Part A: Literature Review

What effect does teacher attitude have on behaviour management choices in the
classroom of a Western Sydney secondary school?

Moran (2015) states that often the choices teachers’ make on how they manage
their classrooms stems from their pre-existing knowledge and own experiences
at school. Moran (2015) argues the issue with this is that these deeply inscribed
beliefs influence how teachers’ react in stressful situations in the classroom and
are not effective in today’s classroom climate. In order to understand teachers’
beliefs on behaviour management in the classroom, how teachers’ attitudes
influences their decisions needs to be considered.

How teachers’ attitude affects behaviour management choices in the classroom

was investigated by Riley (2008) in their paper An adult attachment perspective
on the student-teacher relationship and classroom management difficulties. Riley
(2008) investigated this relationship from the perspective of teacher
professional identity, arguing that teachers need meaningful working
relationships with students to identify as a teacher. Riley (2008) also
investigated if teachers’ who unconsciously enter the profession due to a desire
to form corrective emotional experiences made different choices in regards to
behaviour management. The results of the study found that it may be more
appropriate to consider student-teacher relationships as a two way street in
which teachers need students just as much as students need teachers. Further, it
was also concluded that teachers who enter the profession in order to
experience corrective emotional experiences were in fact more vulnerable to
rejection and as such were more likely to have an aggressive classroom
management style in order to cope.

In 2017, Montuoro and Mainhard attempted to find out why, given the toxic
effects of aggressive behaviour management has on students, such approaches
were still a common occurrence in the classroom. Two hundred and forty-nine
Australian teachers participated in the study that consisted of four online
questionnaires that addressed teachers’ self-concept of care giving, self-control,
and misbehaviour provocation and teacher aggression. Similar to Riley’s (2008)
paper, Montuoro and Mainhard (2017) found that aggressive behaviour
management strategies in the classroom stemmed unconsciously from the
teacher. Montuoro and Mainhard found that teachers’ who participated in the
study that had lower care giving responsiveness used a more aggressive
behaviour management technique in the classroom due to insecure attachments
with students.

Montuoro and Mainhard (2017) also assert that this unconscious lower level of
care giving was a catalyst for interpreting student misbehaviour as a situational
factor (p.510). This idea was also explored in Belt and Belt’s (2017) article
Teachers’ differing perceptions of classroom disturbances, in which they attest that
teacher’s who see classroom disturbances as caused only by the student were
more aggressively reactive rather than proactive in their choice of behaviour
management strategy. Further, it is attested that teachers’ whom view student
misbehaviour as unavoidable unconsciously position the student as their
opponent which can result in confrontation and leaves teachers’ vulnerable to
decreased well-being and resilience (Belt & Belt, 2017, p.67-68).

Romi, Salkovsky, & Lewis (2016) also found that teachers attitude towards
behaviour management strategies in the classroom stemmed from their attitude
towards why misbehaviour occurs. Romi et al. (2016) found in their study that
teachers’ who believed students misbehaved due to permanent characteristics
such as a need to demonstrate independence, were more likely to adopt an
aggressive behaviour management style and were less concerned with knowing
more about the students’ behaviour. Further, teachers’ who externalised their
aggressive approach back on student characteristics were less inclined to
consider professional development on behaviour management strategies as
beneficial to their praxis.

Similarly, Zee and Koomen (2016) found in their synthesis of existing research
that teachers’ attitude towards their own skills correlated with their classroom
behaviour management choices. Saklofske, Michayuluk and Randhawa (as cited
in Zee & Koomen, 2016) found that teacher self-efficacy correlates with
classroom behaviour management choices with Wertheim and Leyser (as cited
in Zee and Koomen, 2016) finding that the effectiveness of these strategies was
also reliant on teacher self-efficacy. Therefore, it can be argued that teachers’
belief in their capability influences how they respond to challenging behaviour in
the classroom (Zee & Koomen, 2016). Gibbs and Powell (2012) also found in
their study that in schools that consisted of teachers who believed in their own
ability to shape behaviour, there was less exclusion of students who misbehaved.
Similarly, Almog and Shechtman (2007) found that there was a significant
positive correlation between teachers’ self-efficacy and their choice of response
to behaviour of special needs students.

Pas, Cash, O’Brennan, Debnam and Bradshaw (2015) conducted an observational

study across one thousand two hundred and sixty-two classrooms in the United
States to determine if there was a link between classroom structure and
behaviour management strategies used by teachers. The study concluded that
teachers in compliant classrooms used more proactive strategies compared to
teachers of non-compliant classrooms. Similarly, teachers in non-compliant
classrooms used three times more reactive behaviour management techniques
including both punitive and directional reactions to get students back on task. A
limitation of the study by Pas et al. (2015) was that they were unable to examine
a link between why this was occurring. As such, it would be interesting to
investigate if teacher attitude towards each classroom resulted in variance of
behaviour management strategy adopted.

