canadian journal of school psychology 2014-akseer-100-15

http://cjs.sagepub.com/School PsychologyCanadian Journal of

http://cjs.sagepub.com/content/29/2/100The online version of this article can be found at:

DOI: 10.1177/0829573514521992

February 2014 2014 29: 100 originally published online 25Canadian Journal of School Psychology

Tabasum Akseer, Sandra L. Bosacki, Linda Rose-Krasnor and Robert J. Coplanin Shy Girls and Boys in the Classroom

Canadian Elementary School Teachers' Perceptions of Gender Differences

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Canadian Association of School Psychologists

can be found at:Canadian Journal of School PsychologyAdditional services and information for

http://cjs.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

http://cjs.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:

http://cjs.sagepub.com/content/29/2/100.refs.htmlCitations:

at Universitas Pendidikan Indone on June 23, 2014cjs.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Universitas Pendidikan Indone on June 23, 2014cjs.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://cjs.sagepub.com/

http://cjs.sagepub.com/content/29/2/100

http://www.sagepublications.com

http://cjs.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

http://cjs.sagepub.com/subscriptions

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

http://cjs.sagepub.com/content/29/2/100.refs.html



What is This?

- Feb 25, 2014OnlineFirst Version of Record

- May 8, 2014Version of Record >>

at Universitas Pendidikan Indone on June 23, 2014cjs.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Universitas Pendidikan Indone on June 23, 2014cjs.sagepub.comDownloaded from

http://cjs.sagepub.com/content/29/2/100.full.pdf

http://cjs.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/02/24/0829573514521992.full.pdf

http://online.sagepub.com/site/sphelp/vorhelp.xhtml



Canadian Journal of School Psychology2014, Vol. 29(2) 100 –115

© 2014 SAGE PublicationsReprints and permissions:

sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0829573514521992

cjs.sagepub.com

Article

Canadian Elementary School Teachers’ Perceptions of Gender Differences in Shy Girls and Boys in the Classroom

Tabasum Akseer1, Sandra L. Bosacki2, Linda Rose-Krasnor2, and Robert J. Coplan3

AbstractShyness may play a significant role in children’s socio-emotional and cognitive competence in the classroom. This qualitative study investigated elementary school teachers’ perceptions of the concept of shyness in their students. In particular, we explored teachers’ perceptions regarding the role that gender plays in shy children’s behaviours, and their suggestions for educational strategies for shy girls and boys to improve their socio-communicative competence and socio-emotional literacy. Twelve elementary school teachers (10 female, 2 male) participated in interviews about their thoughts/beliefs and feelings/attitudes regarding their experiences with shy girls and boys in the classroom. Overall, findings point to differences in teachers’ perceptions of shyness in boys and girls in the classroom, and suggest that some teachers perceive that shyness may be particularly problematic for boys. Findings are discussed in terms of inclusive and holistic educational programs that promote emotional and social competence among all children.

RésuméLa timidité peut affecter significativement la compétence socioémotionnelle et cognitive des enfants en classe. Cette étude qualitative porte sur les différentes perceptions que

1Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada2Brock University, St. Catharines, Ontario, Canada3Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Corresponding Author:Tabasum Akseer, Cultural Studies Program, Queen’s University, 99 University Ave, Kingston, Ontario, K7L 3N6, Canada. Email: [email protected]

521992 CJSXXX10.1177/0829573514521992Canadian Journal of School PsychologyAkseer et al.research-article2014

at Universitas Pendidikan Indone on June 23, 2014cjs.sagepub.comDownloaded from


Akseer et al. 101

les enseignants d'école primaire ont au sujet de la timidité chez leurs élèves. Plus particulièrement, nous avons étudié leurs perceptions à propos de l'effet du genre sur les comportements d'enfants timides, et leurs suggestions de stratégies éducatives visant de jeunes garçons et filles timides dans le but d'améliorer leur compétence socio-communicative et leur littéracie socio-émotionnelle. Douze enseignants d'école primaire (10 femmes, 2 hommes) ont participé à des entrevues portant sur leurs pensées et croyances, ainsi que sur leurs sentiments et attitudes par rapport à leurs expériences avec des élèves timides (garçons et filles) en classe. Globalement, les résultats indiquent une différence de perception de la part des enseignants selon le genre de leurs élèves, et suggèrent que certains enseignants perçoivent la timidité comme étant particulièrement un problème chez les garçons. Ces résultats sont analysés en termes de programmes éducatifs inclusifs et holistiques faisant la promotion de la compétence émotionnelle et sociale pour tous les enfants.

Keywordsshyness, gender differences, teachers’ perceptions, elementary school

Shy children tend to be hesitant, wary, anxious, and self-consciousness in social con-texts and situations of perceived social evaluation (Crozier, 1995). Results from a growing number of studies indicate that shyness may play a significant role in both children’s socio-emotional and cognitive competencies within the classroom (Coplan, Arbeau, & Armer, 2008; Coplan & Weeks, 2009; Harrist, Zaia, Bates, Dodge, & Pettit, 1997; Hughes & Coplan, 2010). For example, past research suggests that a child labeled as shy or socially withdrawn may have difficulty forming adaptive, prosocial peer relationships and may experience negative emotions such as anxiety and loneli-ness (Rubin, Coplan, & Bowker, 2009). Given past research that suggests teachers and teacher–child relationships play a crucial role in the co-construction of children’s gen-der role socialization and their social-cognitive and linguistic abilities (e.g., Birch & Ladd, 1997; Hamre & Pianta, 2001; Howes, Phillipsen, & Peisner-Feinberg, 2000; Pianta & Stuhlman, 2004), surprisingly few studies have investigated teachers’ per-ceptions of how gender may affect shy children’s academic and social-emotional com-petencies and behaviours within the classroom (Arbeau & Coplan, 2007). Accordingly, the goal of the present study was to investigate elementary school teachers’ percep-tions of the concept of shyness in their students.

