102097

Researching Teaching & Learning 2

Mimi-Jane Quynh Tram Nguyen
18415780
Group Focus
Strategies for classroom management

Research Question
Using student responsibility to improve classroom management

Literature Review (1200 words)

Classroom management is defined by American educational psychologist Jere Brophy

(1988) as “the actions taken to create and maintain a learning environment conductive to

attainment of the goals instruction-arranging the physical environment of the classroom,

establishing rules and procedures, maintaining attention to lessons and engagement in

academic activities” (p.2). Classroom management does not only relate to effective teaching and

learning for students, but also the development of social and psychological attributes of students

such as concentration levels, pro-social values, and attitudes towards teachers, their peers and

schoolwork (Romi, Lewis, & Salkovsky, 2015). Student responsibility has been an ever-growing

area of research within Australia as there has been rising concerns from parents and national

documentation that has the desire for the education system to produce successful learners and

active and informed Australian citizens (MCEETYA, 2008). In this paper, student responsibility

refers to students who take responsibility in protecting the learning and safety of themselves

and their peers in the classroom.

Lewis (2001) published a study on building students’ character in the North-eastern

Region of Victoria due to the increase concerns of increase youth violence, self-destructive

behaviour, lack of respect for authority and a perceived loss of work ethic (p. 307). The study

was conducted in order to determine the role of classroom management in developing student

responsibility, and if students proactively disrupted misbehaviour in order to protect their

learning and safety within the classroom (p. 307). The use of coercive discipline through

aggression and punishment increases when teachers react to misbehaviour, which resulted in

the inhibition of promoting self-efficacy and responsibility in students, as well as distraction

from their schoolwork (p. 315). Teachers were failing to implement the four productive
management techniques of rewarding good behaviour, non-directive hints, involvement in

decision-making processes and discussions (p. 312). Student responsibility is an effective

classroom management strategy if built, as students will willingly choose to protect their

personal learning and safety by encouraging their classmates to act responsibly (p. 310). Ramon

Lewis aims to use the study to inform teachers in which management techniques would benefit

students in developing student responsibility and their attitude to schoolwork, develop

teachers’ best practice and achieve efficient classroom discipline.

Roache & Lewis (2011) conducted a similar study to Lewis (2001) in order to extend

and review if Lewis’ findings were still relevant in a modern education system, however, they

researched it from the teachers’ point of view as well. They found that there is a correlation

between the promotion of student responsibility within the classroom and developing

responsible citizens through extensive analysis of literature. The aim of the study was to

examine different management styles that teachers implement within their classrooms and

determine which is the most effective strategies to minimise distraction, misbehaviour and

increase student responsibility from both the teachers’ and the students’ perspective. Roache &

Lewis classifies the different management styles into two categories; ‘coercive’ or ‘relationship’

-based management styles (p. 132). They found that coercive-based management style that uses

a combination of punishment with aggressive behaviour can heighten student distraction and

increase misbehaviour (p. 142). This finding is juxtaposed, as relationship-based management

style that uses an amalgamation of rewards and punishments, validation and discussion of

appropriate behaviour, involvement and trust in determining penalties for misbehaviour,

minimises misbehaviour and stimulates student responsibility (p. 143). Though the investigate,

Roache & Lewis also found that there is a disparity in the perception of aggressive management

between teachers and students, as teachers may not perceive themselves as being aggressive to

students when implementing classroom management, yet students more frequently view the

teachers approach as being aggressive (p. 143). Thus, they concluded that teachers should

refrain from using coercive management strategies and implement relationship-based

management to reinforce positive student-teacher rapport and promote student responsibility

(p. 144).

In 2018, Egeberg & McConney examined the perception of students on teachers whom

they think create and maintain safe and supportive learning environments (p. 195). Specifically,

teacher who developed rapport with their students and controlled the classroom environment

whilst encouraging learning through engaging lessons and developing student responsibility (p.

195). They chose to conduct an analysis on student responses as students are the stakeholders

of the education system and are the active recipients of actions and reactions of teachers (p.

196). To them, student voice is an important source of information, as it allows improvement of

classroom culture, increasing positive interactions and they choose how to react to classroom

management strategies (p. 196). Egeberg & McConney’s aim was not only to ascertain the

characteristics of teachers who are effective classroom managers, but also to increase the

articulation of student voice and promote teacher listening and response to student voice (p.