Englehart (2012) argues in their paper Five half-truths about classroom

management, that where a disconnect exists between home values and school
values, teachers often believe that “not much can be done with changing the
behavior of kids who aren’t taught to act right at home” (p.72). Englehart (2012)
asserts this of course is not the case and such a perspective can come from
cultural differences and should be looked at as an opportunity for development
of the child. This is an interesting perspective and when considering Pas et al.’s
(2015) findings above, further poses the question do teacher attitudes effect
behaviour management techniques used in the classroom, particularly
considering the non-compliant classrooms in Pas et al.’s (2015) study consisted
mostly of minority students (p.145).

The literature reviewed above demonstrates a link between teacher attitude and
behaviour management choices in the classroom. Attitude towards students, the
cause of behaviour and teacher self-efficacy all have an effect on the type of
behaviour management strategies implemented in the classroom, however, each
study acknowledged that these findings could be context dependent. These
findings and subsequent limitations of each study informs the proposed study in
order to determine what effect teacher attitude has on behaviour management
choices in the classroom in the context of a Western Sydney secondary school.
References
Almong, O., & Shechtman, Z. (2007). Teachers’ democratic and efficacy beliefs

and styles of coping with behavioural problems of pupils with special

needs. European Journal of Special Needs Education, 22(2), 115-129.

Doi:10.1080/08856250701267774.

Belt, A., & Belt, P. (2017) Teachers’ differing perceptions of classroom

disturbances. Educational Research, 59(1), 54-72. DOI:

10.1080/00131881.2016.1262747.

Englehart, J.M. (2012). Five half-truths about classroom management. The

Clearing House, 85(2), 70-73. Doi:10.1080/00098655.2011.616919.

Gibbs, S., & Powell, B. (2012). Teacher efficacy and pupil behaviour: The

structure of teachers’ individual and collective beliefs and their

relationship with numbers of pupils excluded from school. British Journal

of Educational Psychology, 82(4), 564-584. Doi:10.1111/j.2044-

8279.2011.02046.x.

Montuoro, P., & Mainhard, T. (2017). An investigation of the mechanism

underlyingteacher aggression: Testing I3theory and the General

Aggression Model. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(4), 497–

517. Doi:10.1111/bjep.12161.

Moran, W. (2015). Managing student behaviour: Individual and group contexts.

In N.L. Weatherby-Fell (Ed.). Learning to teach in the secondary school

(pp.132-153). Port Melbourne, Victoria: Cambridge University Press.

Pas, E.T., Cash, A.H., O’Brennan, L., Debnam, K.J. & Bradshaw C.P. (2015). Profiles

of classroom behavior in high schools: Associations with teacher behavior

 management strategies and classroom composition. Journal of School

Psychology, 53(2), 137-148. Doi:10.1016/j.jsp.2014.12.005.

Riley, P. (2008). An adult attachment perspective on the student–teacher

relationship & classroom management difficulties. Teaching and Teacher

Education, 24(30), 715-724. Doi: 10.1016/j.tate.2008.11.018.

Romi, S., Salkovsky, M., & Lewis R. (2016). Reasons for aggressive classroom

management and directions for change through teachers’ professional

development programmes. Journal of Education for Teaching, 42(2), 173-

187. DOI:10.1080/02607476.2016.1144633.

Zee, M., & Koomen, H.M.Y. (2016).Teacher Self-Efficacy and Its Effects on

Classroom Processes, Student Academic Adjustment, and Teacher Well-

Being: A Synthesis of 40 Years of Research. Review of Educational

Research, 86(4), 981–1015. DOI: 10.3102/0034654315626801.

Part B: Data collection protocol

Participant consent form adapted from PPLE-102082 1H 2018

What effect does teacher attitude have on behaviour management choices

in the classroom of a Western Sydney secondary school?

Dear Potential Participant,

I, Rebekah Donoghue, am a student in the Master of Teaching (Secondary)

degree at Western Sydney University and am seeking your permission to be
interviewed as part of an assessment task for “Researching Teaching and
Learning 2”.

The interview question forms part of an overarching research topic, which is

“What do teachers believe is the best way to manage behaviour in the classroom
in secondary schools?” and as such I am collecting data on the above question to
inform the research question overall.

Previous research has highlighted the impact of teacher attitudes and the effects
of these on behaviour management choices in the classroom. However, all
findings were context dependent and as such this interview aims to determine if
the same attitudes have the same effect in the context of a Western Sydney
secondary school classroom.

The interview will be semi-structured and won’t be recorded; instead the

researcher will transcribe your response. Results will be de-identified and
disseminated at the completion of the assessment task.

By signing this form, I acknowledge that:

 I have read the above information which explains the research study
 I have raised any questions and they have been answered to my
satisfaction
 I agree to be interviewed by Rebekah Donoghue as described
 I understand and agree to the information I provide being used for the
purpose of student assessment in ‘Research Teaching and Learning 2’
provided that it is de-identified
 I understand I can withdraw my participation at any time without
consequence

I have read the above information for this study and voluntarily consent to
participate.

