Debates about how a teacher teaches seem to dominate the educational stratosphere at the moment: progressive versus traditional, discovery versus instruction, engagement versus knowledge, and so on. But the reality is that they all mean absolutely nothing if a teacher can’t control the class. This really is the pillar that holds up everything else.

Now, our teaching-training institutions - whether they be university-based or otherwise - are very good on sharing practical strategies that can be implemented by teachers to manage behaviour. However, perhaps the more discreet but intrinsically important benefits of creating an effective teacher persona have been overlooked in recent years. I don’t feel there has been enough focus on how a teacher uses their body language, tone of voice and general demeanour to create a powerful idea in students’ minds about the kind of teacher they are. Surely, the successful creation and management of an effective teacher persona can vastly reduce incidents of low-level disruption and consequently improve standards over time.

When I finished my PGCE, I took a calculated decision to develop a teacher persona. I settled on something along the “sergeant major” lines. In terms of body language; upright, broad shoulders and a confident stature. Never rush or get flustered, and don’t look surprised by much. I would aim to maintain a veneer of complete control. I would attempt to keep a business like-tone in my verbal engagements with students, whether that was in the classroom or in the corridors. I would also look to use assertive language as much as possible. For example: “X, I would like you to sit down” and “X, sit down now” instead of “Can you please do...?” All of this would combine to create a perception that I believed would help me as a teacher to teach, and then the students to learn.

Although I didn’t take it literally, I also bought into the idea of “not smiling until Christmas” and aimed to gain the students’ respect first and their affection later through teaching great lessons. In the long term, this worked perfectly, but in the short term, it was pretty painful.

‘Establish boundary lines’

I challenged every poor behaviour with fierce consistency. I wanted to be the strict teacher who expected high standards. I also tried to keep my cards close to my chest in the early years: sometimes, less is more when it comes to what students know or don’t know about you. Some teachers fall into the trap of becoming too friendly too quickly, spending valuable lesson time discussing anything but the lesson objective in the hope of garnering some kind of approval from the students. Engaging in “banter” too soon will also allow boundary lines to become blurred.

Ultimately, in my mind, I took lesson time extremely seriously. It was time that was sacrosanct and each lesson mattered to every child’s future. Of course, some children would find this pedantic when I insisted on completing some particular task with five minutes to go before the end of the lesson, and some would resist the pace as one task or activity led to another in super-quick time.

However, in the end they thank you for it. I remember one particular Year 9 student - I will call him Dean - whom I refused to compromise with during my NQT year. I ended up going through the “warning system” nearly every lesson. I ended up sending him out regularly, setting detentions, backed up by my ever-willing head of department at the time. Eventually, and I mean eventually, the battle was won and he finally settled down into some kind of learning routine. He realised I just wasn’t going to back down.

Dean left the school a year later, and on his last day he knocked on my classroom door, came in and told me, to my astonishment, that he really respected me as a teacher for the way I had done things. It would have been easy to avoid conflict (the natural human tendency) and appease Dean. Some teachers will do this not only for an easier life in the short term but also because they worry about the perception that colleagues might have of their ability to manage behaviour. However, it won’t take long for students to realise that you are a push-over and when that happens, it’s too late to “turn strict”. If you aren’t having a battle with at least a few students at any one time, then there is something wrong, unless you are in a school of angels.

It’s not just being willing to confront poor behaviour head-on, but also how to do it. In his recent autobiography, Sir Alex Ferguson wrote about making sure he never lost an argument in the changing room. If someone challenged his authority or decision-making, he would make sure he never lost, even if it meant a long drawn-out process. Hence why many ex-players now view him as a father figure who laid out the discipline but underpinned it with affection. Of course, there will always be a few who throw their toys out of the pram completely but more often than not, most people will respond.

His approach resonated with me and I worry that there aren’t enough Alex Fergusons in schools. He loved his players but he showed it in a way that he knew would bring the best out of them. That certainly wasn’t by being overly nice, applying faint praise or pandering to their every want and need. The “treat ‘em mean, keep ‘em keen” mantra worked for Manchester United. Again though, it might not work for every club or set of players.

You don’t have to be a Sir Alex; you could be a Klopp, a Redknapp or a Ranieri. But try to decide on a persona. Consider how you could develop that persona to match your aspirations in the classroom and your own values and ideals out of it. If you can carry through your vision to its conclusion, the rewards can be infinite. 

Thomas Rogers is a classroom teacher who runs rogershistory.com and tweets at @RogersHistory

Want to keep up with the latest education news and opinion? Follow TES on Twitter and like TES on Facebook