Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without the permission of the Author.
TEACHERS’ USE OF CLASSROOM-BASED
MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES: A SURVEY OF NEW
ZEALAND TEACHERS
A thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Educational Psychology
Massey University, Albany
New Zealand
Charlotte Nasey
2012
ii
Candidates Statement
I certify that the thesis entitled “Teachers’ Use of Classroom-based Management Strategies” and submitted as part of the degree of Master of Educational Psychology is the result of my own work, except where otherwise acknowledged, and that this research paper (or part of the same) has not been submitted for any other degree to any other university or institution.
Signed________________________________
Date_________________________________
iii
Abstract
Behavioural problems are a constant threat to student learning and the learner environment, namely, the classroom. Researchers have identified empirically validated classroom-based strategies to support teachers to manage/deal with problem behaviours, but there has been very little research on whether these strategies are used in New Zealand (NZ) classrooms.
The purpose of this present study is to fill the gap by conducting a survey of teachers’ self-reported use of management strategies, to increase students’ learning engagement and academic outcomes, and reduce behaviour interruptions. The present study is a partial replication and extension of a cross-cultural comparative study conducted in the United States (US) and Greece by Akin-Little, Little, and Laniti (2007) to determine the extent to which teachers’ utilized research-based management strategies in their classroom. The process and methodology of the present study was similar in that it used the same questionnaire but a different sample of teachers. The replication was an opportunity to compare the US-Greek findings with the situation here in NZ. The survey questionnaire was slightly modified to cater for the New Zealand demographic, such as the racial/ethnic background of the participants and the racial/ethnic composition of the classes. Another change was made regarding the use of “corporal punishment” in the school, which was replaced with the use of “restraint,” as non-violent crisis physical restraint is used as a last resort in some NZ schools/classrooms as a safety strategy to manage acting out students’ extreme behaviour.
The use of corporal punishment was banned in all NZ schools (including Early Childhood Centres) in 1990. Participants for this study comprised 53 practising teachers from a range of co-educational primary schools within the metropolitan area of Auckland. The survey questionnaire contained four sections which gathered information on teacher characteristics, classroom rules, classroom child-management systems, and teachers’ perceptions of their role as a teacher, relative to their use of classroom-based management strategies. The results
iv
showed that most schools used a school-wide discipline plan, and a large number of teachers developed their own classroom rules with student input. Teachers’ overall reported the use of research-based management strategies (including those identified in the survey), as well as approaches appropriate to the ecology, culture/climate, and ethos of their particular school. In addition, the results showed that there was a greater emphasis on strengthening positive teacher-student relationships and proactive, preventative systems of managing behaviour, with less frequent resort to reactive-consequence based approaches. The results further indicated that over half the teachers perceived they communicated and monitored their students frequently during lessons and could attend to more than one event without undue disruption. In regard to teacher efficacy, the majority of teachers perceived that their classroom management strategies were adequate. These results have important implications for teaching practices and student learning. A comparison with teacher classroom management practices in the United State and Greece, limitations of the study, and possible further studies in this area are discussed.
v
Acknowledgements
Ehara taku toa i te toa takitahi, engari he toa takitini. My strength is not that of a single warrior but that of many.
This study has been a collective endeavour. I am extremely grateful for the assistance, advice, and guidance of my supervisor Dr Steven Little. I thank you especially for your continuous support and encouragement with my research and for giving me the confidence to persevere with this kaupapa. I appreciate the time you gave for meetings, for emails, for phone calls, and, for your suggestions and ideas for this study. Nga mihi tino miharo mo enei manakitanga. I want to acknowledge also the supportive encouragement of Dr Angelique Akin-Little, for your warm and caring presence, your wisdom, your passion, and your positivity. To a special friend and mentor Linda Marieskind, for your generosity and wisdom and encouraging faith in my work, nga mihi aroha whaea.
I am extremely grateful also to my employer, the Ministry of Education, Special Education, Management, for supporting my journey through this pathway and for allowing me the time to complete this research. To my colleagues and friends I thank you all for your active interest and empathic support.