Shyness in Childhood

Past research has suggested that childhood shyness may be associated with various detriments and difficulties in and across the life span (see Rubin et al., 2009, for a recent review). For example, shyness has been related to poor quality social interac-tions, a lack of competence, and fewer prosocial behaviours (Coplan, Rubin, Fox,



102 Canadian Journal of School Psychology 29(2)

Calkins, & Stewart, 1994; Evans, 1987; Schneider, Younger, Smith, & Freeman, 1998; Stewart & Rubin, 1995); lower self-esteem; a weaker ability to use expressive and receptive vocabulary (Bzdyra, Evans, Spooner, 2002; Crozier & Hostettler, 2003; Evans, 1996; Spere, Schmidt, Theall-Honey, & Martin-Chang, 2004); an increased sensitivity to less positive classroom climates (Bruner, 1996; Gazelle, 2006); and socio-emotional and peer relationship difficulties at school (e.g., Coplan et al., 2008). Indeed, across the life span, shyness is associated with negative social and emotional outcomes such as social anxiety, internalizing difficulties, depression, and vascular illnesses (Bell et al., 1993; Biederman et al., 2001; Coplan, Prakash, O’Neil, & Armer, 2004; Morison & Masten, 1991; Stevenson-Hinde & Glover, 1996, Goodwin, Fergusson, & Horwood, 2004). Rubin (1998) stated that throughout the Western soci-ety, regardless of gender, shyness and socially withdrawn behaviour are considered to be forms of social deviance, whereas sociability is highly valued.

Shyness is also a precursor to children experiencing problems with different aspects of school adjustment, such as difficulties in the formation of positive teacher–child relationships (e.g., Arbeau, Coplan, & Weeks, 2010; Rydell, Bohlin, & Thorell, 2005). Furthermore, teachers and teachers’ perceptions of shy children play a significant role in shy children’s educational experiences such as academic performance and social activity in the classroom (Coplan, Arbeau & Armer, 2008; Bosacki, Coplan, Rose-Krasnor, & Hughes, 2011; Coplan, Hughes, Bosacki, & Rose-Krasnor, 2011) also reported that teachers’ perception of shyness incorporates complex social and psycho-logical factors. Findings from this study suggest a complex and reciprocal relation may exist between children’s classroom experiences and teachers’ perceptions of shy-ness. For example, teachers reported that children’s experience with shyness affected the children’s sense of self and confidence when interacting with their peers.

Gender-Related Differences in Shyness

The role of gender in children’s academic and social-emotional competencies has been found by past research to play a role in shy children’s classroom experiences. To date, current research on gender differences in shyness is somewhat inconsistent. For exam-ple, some researchers have found that elementary school-aged girls rate themselves as significantly more shy than do boys (e.g., Crozier, 1995; Dell’Osso et al., 2003; Mallet & Rodriguez-Tome, 1999; Spooner, Evans, & Santos, 2005). In contrast, other studies have found that boys rate themselves as more shy than girls (9-12 years; for example, Eisenberg, Shepard, Fabes, Murphy, & Guthrie, 1998; Kupfer, Detre, & Korol, 1979; Lemerise, 1997; Rubin, Chen, & Hymel, 1993; Smith, 1974). However, other research-ers have found no gender differences in teacher, parent, or peer reports of shyness (e.g., Rubin et al., 1993; Stevenson-Hinde & Glover, 1996).

Gender stereotypes, such as the idea that shyness appears to be less socially accept-able for boys than for girls, may have implications for how girls and boys behave within the classroom (Rubin et al., 2009; Sadker & Sadker, 1994). Such findings should be considered with societal stereotypic gender-role expectations in mind, in



Akseer et al. 103

which some may perceive shyness to be more “feminine” and thus some adults may accept and reward shyness in girls as opposed to in boys (Bosacki, 2008). In their review of the literature, Rubin and colleagues (2009) concluded that shy boys tend to experience more difficulties than do shy girls. There is also evidence that gender might account for differences in the developmental outcomes of shy boys versus shy girls. If shyness in boys is socially unaccepted, boys may not be receiving necessary support to offset their shyness in the classroom. On the other hand, if shyness in girls is more acceptable, girls may receive more attention and support in reducing shyness than do shy boys. Also, there is evidence to suggest that parents (Radke-Yarrow, Richters, & Wilson, 1988) and peers (e.g., Gazelle & Ladd, 2003) respond more negatively to shy boys than to shy girls—but these differences have not been found for teachers (e.g., Arbeau & Coplan, 2007).

