Staff Mood and Disciplinary Action

Jake Youngkent
George Washington Carver Academy
Waterloo, Iowa
Rationale
For several years Carver Academy has seen dramatic increases in student
office referrals during certain times of the year. November and April are particularly
"rough" months according to school referral data. For a long time it has been
hypothesized that these increases are due to factors largely associated with the
school calendar. For instance, it has been said that November is usually tough in
terms of student discipline because due to colder temperatures the students are no
longer able to be outside during non-school hours. November also seems to be
about the time of year when students are settling in, getting comfortable, and are
beginning to test boundaries. By April students are tired. The year is winding down
and the monotony of the school day begins to wear on them.
Over the course of the past three years, however, another variable has been
observed. Administrators and instructional coaches have observed that the student
behavior has not changed much, if at all, instead indicating that perhaps it is the
adults in the system whose perceptions or attitudes have changed. For the purpose
of this research, it will be assumed that this observation (adult behavior rather than
student behavior) is at least somewhat responsible for the increases in discipline
referrals.
The intent of this research is to ascertain the factors that influence the
perceived change in mood of the staff. By identifying specific factors it may be
possible to: 1) increase staff awareness of those factors, 2) implement systems that

account for the changes in staff mood in order maintain consistency in behavior
expectations and consequences, and 3) make changes to building systems and
structures that alleviate those changes in moods.
Research Design and Question
What are the factors that influence a change in staff mood that are correlated
with the increase in student behavioral referrals?
In order to better understand the "mood" of the Carver Academy staff, one
grade-level team was asked to respond to two different surveys. One survey listed
several possible reasons for behavior referrals. Staff members ranked the possible
reasons and had the opportunity to include additional reasons. The rationale behind
this survey was to isolate possible motivations for referrals. By comparing the
survey results to the building's PBiS matrix it should be possible to better determine
how "accurate" and consistent the resulting referrals are. A second survey asked
staff members to rate their mood on a 1-6 scale for each week in March and April.
The second survey also asked them to identify reasons for their changes in moods.
The second survey was given with the hope of determining possible reasons for
mood changes in the staff. This information may be critical if changes in the
behavior management procedures are recommended.
Another source of information that was considered was a ranking of the
quality of referrals written over the course of March and April. Every referral written
over the two month window was reviewed by two administrators and an
instructional coach. The legitimacy of each referral was ranked on a 1-3 scale.
Legitimacy was defined as being consistent with the staff's expectations according
to the building PBiS matrix.

Data Collection/Analysis
The sixth grade team at Carver Academy consists of ten teachers (six general
education, three special needs, and one ELP/TAG). Eight of the ten teachers
participated in this research by responding to two separate surveys (one of the
teachers completed only one of the two surveys).
Reason and Reaction Survey
The first survey listed eight likely reasons that a teacher might engage in
disciplinary action with a student. The eight responses ranged from substantial
behavior that NEEDS action (fighting for instance) to mental/emotional fatigue on
the part of the teacher. The eight responses were agreed upon by three team
members before the survey was distributed. Each team member was asked to
select the three most likely reasons for disciplinary action.
Because the team was asked to submit their top three responses, it was decided
that a scoring system be used to calculate the strength of each reason. A staff
members most likely reason was given a score of 3, their 2nd response a score of
2, and their 3rd choice was given a score of 1.
Figure 1
Possible Responses

Number of team members citing this

as a reason

Total score of the

response

unchanged or repeated daily behavior

11

a substantial behavior that NEEDS action

20

short fuse with specific students

mental/emotional fatigue

You are having a tough day

physical fatigue
Non-disruptive off task behavior (head down,
drawing, etc.)

the student is not prepared for class

As Figure 1 indicates, a large majority of the team indicated the most likely reason
for taking disciplinary action was a "substantial behavior that needs action." This is
very much in line with the building expectations of staff member in their dealings
with discipline issues. The second highest scoring response, "unchanged or
repeated daily behaviors," is also in line with the staff's expectations.
However, upon further investigation, many of the students that had unchanged or
repeated daily behaviors were special needs students that had behavior
accommodations. In these cases, the team was out of alignment with building
expectations. Interestingly, the third most common response was mental/emotional
fatigue. This response is most certainly not in alignment with building expectations,
however it does indicate that mood is a factor in the decisions to carry out
disciplinary action.
March-April Mood Survey
The second survey asked the team to rank their mood on a weekly basis
beginning with the school week that began March 4 and concluding with the school
week that began April 14. The survey also gave the team the opportunity to mark
possible reasons for their perceived mood and allowed them to include a write-in
reason.
The graph in Figure 2 shows that the majority of the team ranked themselves
as having a lower score mood for all but two of the weeks during the study. The

two weeks that the team generally ranked higher scores were the two weeks
following Spring Break. Of the eight team members that responded to this survey,
at least three members responded with a response of 2 or lower in four of the six
weeks of the study. What we can conclude from this part of the survey is that in
general the teams mood was fairly low before Spring Break and on average equally
low two weeks following the conclusion of Spring Break.
The second aspect of this survey was that team members were asked to
provide reasons for their mood. On the, before mentioned scale, points 1, 2, and 3
represented lower or worse moods. Points 4, 5, and 6 were considered higher or
better moods. Of the 48 individual responses given, 27 were on the lower half of
the scale. These 27 low responses were accompanied by 60 corresponding
reasons for the lower moods. The breakdown of those responses can be found in
Figure 3.
This data suggests that the three most common factors in low mood were
found to be student behavior, mental/emotional fatigue, and a lack of a sense of
support. These responses are easily linked with the responses of the Reason and
Reaction Survey where the top three most common reasons for disciplinary action
were substantial student behavior, unchanged or repeated daily behavior, and
mental/emotional fatigue.
While the team listed mostly behavioral reasons for low mood, Figure 4 shows
that good mood was mostly related to teaching and learning. 21 of the 48 mood
responses given were on the upper half of the mood scale. These responses were
accompanied by 27 corresponding reasons for the higher moods. This breakdown
can be found in Figure 4. As Figure 4 indicates, more than half of the responses to

this part of the survey were related to a sense of progress with students or student
achievement. Interestingly, student behavior was also correlated with good mood.
Figure 2

