grappling with classroom management: the orientations of preservice teachers and impact of student...
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by: [McMaster University]On: 24 October 2014, At: 12:02Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH,UK
The Teacher EducatorPublication details, including instructions forauthors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/utte20
GRAPPLING WITH CLASSROOMMANAGEMENT: THEORIENTATIONS OF PRESERVICETEACHERS AND IMPACT OFSTUDENT TEACHINGS. Michael Putman aa Department of Elementary Education , TeachersCollege, Ball State UniversityPublished online: 24 Sep 2009.
To cite this article: S. Michael Putman (2009) GRAPPLING WITH CLASSROOMMANAGEMENT: THE ORIENTATIONS OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS AND IMPACT OF STUDENTTEACHING, The Teacher Educator, 44:4, 232-247, DOI: 10.1080/08878730903180226
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08878730903180226
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all theinformation (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform.However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness,or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and viewsexpressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of theContent should not be relied upon and should be independently verified withprimary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for anylosses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages,and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of theContent.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan,sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone isexpressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
The Teacher Educator, 44:232–247, 2009
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 0887-8730 print/1938-8101 online
DOI: 10.1080/08878730903180226
RESEARCH ARTICLE
GRAPPLING WITH CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT:
THE ORIENTATIONS OF PRESERVICE TEACHERS
AND IMPACT OF STUDENT TEACHING
S. MICHAEL PUTMAN
Department of Elementary Education, Teachers College,Ball State University
This article describes research conducted to examine 71 preservice teachers’
theoretical orientations of classroom management and the impact of studentteaching on these orientations as well as their overall views regarding classroom
management. Results indicated preservice teachers demonstrated inconsistent
beliefs with regard to philosophies of classroom management developed as partof university coursework. Upon completion of student teaching in environments
characterized by teacher-centered practices, analyses revealed a shift toward
more teacher-centered beliefs and behavior. Conclusions indicate the effectsof vicarious and mastery experiences as influential in determining preferred
orientations and management techniques cited as relevant within the classroom.
Since the first moment adults and children gazed at each other in aschool-like atmosphere, the question of how to best manage the behav-iors of students has faced teachers. The problem still exists today asclassroom management has been cited as one of the foremost concernsof teachers (Chambers, 2003; Young, Milligan, & Snead, 2001). Thisconcern appears regardless of age or experience, but teachers at thebeginning of their careers, including those in training, appear to havethe greatest apprehension regarding overall classroom managementand student behavior (Moore, 2003; Veenman, 1984). These fears ap-
Address correspondence to S. Michael Putman, Department of Elementary Ed-ucation, Teachers College 216, Ball State University, Muncie, IN 47306, USA. E-mail:
232
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 233
pear to be well founded as Crow (1991) wrote, ‘‘the research historyis clear and consistent, novice teachers are inundated by classroommanagement problems and concerns’’ (p. 2). The resulting problemshave been cited as a significant factor in teachers leaving the profession(Merrett & Wheldall, 1993).
To alleviate the difficulties novice teachers have in establishingeffective classroom management, some institutions dedicated to train-ing future educators have begun to focus on the development of skillsin this area. However, issues have been raised that preservice teachersreceive too little training in classroom management, and that whichoccurs is often disconnected from classroom practice (Siebert, 2005).The result is little impact on their overall beliefs or subsequent class-room behaviors. Instead, preservice teachers’ ideas regarding classroommanagement are significantly impacted by field experiences, includingstudent teaching (Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann, 1985; Fry & McKinney,1997). Researchers have noted that contextual variables within fieldexperiences, including the setting and cooperating teacher, exhibitsuch a strong influence on preservice teachers that the beliefs developedwithin teacher education coursework were discarded in favor of thoseassociated with the field experiences (Toll, Nierstheimer, Lenski, &Kollof, 2004; Zeichner & Tabachnick, 1981). The current investiga-tion examined the beliefs about classroom management that preserviceteachers developed during their university coursework and examinedwhether those beliefs changed as a result of their student teachingexperiences.