The Present Study

The present study is grounded in psycho-cultural theories of self-systems and social behaviour that promote psychological and individual social interactions in develop-ment (Bussey & Bandura, 1999; Maccoby, 1998; Rubin & Rose-Krasnor, 1992). Consequently, the purpose of this study was to investigate how elementary school teachers perceive and understand the concept of shyness. We focused on teacher per-ceptions of gender differences in shyness (i.e., whether or not girls and boys exhibit shyness differently; whether shyness is more problematic for boys or girls; and whether teachers should address shyness differently in boys and girls. Teachers’ perceptions of the implications of shyness for shy children’s mental health, motivations, emotions, and socio-communicative competence, and educational practices will also be studied. Furthermore, our study investigated teachers’ suggestions for educational strategies for girls and boys to improve their socio-communicative competence and socio-emo-tional literacy.

Method

In this qualitative study, we interviewed 12 teachers about their thoughts/beliefs, feelings/attitudes, and perceptions about experiences with shy girls and boys in the classroom. Our semi-structured interviews were conducted over the telephone, later transcribed and coded for significant and recurring themes.

Participants

Drawing from a larger on-line study of elementary school teachers’ perceptions of shyness within the classroom (see Bosacki et al., 2011; Coplan et al., 2011), partici-pants who volunteered to be interviewed were contacted by email. Participants were selected based on the criteria that they have had at least 2 years of experience teaching elementary and middle school children. Teachers were asked to respond to researchers via email if they were interested in being interviewed. Interviews from 12 teachers




(Gr. K-6, 10 female, 2 male) located throughout Canada were conducted and analyzed. Participants received a book gift certificate in appreciation for their contribution to the study. Ethical clearance was obtained from the participating universities, as well as permission from relevant school board officials and specific school principals.

Teacher Interviews

Data were collected through telephone interviews comprising 19 questions on teach-ers’ perceptions of shyness and gender differences. The following four questions were used for this report: (a) Do you think that girls are more shy than boys or vice versa? Why/why not? (2) Do girls show shyness in different ways than boys do? If so, please explain how they are different? (3) Is shyness more or less of a problem for girls or boys? (4) Do you think teachers should try to help shy boys and girls in different ways? If so, what are the differences?

The interviews were transcribed and verified through the process of member check-ing, in which participants were given a copy of their transcript to check for quality and accuracy. This process improves the credibility of the data gathered (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). We used qualitative data analysis techniques, which included content analysis in which common codes and ideas that emerged from the data regarding shyness and gender were recorded. According to Glesne (1999), data analysis is the process of systematically organizing data into themes, while at the same time bringing meaning to the different themes so that they can tell a coherent story that can be communicated to others. Researchers, such as Creswell (1998), stress the importance of developing a familiarity with the data during this process. As such, once interviews were tran-scribed, we carefully read all transcripts before beginning the coding process.

Reliability coding was also used as a measure to ensure accuracy, as well as offer justification for relevant themes and codes. Two researchers coded all transcripts inde-pendently and then discussed the codes. These codes were co-created with 98% agree-ment. Differences in coding were negotiated through discussion.

Results

The following section will be guided by the main themes in response to the four inter-view questions outlined earlier.

Gender Differences in Teachers’ Shyness Perceptions

As Table 1 illustrates, when asked whether girls were more shy than boys, or vice versa, most teachers (58%; 7/12) indicated that shyness is equally problematic for boys and girls. Two teachers (17%; 2/12) stated that some boys might experience more social problems as they are expected to be more extroverted than girls. One female teacher responded that shy girls were more emotionally aware and able to communi-cate better with their peers than were shy boys. Interestingly, two other teachers (one male and one female) indicated that their gender as a teacher played a role in the



Akseer et al. 105

shyness of opposite-gendered children in their classes. A male teacher stated that “being a man . . . I have a few cases where we determine that little girls who were shy, they were shy only because they were not used to being around guys.” The gender of the teacher was also evident for a female teacher, who similarly attributed the shyness of boys in her class to her gender.

Gender Differences in Children’s Shyness and Behaviour

When asked if shyness was demonstrated differently in boys and girls, all but one of the teachers (92%; 11/12) stated that there were no differences (see Table 1). Rather, four teachers reported the common behaviours of shy boys and girls, such as avoiding eye contact, staring at hands, hesitancy and overall “quietness.” Two teachers (a female Grade 4/5 teacher and a male Kindergarten teacher) stated that the demonstra-tion of shyness was dependent on the emotional vulnerability of children. The male Kindergarten teacher reflected on the extreme behaviours of shy boys and girls, for

Table 1. Summary of Gender Differences in Teachers’ Perceptions of Shyness.

Interview questions Main themesFrequency of

teacher responses

Do you think that girls are more shy than boys or vice versa? Why/why not?

Shyness is equally problematic for boys and girls

58%; 7/12

Some boys might experience more social problems as they are expected to be more extroverted than girls

17%; 2/12

Teacher's gender plays role in the shyness of opposite-gendered children in their classes

17%; 2/12

Do girls show shyness in different ways than boys do? If not, please explain how they are different?

No differences 92%; 11/12Common behaviours of shy boys and girls

(e.g., avoiding eye contact, staring at hands, hesitancy, and overall “quietness”)

4/12; 33%

Is shyness more or less of a problem for girls or for boys?

Compared with girls, shyness may have the possibility to become more problematic for boys

50%: 6/12

More problematic for girls 4/12; 33%Reference to gender-role stereotypes and

social expectations67%; 8/12

Do you think teachers should try to help shy boys and girls in different ways? If so, what are the differences?