To Clare, I am ever so grateful for your kete of skills, your clarity and focus and for always being here when I needed you. I’m ever so proud of you Clare. To Ernie, this has been the longest marathon ever and I thank you for your love and encouragement and for carrying the greater load to see me through. To the rest of my whanau for your many blessings, your unconditional aroha and faith, kei te miharo, kei te whakamoemiti tonu.
vi
CONTENTS Candidates Statement ……………………………………………………………………. ii
Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………. iii
Acknowledgements …………………………………………………………………….. v
Contents ……………………………………………………………………………..… vi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ……………………………………………………. 1
1.1 Purpose of study ……………………………………….…..………….. 1
1.2 Methodology ……………………………………………….……….… 2
1.3 Theoretical framework of researcher ……………………….…………. 2
1.4 Definitions …………………………………………….…….………… 5
1.4.1 Classroom ……………………………………….….……….… 5
1.4.2 Management ………………………………………….……….. 5
1.4.3 Strategy …………………………………………….……..…… 5
1.4.4 Procedure …………………………………………………….…. 5
1.4.5 Discipline ………………………………….……….……….…. 6
1.4.6 Classroom management …………………………………….….. 6
1.4.7 Behaviour management …………………………….…….…… 6
1.4.8Comprehensive classroom management …………….……..… 6
1.4.9 Kaupapa ……………………………………………..…….…. 6
1.5 Study outline ……………………………….………………….….….. 6
CHAPTER 2: HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS …………………………….……… 8
2.1 Summary ……………………………….……………………………. 16
CHAPTER 3: LITERATURE REVIEW …………………………….……………… 18
3.1 Summary ……………………………………………….……………. 26
vii
CHAPTER 4: AREAS INVETIGATED IN QUESTIONNAIRE …………….…….. 27
4.1 Classroom Rules …………………………………………..………….. 27
4.2 Enhancing Classroom Environment ……………………..……………. 28
4.3 Reinforcement for appropriate behaviour ………………..……………. 30
4.4 Reductive Strategies …………………………………………..…..….. 31
4.5 Teacher Perceptions of Their Role ………………….……..…..…..…. 32
Summary ………………………………………………………..…….. 33
CHAPTER 5: METHODOLOGY ……………………………….………..…….….. 35
Participant …………………………………………………..…………. 35
5.2Materials and Procedure ………………………………..…..………….36
Procedure ……………………………………………………….…….. 37
CHAPTER 6: RESULTS………………………………………………..…………… 38
6.1 Classroom Rules …………………………………………………..….. 38
6.2 Reinforcement for Appropriate Behaviour ……………………..……. 39
6.3 Response to Class Disruptions ………………………………………. 43
6.4 Response to Continuous Non-Compliant Students ……………..……. 43
6.5 Perception Survey ………………………………………………….…. 49
CHAPTER 7: DISCUSSIONS ………………………………………….………..….. 52
7.1 Summary of Results ………………………………………………..….. 53
CHAPTER 8: LIMITATIONS AND FURTHER STUDIES ………………….…..… 65
CHAPTER 9: CONCLUSION ………………………………………………..…….. 68
REFERENCES ………………………………………………….………….……….… 70
viii
APPENDICES A. Participant Information Sheet ……………………………….………..…….… 90
B. Questionnaire Survey ……………………………………….….……….……. 92
C. Ethics Approval ………………………………………………………….……. 98
1
1INTRODUCTION
Purpose of study
The purpose of this study was to examine what New Zealand teachers indicated they do in their classrooms to minimize behavioural disruptions so that teaching and learning curricular can be optimized. In particular, teachers reported use of classroom-based management strategies (i.e., have rules, routines and expectations, give instructive feedback, specific praise, choice and preferred activities, token economies) will be investigated. This study is guided by two questions in relation to classroom management:
What strategies do NZ teachers’ use?
How do they compare with the US/Greek study?
This study is a partial replication of a cross-cultural comparative study that was conducted in United States and Greece by Akin-Little, Little, and Laniti (2007), to determine the extent to which teachers used effective, research-based strategies to reduce unacceptable behaviour and increase student learning in the classroom. The study was a preliminary attempt to compare classroom-based management strategies across cultures (Little et al., 2007). The use of a questionnaire survey filled a gap in the psychological literature for teachers’ reported practice of empirically validated approaches to manage behaviour and learning in the classroom (Little & Akin-Little, 2008).
In United States, the questionnaire survey was distributed to 149 teachers attending in-service training in science education in various locations throughout the United States. The survey asked questions about teachers’ use of classroom-based management strategies such as rules, verbal praise, positive feedback and privileges, described by researchers such as Alberto & Troutman (2006, 2009); Kerr & Nelson (2001); Rogers (2002); Cowley (2001) and Maag (2001, 2004), as essential and effective strategies to help teachers better manage the classroom. The same survey was translated into Greek by Laniti, a Greek scholar and third
2
author of the comparative study, with minor modifications in the demographic section appropriate to the Greek sample. The survey was then distributed to teachers at schools accessible to Laniti in Athens and the surrounding area. There were 97 teachers in the Greek sample. The comparative study was facilitated by Laniti, who was and is affiliated (native) to the language and culture of Greece. The study found that teacher responses in both samples were relatively similar and that generally, teachers reported that they used research based classroom management strategies on a regular basis to enhance student learning and reduce behaviour interruptions.
