I was reading a PARENTING magazine in the waiting room of my Chiro's office that had an article addressing the discipline/behavior management styles and the repercussions.
The author of the article interviewed a couple of child psychs that said that the rationalizing, choice driven and critical thinking development approaches had been taken too far and that old fashion basics like: Do it or else face the consequence types of parenting were more productive at times (of course they were talking in terms of reasonable consequences and not abuse...) because a childs reasoning, memory and critical thinking skills were too immature to benefit from 'newer' approaches. The example of repetition for 'three strikes and your out' types of tactics were criticized because of application not use. They suggested this:
Step one: Explain and verify that your instructions/goals are clear
two: First warning, repeat your instructions/goals and praise the corrected behavior
three: Second warning, shorter repeat of inst./goals w/ a mention of the consequences if it has to go any farther. Again, praise good behavior when they get back on track.
four: Last warning, immediately state what they did wrong, your actions that you took and how they didn't stay with the program and move into consequence phase. If there is any griping, verbally remind them that they are responsible for their actions and the consequences/rewards that come with them.
The thing to watch out for though are those kids who will start to connect the praise after they have settled down post-warning as a reward for the bad behavior, so you have to sprinkle some homespun logic in with the process.
I don't know if I totally agree with this strategy as explained, but it makes sense in theory.
It is nice to see the Psych community agreeing with those of us who teach/raise kids and see how the 'newer' approaches are not affective without some of the 'older' ways.