Social Cognitive Theory and Learning
According to the transactional view of social cognitive theory (SCT),human agency, or the intentional completion of actions, is the resultof interactions between personal factors, environmental variables, andbehaviors. Bandura (1986) described this relationship as characterizedby triadic reciprocality as each of these factors influences one anotherand subsequent actions. For example, environmental variables, such asinstruction and feedback, can affect personal factors (the self) in theform of goals, expectations, and attributions of success or failure. Inaddition, achievement outcomes (behaviors), such as motivation andlearning, are directly impacted by personal and environmental factors.
Within the interaction of the three aforementioned factors of SCTis the development of an individual’s capacity to learn. According toSCT, learning occurs as individuals encounter opportunities to executean action and/or observe others in performances. Enactive learning
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
234 S. M. Putman
refers to individuals directly performing a skill or action. Behaviors thatresult in success are retained whereas those that lead to failure are dis-carded. Vicarious experiences, on the other hand, involve observationsof others as a source of information—there is no overt performanceby the individual. The advantage of the latter type of experience isthat the pace of learning is accelerated as various forms of materials ormodels replace direct action. Several factors affect the overall influenceof a model within a vicarious experience including the similarity ofthe model to the observer, the perceived status and competence of themodel, the anticipated outcomes, and the observer’s efficacy regard-ing his own ability to complete the actions observed (Bandura, 1997).Combining vicarious and enactive experiences facilitates learning asindividuals are able to anticipate the outcomes of their actions basedon not only their direct personal experiences, but also those of themodel or within the observed activity.
Managing the Classroom:
Moving From the University to the ‘‘Real-World’’
Within the preparation of future teachers, a great deal of attentionis focused on developing content knowledge and pedagogy. However,classroom management plays a significant role in a teacher’s ability toconduct instruction as the two factors are inextricably linked. Brophy(1988) defined classroom management as ‘‘the actions taken to cre-ate and maintain a learning environment conducive to attainment ofthe goals of instruction—arranging the physical environment of theclassroom, establishing rules and procedures, maintaining attention tolessons and engagement in academic activities’’ (p. 2). Researchershave found that a teacher’s success in maintaining an optimal learn-ing environment is dependent on the ability to coordinate all aspectsof the classroom, including classroom management, with effectivelyplanned instruction (Brophy, 1983, 1988; Evertson, Emmer, Sanford,& Clements, 1983).
Teaching Beliefs and Classroom Management
It has already been noted that teachers feel a significant amount oftrepidation in matters of classroom management. This is especially trueof preservice and beginning teachers. In fact, researchers noted, ‘‘oneof the biggest concerns of beginning teachers is the lack of preparationthey receive in classroom management’’ (Kher, Lacina-Gifford, & Yan-dell, 2000, p. 2). This perceived lack of knowledge causes these teachers
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 235
to doubt their abilities to effectively handle disruptions in the classroomand beliefs regarding ability have been shown to impact the decisionsof teachers in regards to classroom management strategies (Woolfolk,Rosoff, & Hoy, 1990). Several studies have shown a relationship betweenthe efficacy beliefs of teachers and their predilection to use certainmanagement strategies as part of a behavioral intervention (Emmerand Hickman, 1991; Hughes, Barker, Kemenoff, & Hart, 1993). Hoyand Woolfolk (1990) found preservice teachers with higher efficacybeliefs were less controlling and displayed traits consistent with aninteractionalist approach to classroom management.
To compensate for a lack of knowledge and low overall efficacy,preservice teachers tend to adopt the style that conceptually fits intotheir views of student behavior and how to influence this behavior(Martin & Baldwin, 1992). Brophy (1988) found that many preserviceteachers believed the key to management was creating an atmosphere ofcontrol through power or a friendly, non-threatening environment. Thepreservice teachers were either overly concerned with class control ortoo vague in their expectations causing student confusion, which limitedtheir ability to be successful managers. Other research has demon-strated preservice teachers initially adopt ideas involving a student–teacher partnership (Sokal, Smith, & Mowat, 2002). Thus, a definitiveconclusion regarding preservice teachers’ beliefs for establishing aneffective classroom environment at the earliest stages of their careershas not been reached.
