Chris Esson

Independent Research Project

Student Expectations of Classroom Dynamics

Rationale

In my Diploma sessions I have sat where my students sit and experienced what it is like tosit in a class all day. I realised very quickly how much I normally move while I teach andhow little in comparison students sometimes move. This experience chimed with that ofanother teacher, Alexis Wiggins. In an originally anonymous blog post the American highschool teacher described her experience of shadowing a student for two days. From herposition as a student in the classes she highlighted three recommendations for changes toher own teaching, the first of which was that [s]tudents sit all day, and sitting isexhausting (Wiggins:2014). My discomfort and frustration at my sedentary study periodwas coupled with an awareness of the way in which I worked with my peers, the people Isat next to each class, and how those groupings changed, or did not. The way in which Ibecame more personally aware of the dynamics of the classroom suggested a personaltopic for my Independent Research Project. I have two primary questions: 1) Whatpreferences do students have for the dynamics of their classrooms?; and 2) How do theyfeel about the way in which their classes are currently organised?

In conducting research into language classrooms Van Lier highlights the way in which[i]deals, expectations, and conceptions of the properties that a classroom must possess sothat it can be regarded as an ordinary, good classroom, play an important role indetermining what will happen in the classroom (Van Lier, 1988:81). Similarly, Tudorargues that language teaching is complex in part because of differences in the way inwhich participants perceive the nature and goals of language teaching, and the behavioursand interactional patterns to which these different perceptions give rise (Tudor, 2001:32).What both authors make clear is that the diversity of students' motivations andexpectations play an important part in defining the interactional dynamics of theclassroom. For this reason my research will be focused on gathering student responses toquestions about their expectations of a an ordinary, good classroom.

In his 1987 work Tony Wright makes the claim that [c]lassrooms are usually regarded asvery formal environments, status-marked and asymmetrical (Wright, 1987:114). Whileperhaps I would argue that innovations in approaches to teaching have reduced the

Chris Esson

formality of the classroom these innovations are not universally recognised or implemented,and such an opinion is probably shared by a great many learners and stakeholders inlearning. The layout of classrooms as well as the ways in which teachers and students usethe space will certainly vary, but the perceived status of teachers and the asymmetry ofclassroom relations remain. To what extent teachers are aware of these asymmetries willalso vary, but what is important is how they organise their classes to best benefit theirstudents. Especially in the communicative approach, an approach which informs myteaching and the environment of my school, the dynamics of the classroom are the mediumthrough which communication and opportunities for learning take place. Arnold arguesthat underlying his basic approach to teaching is the assumption that group processes area fundamental factor in most learning contexts and can make all the difference when itcomes to successful learning experiences and outcomes (Arnold, 1999:155). I hope thatquestions for students can making explicit their personal feelings on the classroom and itsorganisation. This will include their position in the classroom and their relations with theirpeers and teachers.

Expanding upon the dynamics of learning groups Arnold argues that the development of agroup is a continuous process (Arnold, 1999:162). This is true not only in the basic senseof rolling enrolment, but also with regards to the changing dynamics of the learners theirprogress, good and bad days, friendships and fallouts. Wright, commenting on the changingrelations of groups of learners, sums up what I feel is most important about theserelations: Quite simply, group activity is dynamic (Wright, 1987:11). This dynamism istwofold: the dynamics of individual lessons and the dynamics of a series of lessons. Myassessment of a student's needs begin as as soon as I ask their name in a new class. I domy best to make judgements about character, educational background, and strengths andweaknesses. These judgements inform my organisation of pair or group work. Often Idevolve at first to simply mixing nationalities. I am aware that I might not move studentsat all through a lessons. I know from experience that if I have not planned specific movesfor the students I may not attempt them. The purpose of this research project is to gatheropinions which make clearer students own feelings on the dynamics of their classrooms.The hope is that equipped with this information I can reflect on the organisationaldynamics of my own classes and work more effectively with students. I am aware that asingle student questionnaire will not provide a dynamic picture of any classroom. To truly

Chris Esson

capture the changing processes of classroom dynamics a piece of action research might bemore effective. However, as an opening insight into this area student's opinions onclassroom dynamics can inform more effective class planning and possible future areas ofresearch.

Tudor argues that the starting point for decision-making in language teaching is an openand constructive understanding of the diversity of perceptions which meet and interact inthe classroom (Tudor, 2001:32-3). A better understanding of these perceptions is theproposed for this research project. There are three main aims to this. By collectingquestionnaire responses from current EFL students

1. What are the expectations for the dynamics of their classrooms that students bringto their classes.

2. What are their feelings about the way in which their classes are currently organised?

Chris Esson

Evaluation

This evaluation will proceed first by briefly describing the questionnaire and then byanalysing the data collected. Second, we will reflect upon the design and usefulness of thequestionnaire and make recommendations for further research. Finally, the most significantfindings and the implications for classroom practice will be discussed.