The US/Greece study provided a framework for the researcher to examine the local New Zealand context to gain a snapshot of current teacher practices in the classroom. The study also catered to a relatively narrow research time frame in terms of the distribution of the questionnaires and the data collection process. The findings of the NZ study will be compared with the US/Greek study.
Methodology
This NZ study adopts an empirical approach (i.e., a detached, objective, structured methodology, allowing the results to speak for itself), in keeping with the descriptive nature of the survey. The researcher did not visit the classrooms to observe and talk with the teachers. However, there is opportunity within the survey (e.g., teachers’ responses to open-ended questions) to gain some qualitative data about other approaches and to report teacher narratives regarding the use of particular models of practice and classroom rules.
Theoretical framework of researcher
The researcher comes to this study as a practitioner with insider knowledge and experience of the research context, having worked in the field of education over a considered period of time. The researcher locates herself within a cultural or kaupapa Maori pedagogical framework which advocates that good teaching should promote values such as,
3
tika, to mean justice, pono, to mean integrity to justice, and aroha, an unspoken and expected outcome of this process (respect is inherent in this relationship); be holistic, innovative, intergenerational and familiar, and should focus on student potentiality/achievement. (These aspects are echoed in the works of Pere, 2002; Poskitt, 2001; Metge, 2001; Stoll, Fink, & Earle, 2002).
A kaupapa Maori position/perspective is used in this context to mean my point of reference with respect to research, my knowledge base and cultural identity, my world view and epistemology. It is a disciplinary foundation that is inclusive and strengths based and underpinned by the Treaty of Waitangi principles of partnership, protection and participation. Essentially it focuses on raising possibilities for all students and views students’ culture as significant and critical in terms of curriculum and the values of the classroom and school.
Advocates of this approach include educational researchers such as Macfarlane and Macfarlane (2008) who talk about ‘culturally responsive practice’; Durie (2002, 2003), who talks about ‘cultural competence and cultural diversity,’ and Castillo, Bishop, and Glynn (1999, 2003) who maintain that ‘Culture Counts.” The Ministry of Education Special Education Maori Strategy 2008 – 2012, released a working document, “Ka Hikitia: Managing for Success,” which is essentially a ‘Maori potential approach’ and Maori enjoying educational success as Maori. According to Nash (1998), recent NZ research indicates that student achievement is affected by the degree to which a student’s culture is respected by the school, and by the degree to which there is congruence between the culture of the community or whanau, and the values of the school. Stoll and Fink (1996, 2003) talk about learning as caring and teachers’ creating a ‘culture of caring’:
Caring teachers expect all students to do well; they do what it takes to the best of their abilities to help each pupil achieve. The same principle of caring that engages pupils
4
in their learning apply equally to caring for teachers, for parents, for important ideas, and for organizations like schools (p. 192).
The researcher draws on several conceptual models (i.e., theory-based, eclectic, and shifting dictated by contextual circumstances and ‘best practice’ currency at the time), including the ecological or social ecological model (Bronfenbrenner, 1989), the behavioural approach (Skinner, 1953), the humanistic perspective (e.g., Rogers & Maslow), and the social cognitive model of behaviour (e.g., Bandura & Mischel), and/or a combination of approaches (i.e., the cognitive-behavioural approach). Each model has made significant contributions to the understanding of behavioural difficulties. For example, while the behavioural model does have its limitations, considerable research over a long period of time has demonstrated how effective behavioural strategies (i.e., reinforcement and punishment) can be in reducing undesirable behaviours (Porter, 2007). Basically, these approaches were created to support classroom environments exhibit behaviour conducive to learning and have a positive, preventative orientation to classroom management (Porter, 2007).
Macfarlane (2000) maintains that a holistic approach (e.g., socio-ecological model) involving whanau is vital for culturally appropriate service to Maori. Viewing the child in terms of their interactions in contextual social environments is a culturally appropriate model for working with students in New Zealand, and could be used in combination with “Te Whare Tapa Wha” model of Maori health (Durie, 2002). This is a holistic model which caters to the spiritual, mental and emotional, physical, and whanau and social well-being of the individual. What the disciplinary models have in common is their recognition that individual classroom management approaches are better understood when viewed in comparison to each other (Emmer & Stough, 2001; Glynn & Berryman, 2005; Gable, Hester, Rock, & Hughes, 2009).