Moving From Coursework to Classroom
In an effort to provide preservice teachers with specific knowledge inclassroom management, institutions of higher education have createdcoursework focusing on this area. Programmatic delivery varies, but of-ten the preservice teachers are introduced to theoretical approaches ofclassroom management falling within a continuum differentiated by theamount of teacher control present within the framework (Glickman &Tamashiro, 1980). Glickman and Tamashiro labeled the most teacher-directed style as interventionist (e.g., Canter, Jones); the middle of thecontinuum exhibiting shared power as interactionalist (e.g., Glasser,Albert); and student-directed management as non-interventionist (e.g.,Gordon, Ginott). The introduction of these theories, however, is oftenperceived by preservice teachers as being too abstract and not con-nected to actual classroom practices (Kagan, 1992; Siebert, 2005).
Meuwissen (2005) stated, teacher educators need to ‘‘illuminatethe connections between purpose and practice’’ and help preservice
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
236 S. M. Putman
teachers ‘‘traverse gaps between teacher education and classroom con-text’’ (p. 254). To do this, future teachers need practical experiencesimplementing theories of classroom management in a safe environmentwith a more knowledgeable mentor (Ryan & Cooper, 2004). Theseexperiences can take place within the context of field placements as partof regular coursework or as part of student teaching, but it is importantto note that preservice teachers have remarked that it was during thesesituations that most of their learning occurs (Feiman-Nemser & Buch-mann, 1985; Fry & McKinney, 1997). During these field experiencespreservice teachers can be exposed to mentor teachers whose ideals ofclassroom management may be notably different than those espoused inuniversity coursework. When this happens, preservice teachers tendedto adopt the prevailing norms of the supervising teacher (Zeichner &Tabachnick, 1981). In fact, Hoy and Woolfolk (1990) wrote, ‘‘the idealimages of college preparation apparently give way to the instrumentalnecessities of maintaining order and running a smoothly functioningclassroom’’ (p. 294). Similarly, Zeichner and Tabachnick (1981) wrote,‘‘the impact of the college is washed out’ by school experience’’ (p. 7).
Accordingly, Moore (2003) described the challenge for institutionspreparing future educators as deciding how to create opportunitiesfor preservice teachers in these programs to further develop theoriesdiscussed in classes and how to apply these theories in classroom set-tings. In essence, Moore advocated using enactive experiences to allowpersonal connections to be made between thought and action. Relat-ing this to social cognitive theory, these opportunities with universitysupervision increase the likelihood preservice teachers will retain behav-iors consistent with successful classroom management. Without them,Moore stated preservice teachers were more likely to adopt the methodsutilized by mentor teachers ‘‘regardless of whether they were in conflictwith theory or practice suggested in university classroom’’ (p. 40).
If institutions of higher education seek to create teachers who im-plement principles consistent with the ideals advocated by the program,examinations must occur regarding what preservice teachers take awayfrom classes that include information on management strategies andhow this information is utilized and impacted during practicum andstudent teaching experiences. This study was conducted to examinesome of these issues. Questions asked as part of this research include:
1. What theoretical orientations and beliefs are preservice teachersadopting as a result of their participation in a required course onclassroom management?
2. Are preservice teachers’ attitudes regarding classroom managementinfluenced more by coursework or student teaching experiences?
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 237
Methodology
Participants
Participants for this research were 71 preservice teachers attending amedium size university located in the Midwest. All were Caucasian with64 females and 7 males involved. Each participant had a declared majorof elementary education and had completed a required 12–16-weekstudent teaching internship.
Context and Data Collection
As part of the core sequence for elementary education majors, allparticipants completed coursework focusing on classroom managementprior to student teaching. As the instructor of this course for all par-ticipants, I presented information on various theories of classroommanagement and research-based strategies to successfully manage theclassroom environment. To reinforce the idea that classroom man-agement is enhanced when elementary school-age students are givenopportunities to participate (i.e., a student-centered approach), I dis-cussed and modeled student-centered techniques within the instruc-tion. Case studies served as a primary method to promote reflectionand discussion, as no field experiences were included in the course.At the conclusion of the course, the preservice teachers completed aclassroom management plan (CMP) outlining their philosophy of man-agement, including references to specific theorists; a potential methodfor the formulation of rules within their classroom; descriptions ofclassroom procedures; potential behavioral interventions; and a class-room map. Data collection activities focused on the CMP consisted ofrecording citations of specific theories regarding classroom manage-ment, descriptions of processes of rule creation, hypothesized class-room procedures, and behavioral management techniques for eachparticipant.
