Rewarding Student Input? UNESCO Chair Open Series Lecture

1. Rewarding Student Input?UNESCO Chair Open Series Lecture Mick King Sharjah Colleges HCT April 2011 Co-researchers: Catherine Cosgrove; Susan Lancaster

2. Rose-tinted Spectacles…?

3. Training the kids…

4. Entertaining the kids…

5. Taming the teenagers

6. At least by college they know how to behave, right?

7. Some questions to start with… • What kinds of undesirable classroom behaviour do you experience in class? • How does this behaviour affect you? • How does it affect the student(s) concerned? • How does it affect the other students? • How do you deal with it? • How satisfied are you that it will not happen again? • How empowered do you feel in regulating undesirable behaviour? • What is most effective: punishment or reward?

8. Student Incivility Research • Non-existent in mid-1980s (Nilson & Jackson, 2004) • Research pre-1980s focus on desirable behaviour (Shepherd et al, 2008) • Nowadays increased media attention (Morrisette, 2001) • Incivility a two-way problem (e.g. Frey, 2009) • 4 levels (Feldman, 2001) • Annoyances (passive incivility – Berger, 2000) • Classroom terrorism • Intimidation (incl. faculty evaluation; nowadays cyber-bullying) • Threat of violence

9. Student Incivility - Causes • Student traits: • Studentdiversity(Frey, 2009) • Ill-prepared for college (Frey, 2009; Shepherd et al, 2008) • Multiple life roles (Frey, 2009) • Student/faculty conflict on what constitutes incivility (Patron & Bisping, 2008) • Faculty non-trained in classroom management (Frey, 2009) • Business Environment: • Student sense of being customer (Berger, 2000; Shepherd et al, 2008) • Desire to retain students (Berger, 2000)

10. Student Incivility - Effects • Faculty stress/burnout • Negative learning environment • Time-consuming for admin • Faculty unwilling to flag it • Fear of no support • Fear of student reprisal • Belief that it will go away (Morrisette, 2001)

11. Student Incivility – Some Solutions • Engaging lectures at moderate pace • Respectful interaction • Communicating clear expectations • Assignment feedback at the end (Frey, 2009) • Define incivility – students more likely to refrain (Patron & Bisping, 2008) BUT ALL THESE FOCUS ON FACULTY BEHAVIOUR MODIFICATION…

12. The Study • Rationale for the action research • Historical background • Research process • Results highlights • Discussion • Suitability • Ethics

13. Historical Background • Carried out in Qatar context before • Students given score and feedback every class on in-class input • Sts given running averages over course • Assessment part of final grade • Assessed on: • Punctuality • Attitude • Preparation • Active participation

14. Rationale • In general terms, learning is a process which leads to a desired outcome which is displayed/performed at the end • University credits often awarded according to hourly input • All input should be rewarded

15. Rationale • Moves from punishment to reward • Continuous assessment of classroom input allows for behaviour modification • Explicit reference to assessment in class • Feedback opportunities to encourage improvement • You get what you earn • Accountability moves to the student • Negotiation of rules no longer such an issue

16. Pros • Students feel accountable • Students have to prove themselves • Constant feedback on performance • Plenty of time to adapt behaviour • Hardworking students are finally rewarded for their consistent efforts • Rewards = points which holds currency with students • Students improve their input (or recognise that their failings are caused by their lack of input)

17. Cons • Very subjective • Difficult to administer in large groups • Potential for conflict in the early stages • Often a sense of unfairness • ‘In your face’ assessment • Teachers sometimes prefer socialisation techniques to deal with problems • Issues of assessment validity/accreditation

18. Critical Incidents • The “10” teacher • Inability to ‘confront’ sts • The emotional student • Why did you only give me 6? • What do I have to do to score more? • Subjectivity • In the end you get what you deserve • Accountability • Self-reflective assessment • Do what you like!

19. Theoretical Underpinnings • Student Incivility, of course… • …but generally, outside psychology and behavioural problem literature, pretty thin on the ground • Assessment should be local (Graves, 2002) • Learning takes place in classrooms (Kohn, 2000) • Do assessments need to be objective? (ibid.)

20. Research Questions • Could this system work in our college context? • Is it fair?

21. Research Process • Getting students on board • Student description • Explaining the project • 1234 assessment (diagnostic) • Keeping scores and teacher journal • Questionnaire • Interviews • Analysis

22. 1234 Assessment

23. Questionnaire Questions

24. Results Analysis • Score trend analysis • Teacher observations/comments • Questionnaire results • Interview feedback

25. Group A – Diploma Male

26. Group A Teacher Observations • The Ss responded very positively to the process • Discernable change in behaviours • The Ss gave themselves some higher scores than I expected • Sense of collegiality • Dip in performance halfway

27. Group A Questionnaire Results • Feeling of Obligation 100% mostly • Felt pressure 82% • Aware of observation 100% • Performed better 100% • Fair 100% • Liked it 91%

28. Group B Higher Diploma Female

29. Group B Teacher Observations • Generally air of excitement and a ‘buzz’ in room • Specific targets e.g. “Today’s challenge is to speak in English all the time” produced even better classroom results • Different assessments, peer, friend, anonymous, self.