197). They determined that there were three key feature of effective classroom management;

meeting students’ need through positive and caring student-teacher relationships, classroom

control through the promotion of student responsibility, and teachers using skills and strategies

to effectively engage students in learning (p. 210 – 211). Egeberg & McConney found that the

students themselves chose how to behave in specific classes. Students elucidated that they were

more likely to behave in classes in which they respected, perceiving respectful teachers as

showing genuine concern and interest in students wellbeing and learning (p. 213). Dominating

teachers, whom students found difficult to understand their reasoning in punishments as well as

conveying content and were perceived to not care for the welfare and learning of their students,

were the teachers that students chose to misbehave in their classrooms (p.213). Egeberg &

McConney determines that the attributes of an effective teacher are defined in the 7Cs

framework; “care, control, clarify, challenge, captivate, confer and consolidate” were present in

effective classrooms that build student responsibility in the classroom (p. 202).
 Furthermore, Romi, Lewis & Salkovsky (2015) conducted a study on the classroom

management technique of exclusion and determining if it positively promotes student

responsibility due to the perception that there is an increase flow in the school-to-prison

pipeline. This pipeline describes the trajectory that students experiencing school failure will

lead to dropping out of school and resulting in involvement with the juvenile justice system

because of being excluded from class too much of the time (p. 306). Their research within this

area has determined that exclusion can promote student responsibility if management is carried

out before, during and after the exclusion process but may lead to disengagement, estrangement

and expulsion if not done so (p. 307). Romi, Lewis & Salkovsky concluded that student response

to exclusion is dependent on the severity of misbehaviour that they have displayed. Students

whom engaged in attention- and/or power -seeking behaviour such as distracting others or

resisting teachers attempt to engage students in learning, respond more productively to

discussion of their behaviour and how it impacts their peers, teacher and their learning (p. 315).

Whereas students who have engaged in aggressive, revenge-seeking behaviour like damaging

property or causing injury to peers will acknowledge their misbehaviour if the student-teacher

rapport has been developed through rewarding appropriate behaviour (p. 315). Thus, teachers

should implement prior punishments, recognition of appropriate behaviour, an explanation at

the time of exclusion and follow-up discussions in order to maximise the effectiveness of

promoting student responsibility and student exclusion from class to reflect on their behaviour

(p. 315).

Extensive research has been conducted on the relationship between student

responsibility and classroom management. Teacher and student view on classroom

management in promoting student responsibility were considered within a Regional Melbourne

context and further research is needed within the Western Sydney context in order to determine

if the research is relevant.

References
Brophy, J. (1988). Educating teachers about managing classrooms and students. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 4(1), 1-18.

Egeberg, H., & McConney, A. (2018). What do students believe about effective classroom

management? A mixed-methods investigation in Western Australian high schools. The

Australian Educational Researcher, 45(2), 195-216.

Lewis, R. (2001). Classroom discipline and student responsibility: The students’ view. Teaching

and teacher education, 17(3), 307-319.

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [MCEETYA]. (2008).

Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Retrieved from

http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educat

ional_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf

Roache, J., & Lewis, R. (2011). Teachers' views on the impact of classroom management on

student responsibility. Australian journal of education, 55(2), 132-146.

Romi, S., Lewis, R., & Salkovsky, M. (2015). Exclusion as a Way of Promoting Student

Responsibility: Does the Kind of Misbehavior Matter?. The Journal of Educational

Research, 108(4), 306-317.

Data Collection Protocol
The data collection protocol is a mixed methods sequential explanatory design,

consisting of a survey and then a follow up interview collecting information from students. The

purpose of the research is not only to determine characteristics of effective teachers, but also

how these effective teachers develop student responsibility within their classrooms. The survey

will be distributed online but if students are unable to access it online then a hard copy will be

provided to them. The intended purpose of and reason behind the action research project will

be clarified to the participating students before supplying the consent forms. Prior to the

completion of the surveys, the consent forms will be provided to all students who are

participating in the survey to meet ethical standards. After analysis of the survey data, a follow

up interview will be conducted on students who were willing to participate in further studies.

Interviewees will be informed on the purpose of the follow-up interview and provided another

consent form to maintain ethical principles. The interviews will be conducted individually.

The design of the data collection process was modelled on Egeberg & McConney

(2018) where they first conducted a quantitative survey and then a qualitative focus group

interview. The survey and interview questions being used in this research is taken from

Egeberg & McConney and further added to wtih questions based on studies conducted by Lewis

(2001), Lewis, Romi & Roache (2012) and Romi, Lewis, & Salkovsky (2015). The survey helps to

understand characteristics of effective teachers, if teachers are developing student

responsibility and if the students themselves are protecting their rights to learning and safety.

This allows for the follow up interview to be more in depth and concise as the interviewer

already understands the students’ perspective.