Upon completion of student teaching, preservice teachers enrolledin a senior seminar, revisited their CMP, and completed a two-partsurvey. Part 1 of the survey accessed information regarding studentteaching and utilized scaled questions followed by requests for expla-nations of ratings to note preservice teachers’ overall involvement inestablishing classroom policies, their assessment of the overall class-room environment, and the likelihood of adopting strategies of thesupervising teacher. Part 2 of the survey included open-ended ques-tions that directed preservice teachers to reflect on the applicability
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
238 S. M. Putman
of the CMP with regard to their student teaching experiences. Ques-tions addressed whether the elements selected or developed withinthe CMP, such as management theorists or interventions, could besuccessful in the classroom based on their experiences student teach-ing. Participants were asked to justify answers with specific examplesfrom student teaching and to provide potential modifications to CMPelements that would increase their functionality in the classroom. Pre-service teachers were also asked to provide the source of one tech-nique/application of classroom management that would be adoptedand used in their future classrooms. Finally, the preservice teachersdescribed a typically occurring misbehavior from their student teach-ing experience, explained the method that they developed to man-age the situation, and provided a rationale for use of the particularstrategy.
Data Analysis
Numerical data analysis consisted of computing the frequencies of spe-cific theorists cited within the philosophy statements of the CMPs tonote student preferences with regard to management beliefs (see Ta-ble 1). This was followed by accessing Part 1 of the survey and comput-ing the frequencies for the scaled survey questions (see Table 2).
Qualitative analysis of CMP descriptions and open-ended surveyquestions was completed using the constant comparative method ofGlaser and Strauss (1967), which allows qualitative incidents to be con-tinually evaluated with each other and grouped based on the identifica-tion of similarities and differences that can be made within and acrossresponses. I independently coded the survey responses to note trendsin the development of the student teaching classroom environment,preservice teachers’ theoretical orientations of classroom managementafter completion of student teaching, methods of behavioral interven-tions and techniques, and sources used for knowledge of classroommanagement. Categories were created based on the similarities anddifferences within responses, keeping in mind the research questionsand utilizing terminology relevant to the study. For example, citation ofa technique for managing student behavior with specific reference tothe redirecting behavior was categorized as ‘‘management technique—teacher directed’’ whereas a response that outlined a discussion of a mis-behavior with a student was categorized as ‘‘management technique—student centered.’’ Following categorization, I revisited the data andcategories to develop and understand the relationship of this informa-tion with regard to research question #2.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 239
TABLE 1 Theoretical Orientations of Preservice Teachers
Theorist(percentageof selectionby students) Comments
Interventionist
Jones (42%) I found Fred Jones’ ideas of classroom arrangement,classroom rules, classroom jobs, morning routine, andbody language tactics to help me manage the classroom.
Jones’ PAT motivated students to make quick transitions tosave time for their choice of activities.
Canters (41%) I thought that the Canters’ theory is very realistic and usefulin the classroom setting. I like the idea of building respectwith my class.
The Canters and I believe that positive acknowledgementcan be a very powerful thing. Students are more inclinedto do acceptable behavior when they are praised andacknowledged for doing so.
Interactionalist
Albert (37%) Linda Albert said the students must believe that they areimportant, valued and worthwhile. After student teachingI came to realize that this alone was not enough tomanage a classroom.
Glasser (28%) I feel that Glasser’s Noncoercive Discipline does not work. Itis a naïve approach to dealing with behavior and children.
Non-interventionist
Kagan, Kyle,and Scott(32%)
I liked giving the responsibility to the students because itgave them a feel [sic] as though they had some control inhow the classroom was managed.
Coloroso(28%)
I believe that management within the classroom comes fromwhatever works for the teacher and the students in theparticular class.