Teachers responded to the question of whether they should help shy boys and girls in different ways

83%; 10/12

Teachers should help shy boys and girls equally,

60%; 6/10

Importance of creating a comfortable psychologically and emotionally safe classroom atmosphere or climate

80%; 8/10




example, that boys become more “aggressive” when they are shy, to the point where they start “pushing.” At the same time, with girls, “if they get really shy, they’d just literally cry.”

Shyness as a Problem for Girls and Boys

Table 1 shows that when asked if shyness was more of a problem for boys or girls, the participants’ responses reflected a variety of perspectives on the role gender plays in shy children’s educational experiences. For example, half of the participants (50%) indicated that compared with girls, shyness may have the potential to become more problematic for boys; 33% indicated it was more problematic for girls, whereas the remaining participants (17%) were undecided. The majority of teachers (67%, 8/12) alluded to gender-role stereotypes and social expectations before responding whether or not shyness was more of a problem for boys or girls. Some teachers referred to the effects of shyness on participation in sports activities for boys. One particular female teaching a class with a combination of Grades 3 and 4 explained shyness is more prob-lematic for boys

because . . . some of the boys tend to want to get into sports, and if you’re shy it’s really hard to make yourself get out there with the rest of the group and participate . . . it might be a little harder for boys that are shy especially in group situations like team sports.

Indeed, the majority of teachers reported the issue of gender stereotypes in their responses. A female Grade 2 teacher stated that shyness was more difficult for boys to overcome because “boys are stereotypically assumed to be aggressive, they’re expected to be a little bit gregarious or outgoing.” Another female Grade 8 teacher echoed a similar response and stated that shyness was more problematic for boys as people

expect boys to be more aggressive than girls. So I think we’re more comfortable with girls being shy because that’s more “lady-like” whereas boys are supposed to be more aggressive and we expect boys to be more aggressive and assertive, unfortunately.

Regarding gender-role stereotypes and societal expectations, some participants stated that the societal expectations may help to determine how cultural values and social cultural norms influence shyness and gender. For example, one female Grade 7/8 teacher stated,

society expects [boys] not to be shy . . . but I think when kids are that shy, they both suffer with it . . . it’s a problem for both. I think society doesn’t accept shy boys as well, for girls I sort of think society ‘oh you’re cute’. Where if a boy’s shy, I think people are ‘oh toughen up’ but I think they both suffer.

Other teachers too shared similar concerns about the detrimental effects that soci-etal and gender-role expectations have on shy children and their behaviours in the classroom.



Akseer et al. 107

Shyness and Teacher Intervention Strategies

Eighty-three percent (10/12) of teachers responded to the question of whether or not they should help shy boys and girls in different ways. Of the 10 teachers who responded, 60% (6/10) stated that teachers should help shy boys and girls equally, while the remaining 4 teachers stated that teachers should consider a child’s gender when addressing shyness in the classroom. The two teachers who did not respond to this question were indecisive and uncertain in their responses. These two teachers agreed that although shyness was an individual characteristic, teachers should treat each stu-dent individually, yet still based their actions on the child’s gender. For example, a female Grade 4 teacher stated that teachers “should help different students differently . . . there’s ways that would be generally more suitable towards some girls, and would generally more suitable towards some boys. No hard fast rules about boys and girls. It’s the individual student, really.” In contrast to the majority of teachers, these two teachers concluded that shyness should be treated on an individual basis and that each child is unique.

Teachers also highlighted the importance of building and encouraging a comfort-able environment within the classroom to engage boys and girls. For example, a female Grade 8 teacher stated that with girls specifically, “you usually have to spend a little bit more time with them in terms of building trust.” Another female Grade 8 teacher stated that teachers should engage students to “shine at something that they feel com-fortable doing.” One male Kindergarten teacher referred to gender-role stereotypes and commented that it would be easier to help the girls than the boys, as it is easier to use humour and make them laugh, in turn allowing them to relax, “[shyness] is less of a problem for girls. Because being a guy, little girls react different to me than little boys do. For me, little girls, I can make them laugh and easier to make them relax.”

Finally, the importance of creating a comfortable psychologically and emotionally safe classroom atmosphere or climate was a common theme among the majority of teachers (80%). The majority of the teachers’ comments focused on the description of instructional strategies to create a positive and psychologically comfortable classroom environment through the use of inclusive and inviting classroom practices aimed to help shy boys and girls develop competence and confidence.

Discussion

The goal of the current study was to explore gender differences in teachers’ percep-tions of shyness in their classrooms. Overall results indicated that some gender differ-ences exist in teachers’ perceptions. Our discussion will be guided by the main themes in response to the four research questions and discussed within the current literature on shyness in children. Educational implications also will be discussed.

Gender Differences in Shyness

Overall, we reported differences in teacher perceptions of shyness in boys and girls in the elementary classroom and our results suggested that shyness may be viewed by




some teachers as possibly more emotionally and socially challenging for boys than girls in this context. For example, results from this study support the recent research of Coplan and colleagues (e.g., Arbeau et al., 2010; Coplan, Closson, et al., 2007), who found that shyness in Grade 1 boys was more strongly related to feelings of loneliness than shyness in girls. Similarly, the present data support past research that suggests that shy boys may be more likely to experience social and emotional difficulties than do shy girls (Rubin et al., 2009). Furthermore, our results appear to be congruent with findings by Sadker and Sadker (1994), who also discussed the stereotype that shyness appears to be less socially acceptable for boys than for girls.