30. Group B Questionnaire Results • Feeling of Obligation 75%+ • (except punctuality! 65%) • Felt pressure 72% • Aware of observation 83% • Performed better 84% • Fair 83% • Liked it 88%

31. Group B Student Soundbites • “…we preferred teacher grading us, not our classmates” – explained as perceived to be more accurate • “….did not really change girls who do not work hard’ – had a more positive effect on students who already have a good work ethic • “…it was good we would like to do this again..”

32. Group C – Higher Diploma Male

33. Group C Teacher Observations • A small improvement in behaviour • More cooperative • Better bonding • Good Faculty evaluation! • Some irritating behaviours remain: • Phone • Talking over me • No laptop

34. Group C Questionnaire Results • Feeling of Obligation 78%+ • Felt pressure 56% • Aware of observation 94% • Performed better 94% • Fair 89% • Liked it 89%

35. Group C Student Soundbites • “It gave [the Ss] a sense of responsibility in a competition way between themselves”. • Peer assessment showed friendship in the class • “Some people will be unfairly judged because some of the class will cover their behaviour”. • “He might have a mark but…it might go up or down”. • Specific picture of each student • “[The teacher] doesn’t put what he thinks personally; he puts what he thinks is expected of him”. • “The ones that weren’t paying attention [still] weren’t paying attention”. • “The teacher is the best judge because he knows the class better than we know ourselves. • Generally would not want it as a course assessment element

36. Overall Trend Classes 1 to 7

37. Overall Questionnaire Results

38. The reward…!

39. Summing up… • Our perceptions • The scores • Student perceptions • Questionnaire • Interviews

40. Reviewing Research Questions • Could this system work in our college context? • Is it fair? • What do you think? • Could it work in your context? • Do you think it is fair?

41. Thanks for your time!micjak66@gmail.com 

42. Boro Productions. (2010, December 1). Classroom etiquette [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/‌watch?v=zZrJSjPWy_E Catherine Tate - Lauren - farmer [Video file]. (2009, May 13). Retrieved from YouTube database. Frey, K. A. (2009, December 4). Understanding Incivility in the college classroom. Retrieved from Graves, D. H. (2002). Testing is not teaching: What should count in education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Harvey, T. M. (2010, October 15). Jack Black - math song.wmv [Video file]. Retrieved from YouTube database. Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: raising the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Morrissette, P. J. (2001). Reducing incivility in the university/‌college classroom. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 5(4). Retrieved from http://www.ucalgary.ca/‌iejll/‌morrissette Patron, H., & Bisping, T. O. (2008). Why students misbehave in class: An empirical analysis of classroom incivilities. Mountain Plains Journal of Business and Economics, 9(2), 61-74. Retrieved from http://www.mountainplains.org/‌articles/‌2008-2/‌General%20Research/‌Mountain_Plains_Journal_of_Business_and_Economics_Volume_9_Number_2_2008_61-74_General_Research_Patron_and_Bisping.pdf Shepherd, C. D., Shepherd, K., & True, S. (2008, June). Business faculty perceptions of positive and negative student behaviors. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 5(9), 9-18. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/‌ERICWebPortal/‌search/‌detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ886777&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ886777 Taylor, B. (2009). Classroom management impacts student achievement: Tips to thrive and survive. Retrieved from Jackson State University website: http://www.eric.ed.gov/‌ERICWebPortal/‌search/‌detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=ED506815&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED506815 References • Boro Productions. (2010, December 1). Classroom etiquette [Video file]. Retrieved from http://www.youtube.com/‌watch?v=zZrJSjPWy_E • Berger, B. A. (2000). Incivility. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, (64), 445-450. • Catherine Tate - Lauren - farmer [Video file]. (2009, May 13). Retrieved from YouTube database. • Feldmann, L. J. (2001). Classroom civility is another of our instructor responsibilities. College Teaching, (49), 137-140. • Frey, K. A. (2009, December 4). Understanding Incivility in the college classroom. Retrieved from • Graves, D. H. (2002). Testing is not teaching: What should count in education. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. • Harvey, T. M. (2010, October 15). Jack Black - math song.wmv [Video file]. Retrieved from YouTube database. • Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: raising the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. • Morrissette, P. J. (2001). Reducing incivility in the university/‌college classroom. International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning, 5(4). Retrieved from http://www.ucalgary.ca/‌iejll/‌morrissette • Nilson, L. B., & Jackson, N. S. (2004, June). Combating classroom misconduct (incivility) Paper presented at International Consortium for Educational Development, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. • Patron, H., & Bisping, T. O. (2008). Why students misbehave in class: An empirical analysis of classroom incivilities. Mountain Plains Journal of Business and Economics, 9(2), 61-74. Retrieved from http://www.mountainplains.org/‌articles/‌2008-2/‌General%20Research/‌Mountain_Plains_Journal_of_Business_and_Economics_Volume_9_Number_2_2008_61-74_General_Research_Patron_and_Bisping.pdf • Shepherd, C. D., Shepherd, K., & True, S. (2008, June). Business faculty perceptions of positive and negative student behaviors. Journal of College Teaching & Learning, 5(9), 9-18. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/‌ERICWebPortal/‌search/‌detailmini.jsp?_nfpb=true&_&ERICExtSearch_SearchValue_0=EJ886777&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=EJ886777