April 14-18

April 7-11

Week of

Teacher 1
Teacher 2

March 31-April 4

Teacher 3
Teacher 4
Teacher 5

March 24-28

Teacher 6
Teacher 7

March 10-14

Teacher 8

March 3-7
0

Mood Scale (1 =
Worst)
Figure 3

# of times
included

lack of feedback
or recognition

lack of a sense of
progress with
students

lack of a
sense of
support

student
behavior

mental/
emotional
fatigue

low student
achievement

other

12

18

14

staff drama
was listed 3
times

Figure 4

# of times
included

positive feedback or
recognition

sense of progress
with students

sense of
support

student
behavior

mental/
emotional
fatigue

physical
fatigue

student
achievement

11

Referral Quality
The final source of information in this research was a referral quality
ranking. The ranking was carried out by two building administrators and an
instructional coach. 35 referrals that were submitted by the sixth grade team over
the same period of time covered in the mood surveys were read and ranked by the
evaluators. The referrals were ranked on a 3-point scale. A ranking of 1 indicated
that the referral was out of alignment with building expectations. A ranking of 2
was given to the referrals that fell just short of building expectations (in most cases
the staff member simply was too vague in their description of an incident or hadnt
fully followed disciplinary procedures). A 3 ranking was given to the referrals that
fully met building expectations.
Each evaluator ranked all 35 referrals independently. Their rankings were
then averaged for each individual referral (Note: in only three cases was there a two
point discrepancy). Next, the referrals were separated by the weeks in which they
were written. Each week was then given a quality score by averaging the
qualities of the weeks individual referrals. Those averages are found in Figure 5.
Three observations stand out in the analysis of this information. The first is
that the number of referrals written in each week is closely correlated with the
mood data from Figure 2. The March-April Mood Survey suggested that the week of
March 10 and the week of April 7 were the two weeks with the lowest mood scores.
The second observation is that the average quality of referrals in Figure 5 also
correlates to the findings of the March-April Mood Survey. The quality of referrals
seems fluctuate with the mood of the team. Because this is a very small sample, it
is difficult to assume that this relationship is directly correlated. However, these

numbers do warrant further investigation. The third observation is simply that in

only two of the six weeks during this survey period did the average quality of
referrals score closer to alignment with building expectations than not. This may be
a cause for concern and require more investigation as well.
Figure 5

Week Beginning

# of Referrals

Average Quality of Referrals

March 3

1.83

March 10

12

1.92

March 24

2.13

March 31

April 7

1.7

April 14

2.1

Results/Conclusions
The initial intent of this research was simply to find the reasons for the
perceived change in mood of Carver's staff. However, as data was collected and
analyzed it became apparent that more attention should be placed on the actual
correlation between mood and disciplinary action. Thus, more data was collected
and more conclusions became clear.
Over the past four years Caver Academys referral data has indicated that
certain months have yielded larger numbers of referrals. Observations made by
building leadership have suggested that these increases in the quantity of referrals
have been, at least partially, due to the mood of the staff.

One conclusion that can be drawn from the Reason and Reaction Survey is
that the sixth grade team at Carver believes that their most common reasons for
taking disciplinary action are in alignment with the building expectations of the
staff. However, after evaluating the actual referrals that were written during the
survey period it was found that in only two of the six weeks during the study were
the referrals more in alignment with expectation than not. This disconnection
between staff perception and actual referral quality is something that may require
more attention in the future.
A second conclusion to draw from this research is that there does seem to be
some correlation between staff mood and both quantity and quality of referrals.
Generally, as the mood of the team decreased so too did the quality of the
referrals, while the number of referrals increased.
Finally, the answer to the original guiding question, What are the factors that
influence a change in staff mood that are correlated with the increase in student
behavioral referrals? Three main sources of mood change were indicated in the
March-April Mood Survey. Student behavior, mental/emotional fatigue, and a lack
of a sense of support were the most common reasons associated with lower
scoring mood. The student behavior reason is somewhat paradoxical. One the
one hand, the student behavior is listed as a source of lower staff mood. On the
other, staff mood seems to be directly correlated with the referral data but also
poorer quality referrals. Mental/emotional fatigue and support are two variables to
staff mood that can and most likely should be address in the future.

Recommendations
The following are recommendations based on the findings of this research.
1. The staff believes that their reasons for taking disciplinary action are in
alignment with building expectations. However, evaluation of referral quality
indicates that they are more often not in alignment. In order to remedy this
disconnect, additional staff training should be considered. Examples of high
quality and low quality referrals should be considered as part of this training.

2. More investigation into the sources of mental/emotional fatigue should be

considered. The sixth grade team indicated this to be their third most
common reason for lower mood. After further investigation action should be
considered to alleviate some of this fatigue.
3. Because the sixth grade team felt a lack of a sense of support, an effort
might be made to find out why they feel this way. In addition, effort should
be given to build their sense of support. This is a mood variable that can be
influenced by building climate.
4. Consideration should be made to inform the staff of the correlation between
mood, number of referrals, and referral quality. Raising the awareness of this
correlation may help the staff to consider their own mood before taking
disciplinary action and reduce the number of low quality referrals.