Furthermore, researchers have suggested that from childhood through adolescence, shy boys may be at a greater risk for maladaptive outcomes than are shy girls (e.g., Coplan et al., 2004; Stevenson-Hinde & Glover, 1996). For example, given that ste-reotypes of gender-role expectations that promote males as more vocal and extro-verted as compared with females (Fine, 2010; Maccoby, 1998), teachers need to make specific efforts to provide a psychologically safe learning community for shy boys and girls to feel comfortable and develop positive social-communicative competence.

Teachers and Shy Children Within the Classroom

We need to consider the important role that parents, teachers, and all those who work with children play in the creation and perpetuation of possibly negative gender-role stereotypes of shy boys and girls. As many educators suggest (Bruner, 1996; Noddings, 2012), the focus of educational programs should be on the promotion of social and emotional well-being of children. Regarding the role of parents in the creation of a negative stereotype of shyness and boys, Simpson and Stevenson-Hinde (1985) reported that mothers respond more negatively toward shy boys than they do toward shy girls. Future research needs to explore the possible explanations of how adults learn such potentially damaging stereotypes. For example, future studies could explore both mothers’ and fathers’ perceptions of shy children at home and school.

As reflected in the teachers’ voices presented in this study, it is important that these adults (parents, teachers) create a psychologically and emotionally safe, respectful and caring learning community that can promote a sense of acceptance and connection with authority figures who provide caring and positive evaluative feedback in a mind-ful and caring way (e.g., Bosacki, 2008; Noddings, 2002, 2012). As Gazelle (2006) noted, teachers have a significant role in the development of a child’s well-being in the classroom, as teachers could help to co-create with their students a psychologically inviting and inclusive classroom. Moreover, as Noddings (2012) suggested, a caring, compassionate, and peaceful classroom may help anxiously withdrawn children to feel comfortable enough to share their thoughts and emotions with others.

Past research found that social and emotional development of shy children may be challenged and perhaps in some way impeded (McHolm, Cunningham, & Vanier, 2005; Rubin et al., 2009). Exploring teachers’ perceptions of gender differences, as well as investigating their roles in facilitating shy girls’ and boys’ socio-emotional functioning and academic success, is integral for understanding the socio-emotional development of children. As research findings in this current study indicate, teachers’



Akseer et al. 109

perceptions of shyness are an important area of inquiry to explore not only to under-stand shy behaviour but also for identifying practices teachers are using to support these children. To strengthen the connection between theory and practice further and to help ameliorate the detrimental effects of social withdrawal or shyness, more atten-tion should be given to the voices and practices of teacher researchers.

Teachers’ Perceptions of Shyness and Teacher–Child Relationships

This study adds to extensive literature supporting the development of positive teacher–child relations in children’s school adjustment and overcoming shyness (e.g., Arbeau et al., 2010; Birch & Ladd, 1997; Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Birch and Ladd (1997) found that shy children who have a closer relationship with their teachers (that is, children who frequently interact with and bond with their teachers) can potentially use their teachers as a “secure base” to help them in the classroom. Teachers in our study too discussed that building a positive relationship with shy students is beneficial to students as it helps these children to become more vocal and active in the classes. As teachers in our study indicated, and as past research also suggests, such a relationship may assist in successfully adjusting to school (Arbeau et al., 2010). However, this relationship should be well-balanced and shy children must not be too dependent on teachers, that is, children who rely too heavily on their teachers for emotional and social support in the classroom.

While it is important for teachers to build positive relationships with shy children, it must not be the only form of social interaction the children experience. Arbeau et al. (2010) postulated that children who are too dependent on their teachers may miss out on opportunities to interact with their classmates. There is also the risk that chil-dren who are too dependent on teachers for social interaction will be viewed by their peers are strange or being the “teachers’ pet,” which may further alienate shy children from their classmates (Arbeau et al., 2010, p. 266). Conversely, some researchers suggest that the close relationship with teachers and the ongoing development of a “safe base” with teachers can lead to increased opportunities for social interaction (Baker, 2006; Birch & Ladd, 1997; Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Coplan, Girardi, Findlay, and Frohlick (2007) suggested that interaction with teachers will make shy children less anxious at school, which thus could enable them to be a more attractive playmate and potential friend for peers. For example, some teachers have implemented strate-gies that encourage shy children to develop their social skills by pairing up a shy child with a peer who is known to be more socially skilled as a peer “coach” or “social skills buddy” to help their peer who struggles with social interactions (Roorda, Koomen, Thijs, & Oort, 2013).

Assessment of Shyness in the Classroom

Past research suggests that some teachers spend a significant amount of time with children who are perceived to be shy or “anxious-asocial” (Arbeau et al., 2010; Birch & Ladd, 1997) and thus may make attempts at encouraging more social interaction in




these children (Coplan & Prakash, 2003). Evidence from studies such as that by Evans and Bienert (1992) supports the recommendation that teachers avoid asking shy chil-dren too many general questions; rather the teachers should try to elicit student response by asking questions that require students to respond with personalized responses (for example, “What is your favourite toy to play with at home?”). Evans (2001) suggested that teachers try to engage shy children when their classmates are not nearby. In this way, children will be likely to be comfortable talking about their per-sonal lives (their lives outside of the classroom, in the playground or at home, their relationships with peers, friends, and family members). However, at the same time, it is necessary for teachers to consider that those children whose shyness has gone unrec-ognized may not be receiving support and could potentially be at risk for even lower self-esteem and academic competence (Spooner et al., 2005).