Conducting an individual interview with participants was chosen over a focus group

interview as all student voices should be heard equally. Focus groups tend to capture the

breadth of opinions but not the depth, and there is possibility for dominant voices and less

confident members may withhold their personal opinions due to these dominant opinions
(Dana & Yendol-Hoppey, 2014). These interviews will determine the underlying reasons for

student choice for behaving or misbehaving in certain classes and why they may or may not

participate in the protection of their learning and safety by intervening peer misbehaviour and

possibly stopping their own misbehaviour. The interview will be semi structed to allows for

flexibility and deeper insight into the research area from the students’ perspective.

In order to maintain the ethical principles of informed content, consent forms are to be

handed out and signed before the surveys and interviews. The identities of all survey responses

and interviews will be removed and de-identified and transcriptions of the interview will not be

attached without student’s consent.

Consent Forms

Survey
Dear Potential Participant:
I am working on a project titled ‘Using Student Responsibility to Improve Classroom
Management’ for the unit, ‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2,’ at Western Sydney University.
As part of the project, I am collecting information to help inform the design of a teacher research
proposal.
The purpose of this study is to understand the role of classroom management in promoting
student responsibility and how that in turn can improve classroom management. The data
collection process will be implemented through the use of surveys in order to gain insight on
how students perceive classroom management techniques that teachers implement, and how
that affects student reaction. The questions will probe students on their past experiences with
their best teacher and how they implemented classroom management.
By participating in this survey, I acknowledge that:

 I have read the project information and have been given the opportunity to discuss the
information and my involvement in the project with the researcher/s.

 The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained to
me, and any questions I have about the project have been answered to my satisfaction.

 I consent to being administered the survey.

 I understand that my involvement is confidential, and that the information gained during
this data collection experience will only be reported within the confines of the
‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2’ unit, and that all personal details will be de-
identified from the data.

 I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my
relationship with the researcher/s, now or in the future.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time university

student who is 17 years old.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________
By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17 years
old and provide my consent for the person’s participation.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________
 Interview
Dear Potential Participant:
I am working on a project titled ‘Using Student Responsibility to Improve Classroom
Management’ for the unit, ‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2,’ at Western Sydney University.
As part of the project, I am collecting information to help inform the design of a teacher research
proposal.
The purpose of this study is to understand the role of classroom management in promoting
student responsibility and how that in turn can improve classroom management. The data
collection process will be implemented a semi-structured interview in order to gain insight on
how students perceive classroom management techniques that teachers implement, and how
that affects student reaction. The questions will probe students on their past experiences with
their best teacher and how they implemented classroom management.
By signing this form, I acknowledge that:

 I have read the project information and have been given the opportunity to discuss the
information and my involvement in the project with the researcher/s.

 The procedures required for the project and the time involved have been explained to
me, and any questions I have about the project have been answered to my satisfaction.

 I consent to being interviewed.

 I understand that my involvement is confidential, and that the information gained during
this data collection experience will only be reported within the confines of the
‘Researching Teaching and Learning 2’ unit, and that all personal details will be de-
identified from the data.

 I understand that I can withdraw from the project at any time, without affecting my
relationship with the researcher/s, now or in the future.

By signing below, I acknowledge that I am 18 years of age or older, or I am a full-time university

student who is 17 years old.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________
By signing below, I acknowledge that I am the legal guardian of a person who is 16 or 17 years
old and provide my consent for the person’s participation.
Signed: __________________________________
Name: __________________________________
Date: __________________________________

Survey
For this survey, we would like you to think about an effective teacher – one who you believe
creates and maintains safe and supportive learning environments. For each statement please
select the box that most appropriately describes your view of this classroom
Some-
Totally Mostly Mostly Totally
what
untrue untrue true true
true
Care
1. This teacher makes me feel s/he really
1 2 3 4 5
cares about me
2. This teacher seems to know if
1 2 3 4 5
something is bothering me
3. This teacher really tries to
understand how students feel about 1 2 3 4 5
things
Control
4. Student behaviour in this class is
1 2 3 4 5
under control
5. I hate the way that students behave in
1 2 3 4 5
this class
6. Student behaviour in this class makes
1 2 3 4 5
the teacher angry
7. Student behaviour in this class is a
1 2 3 4 5
problem
8. My classmates behave the way this
teacher wants them to 1 2 3 4 5