Note. Percentages of preservice teachers choosing the theorists will not total 100% as
95% of the participants selected two or more theorists as relevant.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
240 S. M. Putman
TABLE 2 Scaled Survey Questions
Frequency %
QuestionResponsedescriptor 1 2 3 4 5
I had input into theclassroom managementplan in the classroomwhere I student taught.
1 D Minimal3 D Some5 D High
17.6 29.7 28.4 20.3 4.0
The plan used in myclassroom was (blank).
1 D Teacherdirected
16.2 54.1 16.2 12.2 1.4
3 D Balanced5 D Student
centeredHow likely are you to
adopt elements of yoursupervising teacher’smanagement plan?
1 D Not likely3 D I will adopt
severalelements
5 D I will adopteverything
5.4 10.8 24.3 41.9 17.6
Results
Consistency of Theoretical Orientations of Management
Beginning with analysis of the CMP, preservice teachers who partici-pated in this study demonstrated inconsistent belief patterns in theirtheoretical orientations of classroom management. Data indicated thepreservice teachers were more likely to cite theories that were regardedas interventionist, thus providing more teacher direction, within thephilosophy of classroom management statement developed as part oftheir university coursework (see Table 1). Fredric Jones or Lee and Mar-lene Canter were noted as significant to the developing ideas regardingclassroom management in 70% of the participants’ responses.
However, 75% of the philosophy statements written by the preser-vice teachers in the CMP also included specific phrases such as student-centered, promoting student responsibility, or establishing respectfulrelationships. In addition, 98% described a procedure for developingclassroom rules that directly involved students in the process. Thus,the preservice teachers also identify with characteristics that would bedeemed interactionalist or non-interventionist. These data would ap-pear to be contradictory to the teacher-oriented approaches associatedwith the interventionist perspectives linked to Jones and the Canters,
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 241
where the teacher controls the environment, selected within the man-agement plan.
Examinations of responses to the survey conducted after studentteaching revealed 56% of preservice teachers felt numerous aspectsrelated to the experts in the field of classroom management chosenwithin their management philosophy document were still applicable.Further analysis revealed participants noting interventionist ideas, in-cluding structuring the classroom and the administration of conse-quences or rewards, as being vital to a successful management planas experienced during student teaching. The prevailing reason citedfor the ideas would be categorized as related to ‘‘teacher control’’ withspecific references to ‘‘discipline’’ contained in 36% of the responses.This result is reinforced by specific responses from participants thatprinciples from theorists considered to be interactionalist (Glickman &Tamashiro, 1980) had limited applicability in the classroom. Specificlimitations included utilizing too much student input and a lack ofteacher direction and control (see Table 2).
Classroom Environment
Overall, 70% of the preservice teachers participating in this study ratedthe classroom environment in which they student taught as being moreteacher-directed than balanced or student-centered (see Table 2). Al-though the cooperating teachers were not questioned regarding theirorientations, it is theorized that the overall classroom atmosphere wasthe result of their views as the majority of preservice teachers revealedthey had limited input into the overall classroom management planused in the classroom (see Table 2). Further analysis of the surveyresponses regarding preservice teachers’ role in the development of themanagement plan revealed experiences ranged greatly within the con-text of their supervising teachers’ flexibility regarding implementationof ideas, from no input to the plan to trying several ideas. Notably, noneof the preservice teachers were able to fully implement their own ideasregarding the classroom management plan. The following commentsillustrate the variability described above:
‘‘My teacher directed the classroom management plan.’’
‘‘A classroom management plan had already been in effect during mystudent teaching. The school that I was at looped so the teacher I waswith had the students the year before. I tried to abide by the rules andregulations the students understood to have in her classroom.’’
‘‘My supervising teacher allowed me to implement some of my own rulesto see if they would work or not.’’
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
242 S. M. Putman
Contextual Influences on Managing Behavior
Analysis of preservice teacher reflections regarding a viable interventiontechnique used within the student teaching classroom revealed teacher-centered, interventionist strategies, including implementing rewards/consequences or ‘‘redirecting’’ behavior, in 68% of the responses. Fur-ther exploration of this information in regards to philosophy statementsfrom the CMP revealed more than half of these individuals had notedthe importance of involving children in becoming responsible for theirown behavior, a perspective more associated with the interactionalist ornon-interventionist philosophy.