The ability to accurately recognize signs of social and emotional challenges in shy children is important as most research on children’s shyness is based predominantly on parents’, teachers', or observers’ assessments of shy children (Spooner et al., 2005). As such, teachers need to ensure that their interpretations of shyness are ade-quate and relevant, and reflect children’s self-assessments of shyness. For example, if a child is not participating in Math class, it may not be because the child does not understand the material, rather because the child is shy. Children whose shyness is unrecognized or perceived as academic incompetence may not receive vital support, which may lead to developing negative self-thoughts and feelings regarding their perceived academic competence (Spooner et al., 2005). Those shy children who are accurately identified and served by teachers and parents may receive valuable aca-demic and social support from the teacher, whereas those students whose shyness is unrecognized likely will not.

Given that understanding and interpreting the shyness of socially child’s experi-ence as complex and the behaviours as often subtle and easy to miss, teachers also need to work with parents to validate the experiences of shy children. For example, Alm and Lindberg (1999) suggested that teacher, parent, and observer reports may not always take into consideration the unobservable emotional and cognitive components of social withdrawal or shyness such as not participating in class, or not expressing oneself verbally. Thus, future research should investigate the partnership between teachers and parents as they work with shy children to increase children’s social com-munication and emotional competence within the home and classroom.

To apply the growing literature on relevant and accurate teacher practices to the practice (Arbeau & Coplan, 2007; Coplan et al., 2011), teacher education programs should include more explicit instruction to help teachers to learn how to recognize the social and emotional difficulties of children who may experience shyness and social anxiety. Hughes and Coplan (2010) also pointed to the need for increased diverse assessment protocols for assessing academic achievement and competence so that shy children’s experiences are not consistently interpreted by the teachers as signs of social withdrawal or difficulty with social interactions. These researchers also high-lighted the importance of exploring longitudinal associations between shyness and academic achievement. Factors such as family characteristics (e.g., parenting style,



Akseer et al. 111

sibling influences) and extra-familial experiences (e.g., teacher-child experiences) have been found to moderate the relations between children’s shyness and socio-emo-tional (Arbeau et al., 2010; Coplan et al., 2008; Coplan & Weeks, 2009).

As the present study demonstrates, shyness is viewed as more problematic for boys than for girls, especially boys who are not identified as shy and thus may not receive adequate attention and support from teachers. From a holistic perspective, teachers need to address shy children individually and consider the children’s gender in relation to other factors such as their families, social and cultural contexts. Thus, effective intervention with shy boys and girls; must involve trusting relationships among chil-dren, teachers, and parents so that shy behaviour is minimalized by adolescence. As Coplan et al. (2008) claimed, teachers and their perceptions of shy children play a significant role in shy children’s educational experiences in the classroom and research needs to be continued within the Canadian educational context.

Limitations and Future Directions

A limitation to this study is the lack of a diverse sample size which could have helped to provide more insight into possible gender differences in children’s shyness. Another limitation is the lack of a gender balance in teachers, future studies should consider an equal number of males and females. A larger sample size would have provided more power to detect potential relations between gender, shyness, and teacher perceptions. In addition, given that this research was based on teachers’ perceptions as obtained through telephone interviews, some teachers’ responses may have been biased as some participants may have responded in a socially desirable way. Future research studies should use multiple methods of data collection, such as interviews with teach-ers, parents, and children as well as teacher and parent reports. In addition, partner-ships between clinical and educational researchers would help to explore the reasons why some children choose to withdraw socially and remain silent (Dell’Osso et al., 2003). Findings from the current study can help to develop ameliorative, if not preven-tative, interventions for these children, including educational strategies such as pro-viding children opportunities to perform and to participate in class (Bosacki, 2008; Noddings, 2012). Overall, this study addresses some of the challenges and benefits experienced by some teachers’ experiences through their interaction with shy children in the elementary school classroom. Through the description of teachers’ experiences, this study aims to encourage current and future teachers to incorporate inclusive and developmentally appropriate educational strategies and practices within their class-rooms to help shy children develop a positive sense of self and communicate effec-tively with their peers.

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge the teachers and school boards for participating in our research study, as well as all other research assistants (Kamilla Akseer, Felicia Tan, Cynthia Marques, and Kathleen Hughes) who worked on the research project. Thanks also to the Spencer Foundation for providing support for the project.




Authors’ Note

Portions of this article were presented at the Development 2010 Conference at Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, May, 2010.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research and/or author-ship of this article: This research was supported by a grant from “The Spencer Foundation” awarded to Sandra L. Bosacki, Linda Rose-Krasnor and Robert Coplan.

References

Alm, C., & Lindberg, E. (1999). Attributions of shyness-resembling behaviors by shy and non-shy individuals. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 575-585.

Arbeau, K. A., & Coplan, R. J. (2007). Kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and responses to hypo-thetical prosocial, asocial, and antisocial children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 53, 291-318.

Arbeau, K. A., Coplan, R. J., & Weeks, M. (2010). Shyness, teacher-child relationships, and socioemotional adjustment in grade 1. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34, 259-269.