Name: __________________________________

Signed: __________________________________

Date: __________________________________
Part B: Data collection protocol
Interview scaffold – adapted from Kervin, Vialle, Howardm Herrington and Okely
(2016) and Magnusson and Marecek (2015).
Introduction
Participant information
Remind participant of the purpose of
the interview
Remind participant of the measures in
which the data will be collected and
used
Ensure that the participants
understands that they can withdraw at
anytime
Confirm with method of data collection
Develop connection with interviewee
Questions
Interview questions are a guide and will depend on responses to each question as
to how the interview will flow and themes develop.
How long have you been teaching?
Can you recall what drove you to
become a teacher?
Tell me about your typical day
Tell me how you feel at the end of a
typical week
Do you think you have adequate job
satisfaction?
Do you find you engage in a lot of
behaviour management?
Male 
Female 
The interview question forms part of an
overarching research topic, which is
“What do teachers believe is the best
way to manage behaviour in the
classroom in secondary schools?”
Previous research has highlighted the
impact of teacher attitudes and the
effects of these on behaviour
management choices in the classroom.
However, all findings were context
dependent and as such this interview
aims to determine if the same attitudes
have the same effect in the context of a
Western Sydney secondary school
classroom.
Note taking
Sample questions:
- Tell me about your classroom
- What are your key learning
areas? How did you decide upon
these?
Possible follow-up and/or probing
question
Has this idea been fulfilled since you
started practising?
Why do you think that is?
Does this change throughout the term?
Tell me more about this
Tell me about a class where you might
need to engage in more behaviour
management
Tell me about a class where you don’t
 seem to have to do this as much
On a typical day, what strategies do you Tell me how these change from class to
use to manage behaviour in your class
classroom? What drives this decision?
Have you ever experimented with Which class did you try this with?
behaviour management strategies? Why?
Why not?
Was it successful?
Do you recall a time where you didn’t Why did you decide to try it?
think something would work in the Why didn’t you think it would work?
classroom and it did, such as an activity?
Have you ever had such a terrible day How did you deal with this?
where you thought nothing you did was Did you notice a difference between
making a difference? your
Tell me about the most challenging How did you deal with this?
classroom behaviour you have What was the outcome?
encountered Tell me about the student?
Have you encountered this again?
Conclusion
Ask the interviewee if there is anything else they would like to add, or any
questions that they expected to be asked but weren’t
Conclude the interview with thanking the participant
Part C: Data protocol justification

The purpose of this research is to investigate what effect teachers’ attitudes have
on behaviour management choices in the classroom of a Western Sydney
secondary school. The literature reviewed demonstrated a link between negative
teacher attitudes and aggressive behaviour management approaches, however,
all research was contextual and teachers’ attitudes stemmed from teacher self-
efficacy, perceptions of misbehaviour and relationships with students. It is for
this reason that a semi-structured interview was developed. It is unclear what
attitudes the participating teacher will or will not possess and as such particular
responses do not want to be elicited by the researcher but revealed organically.
The data collection protocol informs the overall research question “what do
teachers’ believe the best way to manage behaviour in the classroom in
secondary schools” by examining if teachers’ attitudes effect their practice and
inturn their belief on what’s the best way to manage student behaviour.

The interview scaffold is guided by the work of Kervin et al. (2016) whom
provide a checklist for researchers to gather crucial information from
participants by asking “global” and “prompting” questions. Types of global
questions include: grand tour questions, typical questions and specific questions
(Kervin et al. 2016), all of which have been utilised in the data collection
protocol. The purpose of asking a variety of questions is to get a thorough
understanding of the participants general life, usual encounters and how specific
events have unfolded by allowing the participant to answer in their own words
and to establish the context of events. Prompting questions (Kervin et al., 2016)
are layered throughout the interview in order to get more details regarding the
participants responses and draw out the underlying attitudes contributing to the
event. The data protocol was designed in this way as although interviews
provide rich and detailed data, it is possible that questions can be “flavoured by
the researchers own bias” (Kervin et al., 2016, p.78) and as such, the researcher
does not want to lead the participant to display any particular attitude.

Limitations of the data collection protocol have also been considered and the
advice of Magnusson and Marecek (2015) has been applied in order to
counteract the limitations. Interviewees can often feel uncomfortable and the
researchers presence can bias results (Kervin et al., 2016) therefore the
interview is semi-structured to promote a casual flow and allow the interviewee
to answer in their own words.

Ethical considerations of informed consent and anonymity have also contributed

to the overall design of this data collection protocol. The purpose of asking
participants to give informed consent is not just to be able to use the data
collected but to brief the participant on how their data will be used and ensure
they are comfortable with the process (Kervin et al., 2016). Participants are
required to sign the consent form before the interview begins, however, are
reminded numerous times that their participation is voluntary and can be
withdrawn at any time without consequence.
References
Kervin, L., Vialle, W., Howard, S., Herrington, J., & Okely, T. (2016). Research for

educators (2nd ed.). South Melbourne, Victoria: Cengage Learning

Australia.

Magnusson, E., & Marecek, J. (2015). Doing interview-based qualitative research:

A learner’s guide. Cambridge, United Kingdom: Cambridge University

Press.

Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments. (2018). Assessment 1 Information

and Consent Forms. Retrieved from

https://vuws.westernsydney.edu.au/webapps/blackboard/execute/cont

ent/file?cmd=view&content_id=_3164473_1&course_id=_24487_1&frame

setWrapped=true