This information is significant in light of the comparisons be-tween strategies selected for implementation in future classrooms andthe source of this strategy: supervising teachers/schools or elementsrelated to coursework or university experiences. Preservice teacherswere more likely to cite mentor teachers/schools for an aspect relatedto classroom management that will be incorporated into their futureclassroom management plan. When queried to name the specific aspect,participants were most likely to indicate behavior/incentive systemsand procedures. Although procedures have a decidedly neutral aspectto them in terms of their association with a specific classification ofmanagement technique, behavior/incentive systems as described by theparticipants were based on an interventionist ideology. Specifically, inevery case, preservice teachers indicated a loss of privilege/consequenceassociated with misbehaviors, in some cases termed ‘‘accountability,’’ orreward for ‘‘proper’’ behavior, such as following directions.
An aspect of coursework, including theorists and instructors, wascited as the source of a strategy/intervention to be used in the par-ticipants’ future classrooms in only 26% of the cases. Within theseresponses, there was an equal split between citations of theorists andcoursework. When instructors or coursework was described as the source,specific references were made to promoting student responsibility andusing student input in all cases. On the other hand, references totheorists were more likely to cite behaviorist tendencies associated withthe interventionist perspective than strategies associated with the non-interventionist or interactionalist theorists.
Discussion
As classroom management continues to be an area of concern forpreservice teachers as they enter their chosen profession (Kher et al.,2000), this study was undertaken to investigate the impact of university
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 243
coursework devoted to classroom management on preservice teachers’evolving beliefs related to this area. Specific examinations into the con-sistency of the theoretical orientations of this group upon completion ofstudent teaching and into the overall influence of university courseworkand practicum experiences were noted. Examining the results of thisstudy in light of the tenets regarding learning set forth in social cogni-tive theory (Bandura, 1986), it became quickly apparent that the effectsof mastery and vicarious experiences were predominant factors with theoverall orientations of the preservice teachers and on the greater impactof student teaching as compared to coursework.
Mastery and Vicarious Experiences
Analyses of preservice teachers’ initial ideas regarding how to best man-age the classroom environment revealed an apparent inconsistency intheoretical orientations and proposed implementation of ideas. Whereasthe interventionist orientations exhibited by the preservice teachers inthe CMPs were consistent with prior research (Brophy, 1988), the pre-service teachers also revealed ideas regarding a student teacher partner-ship, similar to that found by Sokal et al. (2002), in their documents. Asthe instruction within coursework dedicated to classroom managementfocused on modeling interactionalist ideas, these conflicting views couldbe the contrast of identification with what was ‘‘right’’ according to theresearch-based practices presented by a more knowledgeable mentorversus the perceived control necessary to have the greatest influenceon student behavior (see Martin & Baldwin, 1992). Lack of vicari-ous or mastery experiences associated within the context of universitycoursework likely attributed to this lack of a defined orientation aspreservice teachers were not able to see or implement ideas associ-ated with management theories with children. Discussing case studies,while an important component of coursework, focused on providingpreservice teachers with information relevant to effectively creating andmanaging the classroom environment; however, students were not ableto note vicarious consequences nor the instructor’s competence, bothimportant components of modeling in SCT.
Further evidence of the impact of vicarious experiences is revealedthrough the analyses of the role of the preservice teachers within thedevelopment of the classroom management plan during their studentteaching placement. Although it is not surprising the preservice teach-ers had some role within the development of the overall plan as theexperience took place in the fall, survey responses by the preserviceteachers revealed their supervising teachers’ classrooms exhibited a
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
244 S. M. Putman
more teacher-directed orientation. Classroom observations were notconducted to confirm the success of these methods; however, the pref-erence for interventionist techniques demonstrated by the preserviceteachers indicates the successful use of these methods by the super-vising teachers. Students were able to see a model with prestige andcompetence, to note vicarious consequences associated with the actionstaken by the teacher, and, in turn, base their outcome expectationsand goals on the practices of the teachers. In other words, the vicariousexperiences allowed the preservice teachers, many of whom alreadyshowed a predilection for some interventionist techniques, to identifywith the teacher-centered strategies utilized by the supervising teachers.The adoption of behaviorist techniques, such as incentive systems, wasfacilitated as a result of seeing the successful implementation of suchmethods.