Baker, J. A. (2006). Contributions of teacher-child relationships to positive school adjustment during elementary school. Journal of School Psychology, 44, 211-229.

Bell, I. R., Martino, G. M., Meredith, K. E., Schwartz, G. E., Siani, M. W., & Morrow, F. D. (1993). Vascular disease risk factors, urinary free cortisol, and health histories in older adults: Shyness and gender interactions. Biological Psychology, 35, 37-49.

Biederman, J., Hirshfeld-Becker, D. R., Rosenbaum, J. R., Herot, C., Friedman, D., . . . Faraone, S. V. (2001). Further evidence of association between behavioral inhibition and social anxi-ety in children. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158, 1673-1679.

Birch, S. H., & Ladd, G. W. (1997). The teacher-child relationship and children’s early school adjustment. Journal of School Psychology, 35, 61-79.

Bosacki, S. L. (2008). Children’s emotional lives: Sensitive shadows in the classroom. New York, NY: Peter Lang.

Bosacki, S. L., Coplan, R. J., Rose-Krasnor, L., & Hughes, K. (2011). Elementary school teach-ers’ reflections on shy children in the classroom. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 57, 273-287.

Bruner, J. (1996). The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Bussey, K., & Bandura, A. (1999). Social cognitive theory of gender development and differen-

tiation. Psychological Review, 106, 676-713.Bzdyra, R., Evans, M. A., & Spooner, A. L. (2002, August). The relationship between shyness

and self-determination in middle childhood. Poster presented at the Biennial Meeting of International Society for the Study of Behavioural Development, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.

Coplan, R. J., Arbeau, K. A., & Armer, M. (2008). “Don’t fret, Be supportive!” Maternal char-acteristics linking child shyness to psychosocial and school adjustment in kindergarten. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36, 359-371.



Akseer et al. 113

Coplan, R. J., Closson, L., & Arbeau, K. (2007). Gender differences in the behavioral associates of loneliness and social dissatisfaction in kindergarten [Special Issue on Preschool Mental Health]. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48, 988-995.

Coplan, R. J., Girardi, A., Findlay, L. C., & Frohlick, S. L. (2007). Understanding solitude: Young children’s attitudes and responses towards hypothetical socially-withdrawn peers. Social Development, 16, 390-409.

Coplan, R. J., Hughes, K., Bosacki, S., & Rose-Krasnor, L. (2011). Is silence golden? Elementary school teachers’ strategies and beliefs towards hypothetical shy/quiet and talkative/exuber-ant children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103, 939-951.

Coplan, R. J., & Prakash, K. (2003). Spending time with teacher: Characteristics of preschoolers who frequently elicit versus initiate interactions with teachers. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 143-158.

Coplan, R. J., Prakash, K., O’Neil, K., & Armer, M. (2004). Do you ‘want’ to play? Distinguishing between conflicted shyness and social disinterest in early childhood. Developmental Psychology, 40, 244-258.

Coplan, R. J., Rubin, K. H., Fox, N. A., Calkins, S. D., & Stewart, S. L. (1994). Being alone, playing alone, and acting alone: Distinguishing among reticence, and passive- and active-solitude in young children. Child Development, 65, 129-138.

Coplan, R. J., & Weeks, M. (2009). Shy and soft-spoken? Shyness, pragmatic language, and socio-emotional adjustment in early childhood. Journal of Infant and Child Development, 18, 234-254.

Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five tradi-tions. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Crozier, W. R. (1995). Shyness and self-esteem in middle childhood. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 65, 85-95.

Crozier, W. R., & Hostettler, K. (2003). The influence of shyness on children's test perfor-mance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 73, 317-328.

Dell’Osso, L., Rucci, P., Ducci, F., Ciapparelli, A., Vivarelli, L., Carlini, M., . . . Cassano, G. B. (2003). Social anxiety spectrum. European Archives of Psychiatry & Clinical Neuroscience, 253, 286-291.

Eisenberg, N., Shepard, S. A., Fabes, R. A., Murphy, B. C., & Guthrie, I. K. (1998). Shyness and children's emotionality, regulation, and coping: Contemporaneous, longitudinal, and across-context relations. Child Development, 69, 767-790.

Evans, M. A. (1987). Discourse characteristics of reticent children. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 171-184.

Evans, M. A. (1996). Reticent primary grade children and their more talkative peers: Verbal, nonverbal, and self-concept characteristics. Journal of Educational Psychology, 88, 739-749.

Evans, M. A. (2001). Shyness in the classroom and home. In W. R. Crozier & L. E. Alden (Eds.), International handbook of social anxiety: Concepts, research and interventions relating to the self and shyness (pp. 159-183). Westport, CT: Wiley.

Evans, M. A., & Bienert, H. (1992). Control and paradox in teacher conversations with shy children. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 24, 502-516.

Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of gender: How our minds, society and neurosexism create differ-ence. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.

Gazelle, H. (2006). Class climate moderates peer relations and emotional adjustment in children with an early history of anxious solitude: A child & environment model. Developmental Psychology, 42, 1179-1192.




Gazelle, H., & Ladd, G. W. (2003). Anxious solitude and peer exclusion: A diathesis-stress model of internalizing trajectories in childhood. Child Development, 74, 257-278.

Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (2nd ed.). Don Mills, Ontario, Canada: Longman.