No one model is favoured over another, however, basic humanistic values are adhered to, such as respect for the dignity of each person, respect for the individuals’ desire for
5
autonomy and independence, and an expectation that education/teaching should focus on helping students to reach their optimum potential in any learning context. The researcher has experienced (and observed) a range of effective strategies from authoritarian to authoritative, to teacher as expert and locus of knowledge and control, to teacher as facilitator and supporter in the learning process. What is acknowledged is that there are many different models, disciplinary options, and pedagogical practices (traditional, contemporary, innovative, and in development), available to teachers to support the diverse challenges of classroom management.
Definitions:
Classroom
The classroom refers to the physical place in the school where the teacher meets a group of students to interact with subject matter and materials so that learning can take place (i.e. the physical, social, political and intellectual context of the teacher and students). The classroom goes beyond the physical confines of the room to include the total school context that teachers and students inhabit throughout the school day.
Management
Management refers to the process of planning, organising, leading and controlling the resources (physical, human) required to achieve the goals/functions of teaching and learning (i.e., attending to the logistics of teaching).
Strategy
A strategy is any action or instruction or series of actions directed by the teacher to achieve a specific task – what the teachers does.
Procedure
A procedure refers to how things are done in the classroom – a process.
6
Discipline
Discipline refers to behaviour (students’ responsibility – acting responsibly, managing impulse, having self-control) not procedures.
Classroom management
Classroom management refers to the actions of the teacher to ensure that things get done. It has to do with rules, routines, structure – managing instruction, organizing learning materials and activities.
Behaviour management
Behaviour management refers to the use of proactive and reactive strategies to alleviate off-task behaviours – helping students to act responsibly, gain self-control.
Comprehensive classroom management
Comprehensive classroom management refers to all the actions and interactions that occur in the classroom from the start to the finish of the lesson. Behaviour management is one aspect of this process.
Kaupapa
Kaupapa refers to the subject, topic of discussion.
Study Outline
The structure of the study is as follows. Chapter One provides an overview of the study which includes the purpose of the survey, the methodological orientation utilized and the theoretical framework of the researcher. Chapter Two presents a discussion of the historical foundations of classroom-based management strategies, from a predominantly behaviourist view of learning to a more constructivist orientation where students are at the centre of the learning process and actively engage in their own knowledge construction. Chapter Three reviews the literature on classroom-based management strategies. Chapter Four discusses the methodological process used in the
7
study. Chapter Five is a discussion of the areas investigated in the study in relation to the literature reviewed. In Chapter Six the results of the survey are presented and illustrated as appropriate. Chapter Seven is an analysis and discussion of the key findings in relation to the purpose of the study and supporting literature. In Chapter Eight the limitations and further studies are discussed. Chapter Nine is the concluding chapter and presents a summary of the study and issues raised for further research on classroom-based management strategies.
8
HISTORICAL FOUNDATIONS
The empirical study of classroom management developed in the l950s from two
different schools of thought, behaviourists (Watson and Skinner) whose learning theories emphasized the observable and measurable aspects of behaviour (i.e., stimulus – response events), and the rules that establish their functional relations; and ecological theorists who were more humanistic (Bronfenbrenner, 1989; Kounin, 1970) and viewed behaviour holistically, as being influenced by the social and physical environment. The behaviouristic movement in psychology was essentially a reaction against the introspective approach of earlier theorists. Introspection (i.e., the method of examining one’s thoughts, feelings and emotions and generalizing from them), was seen as an unscientific methodology.
Behaviourists emphasized a more scientific approach based on objectivity and experimentation with regard to overt observable and measurable behaviour. As such, they avoided such words as “emotions” or redefined them in terms of potentially observable responses. For example, Watson (1913), defined feelings as movement of the muscles of the gut, and thinking as movement of the muscles of the throat. (Tauber, 1999, 2007). Cognitive and unconscious processes were ignored as the focus of this approach was on observable symptoms and changing behaviours through external methods or rewards and punishment.
The behaviourists’ derived their theories of learning and behaviour from studies of animal and later human conditioning. Many studies, experiments and practices involving animals have contributed to the history of rewards and punishments in behavioural psychology (Kohn, 1993). In terms of classroom management and learning theories, Skinner’s (1953) theories, which go beyond classical conditioning, have had wide appeal and application in educational settings. Teachers who use this approach (e.g., rules, praise and ignoring as a base to change and correct behaviour) must ‘control’/manage the environment to get desirable behaviours. The behavioural approach to classroom management (i.e., the
9
adaption and modification of experiments developed elsewhere and applied in the classroom such as applied behaviour analysis) evolved as a result of changes in the environment. Skinner wanted to find out whether the principles governing animal behaviour also governed human behaviour. The use of these principles (operant conditioning – positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, presentation punishment and removal punishment) to change human behaviour (behaviour modification) in real-life settings developed into the science/discipline of applied behaviour analysis (Alberto & Troutman, 2009).