As defined by Bandura (1986), mastery experiences influence be-liefs as the individual is imbedded within the situation or context relatedto the act or skill being undertaken. Certainly teaching a class duringa practicum or field experience provides a mastery experience as pre-service teachers gain information that impacts their developing efficacybeliefs for teaching. For student teachers, being the adult in charge ofmaintaining the learning environment of the classroom represents oneof their first instances of full control. Thus, this enactive experience,combined with the observations of the classroom teacher, may have hada significant impact on their growing conceptions related to classroommanagement. As students experienced the successes they noted withintheir intervention summaries, their views regarding their own ability toimplement techniques associated with the classroom teacher improved.
Examining the preservice teachers’ responses regarding the ideasthey were most likely to implement in their future classroom and thesource for these ideas, it was apparent supervising teachers were agreater influence than coursework. This could be a combination of theimpact of vicarious and mastery experiences of the preservice teach-ers as they began their placement observing their mentor teachers inaction and progressed to implementing the principles of classroommanagement used by these teachers. Data analysis revealed preserviceteachers were most likely to cite a behavioral charting/incentive systemas a strategy gained from mentor teachers. These plans were oftenlinked to some form of consequences, which was often noted as anarea needing modification within the management plan created intheir junior year. In addition, preservice teachers indicated some formof classroom procedure from the mentor teachers’ classrooms. Theconclusion reached based on this information was that policies/ideasretained from field experience are likely to fill in perceived gaps in
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 245
knowledge that result from a lack of a field experience during course-work in classroom management.
Implications
Although this investigation has several limitations, including voluntarysampling techniques, the use of self-report data, and the lack of observa-tions of classroom practices, it represents a necessary step in examiningthe change that occurs in preservice teachers’ beliefs with regard tostudent teaching experiences and university coursework. This researchhas several implications for research and practice. Notably, institutionsof higher education can begin or continue to examine their practicesregarding preservice teachers in the area of classroom managementwith regards to the overall beliefs, learning environment, and the sub-sequent behaviors of this group.
An initial area for consideration centers on providing preserviceteachers opportunities to implement theories discussed within the course-work under the guidance of a university supervisor. As the vicariousand mastery experiences that occur within student teaching representa significant influence on preservice teachers’ beliefs, instructors anduniversities need to ensure that students work in classrooms wherethey can implement research-based practices under the guidance of auniversity mentor or observe the university instructor modeling. Theseexperiences, followed by active reflection and dialogue with classmatesand the instructor, could result in more consistency in the orienta-tions developed as part of university coursework. For this to occur, theplacement of a course on classroom management within the overallsequence and in relation to student teaching and subsequent entranceinto the teaching profession is important. Investigations into classroommanagement concepts introduced one semester prior to or as part ofprofessional development during student teaching would allow furthercomparisons to be made and facilitate comparisons of programmaticdelivery.
A second implication that stems from SCT, but not studied aspart of this research, is the study of preservice teacher self-efficacy.Prior research has indicated that teachers are less controlling whenthey demonstrate positive efficacy beliefs (Hoy & Woolfolk, 1990), thuswe could infer that universities need to ensure that students experiencesuccess directly or by observing similar models with regard to classroommanagement. Again, this can be enhanced by paying particular atten-tion to placement, with a focus on managing the day-to-day realities ofthe classroom earlier, more often, and with peer and university support.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
246 S. M. Putman
References
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freemanand Company.
Brophy, J. (1983). Classroom organization and management. Elementary School
Journal, 83(4), 265–285.Brophy, J. (1988). Educating teachers about managing classrooms and students.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 4, 1–18.Chambers, S. M. (2003). The impact of length of student teaching on the self-efficacy
and classroom orientation of preservice teachers. Paper presented at the AnnualMeeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association, San Antonio,TX. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 477509)
Crow, N. (1991). Personal perspectives on classroom management. Paper presentedat the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,Chicago, IL. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 332959)
Emmer, E. T., & Hickman, J. (1991). Teacher efficacy in classroom managementand discipline. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 51 , 755–765.