Goodwin, R. D., Fergusson, D. M., & Horwood, L. J. (2004). Early anxious/withdrawn behaviours predict later internalizing disorders. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 874-883.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children’s school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development, 72, 625-638.

Harrist, A. W., Zaia, A. F., Bates, J. E., Dodge, K. A., & Pettit, G. S. (1997). Subtypes of social withdrawal in early childhood: Sociometric status and social-cognitive differences across four years. Child Development, 68, 278-294.

Howes, C., Phillipsen, L. C., & Peisner-Feinberg, E. (2000). The consistency of perceived teacher-child relationships between preschool and kindergarten. Journal of School Psychology, 38, 113-132.

Hughes, K., & Coplan, R. (2010). Exploring processes linking shyness and academic achieve-ment in childhood. Social Psychology Quarterly, 25, 213-222.

Kupfer, D. J., Detre, T., & Korol, J. (1979). Deviant behavior patterns in school children: Application of KDS-14. Psychological Reports, 35, 183-191.

Lemerise, E. A. (1997). Patterns of peer acceptance, social status, and social reputation in mixed-age preschool and primary classrooms. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 43, 199-218.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Maccoby, E. (1998). The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Cambridge, MA:

Harvard University Press.Mallet, P., & Rodriguez-Tome, G. (1999). Social anxiety with peers in 9- to 14- year-olds:

Developmental process and relation with self-consciousness and perceived peer accep-tance. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 14, 387-402.

McHolm, A., Cunningham, C., & Vanier, M. (2005). Helping your child with selective mutism: Practical steps to overcome a fear of speaking. Oakland, CA: New Harbinger.

Morison, P., & Masten, A. S. (1991). Peer reputation in middle childhood as a predictor of adap-tation in adolescence: A seven-year follow-up. Child Development, 62, 991-1007.

Noddings, N. (2002). Educating moral people: A caring alternative to character education. London, England: Teachers College Press.

Noddings, N. (2012). Peace education: How we come to love and hate war. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Pianta, R. C., & Stuhlman, M. W. (2004). Teacher-child relationships and children’s success in the first years of school. School Psychology Review, 33, 444-458.

Radke-Yarrow, M., Richters, J., & Wilson, W. E. (1988). Child development in a network of relationships. In R. A. Hinde & J. Stevenson-Hinde (Eds.), Relationships within families (pp. 48-67). Oxford, UK: Clarendon.

Roorda, D., Koomen, H., Thijs, J., & Oort, F. (2013). Changing interactions between teachers and socially inhibited kindergarten children: An interpersonal approach. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 34, 173-184.

Rubin, K. H. (1998). Social and emotional development from a cultural perspective. Developmental Psychology, 34, 611-615.

Rubin, K. H., Chen, X., & Hymel, S. (1993). Socioemotional characteristics of withdrawn and aggressive children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 39, 518-534.

Rubin, K. H., Coplan, R. J., & Bowker, J. (2009). Social withdrawal in childhood. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 1-11.



Akseer et al. 115

Rubin, K. H., & Rose-Krasnor, L. (1992). Interpersonal problem solving. In V. B. Van Hasselt & M. Hersen (Eds.), Handbook of social development (pp. 283-323). New York, NY: Plenum.

Rydell, A. M., Bohlin, G., & Thorell, L. B. (2005). Representations of attachment to parents and shyness as predictors of children’s relationships with teachers and peer competence in preschool. Attachment and Human Development, 7, 187-204.

Sadker, D., & Sadker, M. (1994). Failing at fairness: How our schools cheat girls. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Schneider, B. H., Younger, A. J., Smith, T., & Freeman, P. (1998). A longitudinal exploration of the cross-contextual stability of social withdrawal in early adolescence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 374-396.

Simpson, A. E., & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1985). Temperamental characteristics of three- to four-year-old boys and girls and child-family interactions. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 26, 43-53.

Smith, P. K. (1974). Social and situationai determinants of fear in the playgroup. In M. Lewis & L. A. Rosenblum (Eds.), The origins of fear (pp. 107-129). New York, NY: Wiley.

Spere, K. A., Schmidt, L. A., Theall-Honey, L. A., & Martin-Chang, S. (2004). Expressive and receptive language skills of temperamentally shy preschoolers. Infant and Child Development, 12, 1-11.

Spooner, A. L., Evans, M. A., & Santos, R. (2005). Hidden shyness in children: Discrepancies between self-perceptions and the perceptions of parents and teachers. Merrill Palmer Quarterly, 51, 437-466.

Stevenson-Hinde, J., & Glover, A. (1996). Shy girls and boys: A new look. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 37, 181-187.

Stewart, S. L., & Rubin, K. H. (1995). The social problem-solving skills of anxious-withdrawn children. Development and Psychopathology, 7, 323-336.

Author Biographies

Tabasum Akseer, MEd, is a doctoral candidate at Queen’s University in the Cultural Studies Program. Her areas of interest include national security, citizenship and immigration.

Sandra L. Bosacki, PhD, is professor in the graduate and undergraduate Department of Educational Studies at Brock University. She teaches and conducts research in developmental social cognition and applications to the classroom.

Linda Rose-Krasnor, PhD, is a professor in the Psychology Department at Brock University. She teaches and conducts research in youth engagement and social competence among youth.

Robert J. Coplan, PhD, is a professor in the Psychology Department at Carleton University. He teaches and conducts research in childhood shyness and related social cognitive development.