Early applications of behavioural strategies to classroom management were mostly about shaping discrete behaviours of individual students by reinforcement (such as remaining quiet and staying in the seat). Reinforcements included immediate praise or feedback or some kind of token economy. Later, refinements were made to cater to groups of students and larger groups of behaviours over a longer period of time, with the teacher verbally articulating and monitoring reinforcement contingencies (e.g., task engagement, completion of assignments). Behaviourists continually modified and expanded their repertoire of recommended strategies beyond those developed in the laboratory, to accommodate generalization to the classroom (Evertson & Weinstein, 2006).
Research by Kounin (1970), Brophy and Evertson (1976), and others pursued this agenda indicating that effective managers needed to intervene early (rather than ignore) to extinguish potentially disruptive behaviour. The use of this strategy is variable, although most teachers would accept early intervention as an effective action. How the teacher attends to this situation will determine what the outcome will be. Another similar strategy that is common practice is the use of the Premack Principle (1965) or activity reinforcement.
The limitations of the behaviourist model and new theorising created a shift from the primary base of Skinner’s operant conditioning to embrace Bandura’s (1969) social learning application of behaviour modification and Meichenbaum’s (1977) version of cognitive-
10
behaviour modification and the role of cognitive factors in changing behaviour. Further adaptions and dimensions to fit more preventative and constructivist-oriented classrooms led to the development of more comprehensive approaches to classroom management (e.g., the Assertive Discipline programme by Canter & Canter and the Crisis Prevention Institute -Non-violent crisis intervention programme).
An alternative but related perspective on the emergence of classroom management is presented by management theorists and researchers who also introduced/applied management principles and strategies into the classroom from other fields of inquiry. Prior to the systematic study of classroom management, what was happening in the classroom and in management specifically was subsumed within the broader context of school efficiency. Management theorists were pre-occupied with the changing political, economic, social, technological, global, and ecological conditions of the time. A brief examination of the language used to describe classroom management, indicates a close affinity and alignment with the language and management practices of the labour industry and business sector. An example of this is the work of Bagley (1907) which was based on his personal experiences and observations as a teacher.
According to Bagley (1907) the ultimate aim of education is to develop socially efficient individuals “by slowly transforming the child from a little savage into a creature of law and order, fit for the life of civilized society” (p. 35). To achieve ‘efficiency’ in the school system he expounded management principles (i.e., a lead and control approach to increase student performance) to deal with the ‘problem of economy’ in the class/room. He viewed the ‘problem for the teacher’ was to determine in what manner the ‘working unit’ of the ‘school plant’ could be made to ‘return the largest dividend upon the material investment’ of time, energy and money, using ‘specific tools or methods’ (e.g., scaffolding instructions). Teaching was viewed as a ‘business problem,’ with the management of a homogenous group
11
of individuals as the central point of interest, and how to get the best results from an educative process under this condition. Much of this advice is familiar to teachers and still appears in textbooks today.
Bagley went on to say that the function/duty of the ‘school plant’ was to turn out a certain ‘raw material’ (living and active) into a ‘desired product’. To achieve this outcome a strict ‘chain of control’ was proposed beginning with the principal who issues the ‘orders’ to the teachers, who accept the dictum (e.g., teaching the national standards) without question and execute the assigned tasks (skills and knowledge) to the students, who in turn comply and follow through on the tasks. Albeit, a simplistic explanation of a very complicated process expounded by Bagley, which had at its core the efficient use of time (i.e., academic learning/habit training over engaged time) through the unquestioned obedience of the teachers and students.
An earlier study emerged from the Management field through the work of Taylor whose collection of strategies he called scientific management (also known as Taylorism). According to Taylor, the problem of management was the workers and their inefficient use of time, and this he attributed to the failure of management to structure the work effectively and to provide incentives (motivation). Taylor also viewed human labour as similar to machine work, as something to be “engineered” (manipulated) to achieve efficiency. He believed there was one best way to do a job efficiently and like the behaviourists he became obsessed with analysing each aspect of each task and measuring everything measureable. His time and motion studies allowed him to describe performance objectives quantitatively and to fit wages to standards. In other words, workers were paid for targets met and provided with regular feedback as an incentive or reward for attendance, rather than performance.
Remnants and modifications to these strategies are still evident in our classrooms, schools, and the education system today (e.g., standardized testing, performance standards
12
over “rule