Evertson, C. M., Emmer, E. T., Sanford, J. P., & Clements, B. (1983). Improvingclassroom management. An experiment in elementary school classrooms.Elementary School Journal, 84(2), 173–188.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1985). Pitfalls of experience in teacherpreparation. Teachers College Record, 87(9), 53–65.
Fry, P. G., & McKinney, L. J. (1997). A qualitative study of preservice teach-ers’ early field experiences in an urban, culturally different school. Urban
Education, 32(2), 184–201.Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory.
Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.Glickman, C. D., & Tamashiro, R. T. (1980). Clarifying teachers’ beliefs about
discipline. Educational Leadership, 37, 459–464.Hoy, W. K., & Woolfolk, A. E. (1990). Socialization of student teachers. American
Educational Research Journal, 27, 279–300.Hughes, J. N., Barker, D., Kemenoff, S., & Hart, M. (1993). Problem owner-
ship, causal attributions, and self-efficacy as predictors of teachers’ referraldecisions. Journal of Educational & Psychological Consultation, 4, 369–384.
Kagan, D. M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginningteachers. Review of Educational Research, 62(2), 129–169.
Kher, N., Lacina-Gifford, L. J., & Yandell, S. (2000). Preservice teachers’ knowledgeof effective classroom management strategies: Defiant behavior. Paper presented atthe Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, NewOrleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 444941)
Martin, N. K., & Baldwin, B. (1992). Beliefs regarding classroom management style:
The differences between preservice and experienced teachers. Paper presented atthe annual meeting of the Mid-South Educational Research Association,Knoxville, TN. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 355213)
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014
Preservice Teachers and Classroom Management 247
Merrett, F., & Wheldall, K. (1993). How do teachers learn to manage classroombehaviour? A study of teachers’ opinions about their initial training withspecial reference to classroom behaviour management. Educational Studies,
19, 91–106.Meuwissen, K. W. (2005). Maybe someday the twain shall meet: Exploring
disconnections between methods instruction and ‘‘life in the classroom.’’The Social Studies, 96, 253–258.
Moore, R. (2003). Reexamining the field experiences of preservice teachers.Journal of Teacher Education, 54, 31–42.
Ryan, K., & Cooper, J. M. (2004). Those who can, teach (10th ed.). Boston, MA:Houghton Mifflin.
Siebert, C. J. (2005). Promoting preservice teachers’ success in classroom man-agement by leveraging a local union’s resources: A professional developmentschool initiative. Education, 125(3), 385–392.
Sokal, L., Smith, D. G., & Mowat, H. (2002). Pre-service teachers’ attitudes toward
classroom management in an alternative certification program. Paper presented atthe Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, NewOrleans, LA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 466450)
Toll, C. A., Nierstheimer, S. L., Lenski, S. D., & Kollof, P. B. (2004). Washing ourstudents clean: Internal conflicts in response to preservice teachers’ beliefsand practices. Journal of Teacher Education, 55, 164–176.
Veenman, S. (1984). Perceived problems of beginning teachers. Review of Edu-
cational Research, 54(2), 143–178.Woolfolk, A. E., Rosoff, B., & Hoy, W. K. (1990). Teachers’ sense of efficacy
and their beliefs about managing students. Teaching & Teacher Education, 6,137–148.
Young, B. N., Milligan, B., & Snead, D. (2001). Jewels of wisdom: A study of percep-
tions of discipline of middle school teachers, high school teachers, student teachers, and
undergraduate education majors enrolled in classroom management course (YOED4000). Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South EducationalResearch Association, Little Rock, AK. (ERIC Document Reproduction Ser-vice No. ED 461652)
Zeichner, K. M., & Tabachnick, B. R. (1981). Are the effects of university teachereducation ‘‘washed out’’ by school experience? Journal of Teacher Education,
3(3), 7–11.Dow
nloa
ded
by [
McM
aste
r U
nive
rsity
] at
12:
02 2
4 O
ctob
er 2
014