’ TEDx talk, where he explains that challenging behaviour is really a way for students to communicate (Youtube, 2019). When students act out, it often means they’re feeling things like frustration, fear, or confusion; but they don’t know how to say it in words. Nelmes pointed that if teachers take the time to understand why a student is acting a certain way, instead of just reacting we need to rethink, it can make a big difference (Youtube, 2019, 11:19). This can be accomplished by asking meaningful questions as educators engage in reflective practices coordinating with one another. Ultimately guiding us to build relationships in our own classroom establishing our own unique classroom management strategies for the students. 

Nelmes’ message reminds us that when teachers respond with care and collaborate, we create a school environment where all students feel understood and supported, even when they display challenging behaviours. By ensuring consequences are appropriate and fair, we help students learn from their actions and grow. Together, the school community plays a vital role in helping every student strive for success.