Download
1 / 24
240 likes | 427 Vues
Focus on: Shouting. Leading Edge work carried out by CMS Focus group research carried out by CMS; JP; SJJ; JAH; JHG. Our task. In September 2007 a focus group of 5 staff members were challenged with investigating the behaviour strategy of teachers using shouting.
E N D
Focus on: Shouting Leading Edge work carried out by CMS Focus group research carried out by CMS; JP; SJJ; JAH; JHG
Our task • In September 2007 a focus group of 5 staff members were challenged with investigating the behaviour strategy of teachers using shouting. • Our mandate was to research current thinking on the use of shouting as a means of classroom management. • Finally student and staff views were sought on the possibility of establishing Priory as a No Shouting school
Methodology: Researching at school, local , national and international levels
Methodology: Researching at school, local , national and international levels • Timescale: • By September 2007, a focus group had been set up and given the above mandate. • By the end of the Autumn term 2007 a 1 hour focus group meeting was undertaken to research the impact of shouting on the school community, and to take time to reflect on teaching strategies. • By Spring 2008 through a further focus group meeting and directed time the majority of research had been carried out, and recommendations were made, with reference to current school policy (inclusion). • Throughout the remainder of the Spring and Summer terms 2008, these recommendations were trialled in order for the focus group to come to final conclusions.
Methodology: Researching at school, local , national and international levels • Methods of research included: • Full internet search (secondary strategy; etc) • Posting questions on teaching websites (over 500 replies! A sample of which have been included in Appendix 1) • School teachers questionnaire (an anonymous sample appears in Appendix 2) • Referencing school inclusion policy • Students ‘focus group’ • Referencing teaching literature • Teachers unions • Questioning other schools
Firstly, we needed to clarify use of the word ‘shouting’, to ensure that the word was being used in context. • Shouting can be classified as: encouragement in the form of cheers from spectators; the expression of approval and support; uttering a loud inarticulate cry as of pain or excitement; a loud utterance; often in protest or opposition • (Oxford English Dictionary 1997) However there were issues with the use of this word as it was deemed slightly ambiguous following the definition; therefore we decided to use both ‘shouting’, and the term ‘verbal aggression’ in this context, and for the means of research. The use of these terms was explained to all students and teachers taking part in the research process. • Verbal/symbolic aggression is a communication intended to cause psychological pain to another person, or a communication perceived as having that intent. The communicative act may be active or passive, and verbal or nonverbal. Examples include name calling or nasty remarks (active, verbal), slamming a door or smashing something (active, nonverbal) and stony silence or sulking (passive, nonverbal). • (Oxford English Dictionary 1997)
International thoughts • Very difficult to find information on non-shouting schools, as schools tend not to ‘advertise’ that they are ‘non-shouting’; although we did find one example of a school in the USA… This school believed that after every weekend teachers and staff should ‘share group hugs’ when returning to school, to ensure that the relationship between staff and students was concreted after time apart. We felt that many staff and students would refuse to emulate this within our school environment, and that at times this would not be appropriate. • Sun Yeh School (Chinese) – visited by the head teacher. We felt that the experiences of this particular school may not transfer to our own school environment, due to the nature of the students. In many Asian countries teachers are highly respected and this may mean that there is never a ‘need’ to shout/raise one’s voice.
National level: Please see Appendix 1 for a sample of our replies from various teaching ‘blogs’. A small sample appears below. • “Shouting can be effective if used only rarely. I’m usually very calm, no matter what the situation is, and I choose, very carefully, the occasions when I think a “shout” will be effective. Even if it doesn’t have an effect on the student (and it usually does) it certainly has an effect on the rest of the class. You can almost see them thinking “Phew, glad it wasn’t me “ • “If you need to shout, once you have the attention of the class, you should return to a normal calm level” • “It takes less time to have a quick shout than keep kids in for endless detentions and the kids prefer it if you ask them” • “When telling off children from other classes I vary between a low yet loud shout or a severe disappointment act. The children don’t know what to expect so it has great effect. Particularly effective as a deterrent to my observe class. Both are an act and both are I admit forms of mind games. The observers get my “wink” as reassurance it is an act. I always ensure person leaves telling off with ways to move forward and change behaviour.”
Responses to teacher questionnaires - a further sample is provided in appendix 2. • The majority of replies suggested that ‘shouting’ is raising your voice. A number of people suggested that it was raising your voice in an aggressive manner. • “ Shouting at pupils is not appropriate and not the same as giving instructions/making a point by use of volume. A raised voice is not the same as a loss of temper and a teacher should be trusted to know the difference.”
When do people shout? Taken from staff questionnaires and general research. • Safety issues • Practical situations • Open spaces (organising groups) • Indoor spaces (eg corridor) • For ‘theatrical effect’ • Stress situations (anger)
Conclusions and recommendations Recommendations made to staff following focus group research
Working definition“He who angers you, conquers you” Buddha. • Shouting – Verbal aggression when it indicates a loss of control of a situation or of one’s self. • Raising your voice is not verbal aggression when employed in the following situations • On corridors, when there are a lot of students around • When there are safety issues • Crowd control • When you want to make a point clear/ to express the magnitude of their mistake • Use only occasionally otherwise loses effect • To give instructions in a practical lesson above the normal noise of all students eg all using electrical whisks • Organising large groups in open spaces • To reprimand as a last resort when ‘gentler’ comments have been ignored • To stop a pupil who is totally focused on something that will harm them or others • Raising one’s voice to a loud level to highlight the gravity of a situation to a student. • Enforcing a particular health and safety issue. • To communicate to a student at a distance. • To focus a large groups attention. • To reinforce an important point. • To reinforce positive achievement.
Final recommendations following research and trial period • The Priory School should not become a non-shouting school. • It was felt throughout the school that suitable measures were in place – sanctions and so on – and that it would be unnecessary to take this further and leave teachers open to scrutiny from students about ‘shouting’. • ‘If we all used the same behaviour management techniques they would be less effective – you need a range of techniques to use with different classes’. • Instead school guidelines/union guidelines on verbally aggressive behaviour should be used, along with continuation of use of sanctions. • Promote variety in lessons to hold interest. • Differentiation for students to avoid boredom/poor behaviour from more or less able students. • Routine for behaviour in every classroom. • We should be working towards less verbal aggression than raising your voice as in the previous situations. “Unless the entire school body walks the corridors in silence how can you get any individuals attention?” • Staff should be happy to try other techniques with their classes. • There were so many suggestions from staff about behaviour management techniques they are listed on a separate sheet – please see Appendix 3
I believe that overall we were able to cover the brief set for the focus group, and came to logical conclusions which led to our final recommendations. In terms of the Leading Edge work I was able to look at the information in more depth, however I felt my final analysis of the statistics/results could have been in more detail; considering the amount of time it took to analyse all of the data from the website in particular. • This could be a possible future extension task, to look at the number of responses against the relevance of the response. • I think an interesting further study would be to analyse the effects particular behaviour management techniques have upon the staff using them, as initial research suggests that shouting (in an aggressive context) can have many negative effects on stress levels and overall health.
Bibliography and research reference • http://www.developments.org.uk/articles/at-school-in-somalia/ no shouting policy – somalia • http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4080354,00.html no shouting policy – south of England • http://www.respectinschools.co.uk/dayone/index.asp instilling respect in schools without shouting • http://www.helium.com/tm/656247/fashioned-western-junior-girls personal clashes • http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/t/119005.aspx?PageIndex=19#1861787 • http://community.tes.co.uk/forums/t/119006.aspx?PageIndex=5#279646 Research blogs on TES forum