9. Students in this class treat the teacher

1 2 3 4 5
with respect
10. This class stays busy and doesn’t
1 2 3 4 5
waste time
11. This teacher yells at students who
1 2 3 4 5
misbehave
12. Students stop misbehaving when the
teacher describes what students are 1 2 3 4 5
doing wrong
Clarify
13. If you don’t understand something,
1 2 3 4 5
this teacher explains it in another way
14. This teacher knows when the class
1 2 3 4 5
understands and when we don’t
15. When s/he is teaching us, this teacher
1 2 3 4 5
thinks we understand when we don’t
16. This teacher has several good ways to 1 2 3 4 5
explain each topic that we cover in
 class
17. This teacher explains difficult things
1 2 3 4 5
clearly
Challenge
18. This teacher asks questions to be sure
we are following along when s/he is 1 2 3 4 5
teaching
19. This teacher asks students to explain
1 2 3 4 5
more about the answers they give
20. In this class, this teacher accepts
1 2 3 4 5
nothing less than our full effort
21. This teacher doesn’t let people give up
1 2 3 4 5
when the work gets hard
22. This teacher wants me to explain my
1 2 3 4 5
answers – why I think what I think
23. In this class, we learn a lot almost
1 2 3 4 5
every day
24. In this class, we learn to correct our
1 2 3 4 5
mistakes
Confer
25. This teacher wants us to share our
1 2 3 4 5
thoughts
26. Students get to decide how activities
1 2 3 4 5
are done in this class
27. This teacher gives us time to explain
1 2 3 4 5
our ideas
28. Students speak up and share their
1 2 3 4 5
ideas about class work
29. This teacher respects my ideas and
1 2 3 4 5
suggestions
Student Responsibility
30. Students are involved in making the
1 2 3 4 5
classroom rules
31. Students are involved in determining
1 2 3 4 5
the rewards for good behaviour
32. Students are involved in determining
1 2 3 4 5
the punishments of misbehaviour
33. I have tried to stop peers from
disrupting the work of other students 1 2 3 4 5
in this class
34. I have encouraged peers to try and
1 2 3 4 5
stop all forms of bullying in this class
For this section of the survey, if you have ever been excluded or sent out of the class, please
select the box that most appropriately describes the most recent experience you had during the
exclusion process.
Some-
Totally Mostly Mostly Totally
what
untrue untrue true true
true
1. The teacher acknowledged my good
1 2 3 4 5
behaviour prior to exclusion
2. I received an explanation prior to
1 2 3 4 5
exclusion
3. I received either warning or
1 2 3 4 5
punishment prior to exclusion
4. After I was excluded from class, the
teacher had a follow-up discussion 1 2 3 4 5
with me

Interview Questions
The interview will be semi-structured, but these questions will be asked. The indented
questions are hints if students do not understand the question.

1. Do students choose to behave well in some classes and not so well in others?
2. Why do you behave for some and misbehave for others?
3. What do teachers say and do that cause you to behave better and do more work?
4. What do teachers say and do that cause you to behave worse and do less work?
5. What do you think makes for a good teacher?
6. Why do you choose to stop/not stop your fellow peers from misbehaving in certain
classes?
7. Can you tell me why you were excluded from the class?
8. How many warnings or punishments did you receive before being told to leave?
a. What was the nature of these warnings or punishments?
9. How did the teacher explain the punishment?
a. What impacts of your misbehaviour did the teacher explain to you?
10. What was the nature of the follow up discussion?
a. How did the teacher attempt to help you understand your unacceptable
behaviour?
b. How did the teacher attempt to help you work on better behaviour?
References
Brophy, J. (1988). Educating teachers about managing classrooms and students. Teaching and

Teacher Education, 4(1), 1-18.

Dana, N. F., & Yendol-Hoppey, D. (2014). Developing a research plan: Making inquiry a part of

your teaching practice. In N. F. Dana & D. Yendol-Hoppey (Ed.), The reflective

educator’s guide to classroom research: Learning to teach and teaching to learn

through (pp. 85-145). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press

Egeberg, H., & McConney, A. (2018). What do students believe about effective classroom

management? A mixed-methods investigation in Western Australian high schools. The

Australian Educational Researcher, 45(2), 195-216.

Lewis, R. (2001). Classroom discipline and student responsibility: The students’ view. Teaching

and teacher education, 17(3), 307-319.

Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs [MCEETYA]. (2008).

Melbourne declaration on educational goals for young Australians. Retrieved from

http://www.curriculum.edu.au/verve/_resources/National_Declaration_on_the_Educat

ional_Goals_for_Young_Australians.pdf

Roache, J., & Lewis, R. (2011). Teachers' views on the impact of classroom management on

student responsibility. Australian journal of education, 55(2), 132-146.

Romi, S., Lewis, R., & Salkovsky, M. (2015). Exclusion as a Way of Promoting Student

Responsibility: Does the Kind of Misbehavior Matter?. The Journal of Educational

Research, 108(4), 306-317.