Data and Analysis

The process of developing the questionnaire began by drafting a number of questions forstudents. The first questions were aimed at collecting basic personal information whichcould put the later responses into context. A series of questions asked respondents toreflect on how they felt in their classroom. The final questions enquired about the ways inwhich teachers organised classroom dynamics and the feelings of respondents in relation tothis. The number of questions was deliberately kept low, just nine, in order to encouragethe maximum number of responses. For the same reason the questions were graded to allowlower level students to respond also. The questionnaire was produced usingSurveyMonkey.com and distributed to students by URL and QR code. Students completedthe questionnaire anonymously online.

Thirty five responses were collected from students of thirteen different nationalities (table1.). Although Saudi, Kuwaiti, South Korean and Italian students made up the majority ofresponses (making up twenty responses altogether), the results from later questions showeddifferences of large enough significance to suggest that this did not skew the data. On theother hand, the respondents were overwhelmingly in their twenties (twenty fiverespondents), meaning that the results that follow should be considered as representative ofa younger generation of learners rather than a broader demographic (table 2.).

The majority of respondents (twenty three) had been at the current language school forbetween 1 and 6 months (table 3.). This suggests that they may have had time to becomeaccustomed to this environment and reflect with some objectivity on it. This is especiallyimportant in relation to the questions that follow.

The first significant finding comes from question four (table 4.). Nearly half of therespondents (seventeen) would describe themselves as only quite comfortable in the firstweek at their current language school. Just under a third (ten) said they were a bit or

Chris Esson

very uncomfortable. The total of thirty five respondents would divide into three classes atmy current school (with a maximum of twelve per class). This means that there is a stronglikelihood that up to four students in each of those classes was a bit or very uncomfortablein their first week.

The second, and possibly most significant finding comes from question five (table 5.). Astrong majority (nineteen) described classes in their current language school as totallydifferent to classes in their home country. A significant number (twelve) said that theywere a bit different, and only five said that they were the same. Considered in light ofthe responses to questions four we can surmise that the transition to a language school inthe UK represent a considerable change accompanied by a potentially uncomfortablechange in circumstances.

Question six and the third part of question seven suggests that most students have a goodrelationship with their classmates (tables 6. and 7.). In contrast to the mostly positivepreference of students to work with their friends, it is interesting to note that students arealmost evenly divided about whether they have a preference over where they sit. Equallymixed, although perhaps more significant when considering seating arrangements, arerespondents' opinions about students they prefer not to work with. The conclusion must bedrawn that nearly 50% of students have negative feelings about working with at least someother members of their class. Nothing in the data collected suggests how many individualsrespondents have negative feelings about. It could be just one or a whole group. However,the mostly positive attitudes towards their classmates expressed in question six suggestthat the number is small. Nevertheless, 50% of students is a significant number, and itmust be up to the teacher to be aware of which students can productively work together,and which cannot.

Question eight shows that students are quite used to being asked to move around in class.Approximately two thirds responding that they change seat, stand up and walk around,with a small drop ion frequency in each case (table 8.). In combination with question nineit can be seen that overall students do not have strong negative or positive feelings aboutthese classroom dynamics (table 9.). The vast majority responded that they felt OKabout these movements, with fewer than six responding that they felt either happy orunhappy.

Chris Esson

Design and Further Research

The rationale for this research project set two questions:

1. What are the expectations for the dynamics of their classrooms that students bringto their classes.

2. What are their feelings about the way in which their classes are currently organised?

The design of the questionnaire was such that while some light can be said to have beenshed upon the second question, there is much more limited information in response to thefirst. Apart from question five on how different students' classes were, there was no furtherenquiry into students' expectations. This is a failing of the questionnaire by the terms ofits intended purpose. The reason for this is the already stated decision in the designprocess to keep the questionnaire short and easy to complete. To collect and compareinformation about both students current and previous classroom experience would haveentailed a doubling of the number of questions.

The failure to answer one of the two questions set, and the trend that is revealed by thedata, suggest a new area for more detailed research. If the majority of students say thattheir current school is a bit or totally different, it would serve an interesting purpose toask in what ways they perceive these differences. A series of questions with answers on asliding scale could be asked, such as how different are seating arrangements?. Furtherquestions could ask about whether students feel positive or negative about thesedifferences.

Further to students perception of the differences in their classes, the discomfort reportedby many in the first week at their current school also suggests an avenue for more research.The wording of the question included only the first week, and the data collected gives noindication of how long any discomfort persisted, or how long it took for students to becomeaccustomed (if indeed they did) to their school. With the majority of respondents havingbeen at their school for between one and six months, this group would be ripe forquestioning about their changing feelings across their course of study. Another interestingidea is a longitudinal study, with students asked to report periodically on their feelingsabout their classes.

Chris Esson

Analysis and Conclusions

In examining Van Lier's has suggestion that classroom dynamics are determined by idealsand expectations, then the question suggests itself what ideals and whose expectations?.Jane Arnold describes the norms regulating classroom life while Tudor describes differentrationalities - the set of rational principles which guide a group's activity. Tudor suggestsfive distinct rationalities (2001:33-39):

1. Student rationalities2. Methodogical rationalities3. Sociocultural rationalities4. Institutional and corporate rationalities5. Teacher rationalities

If it is our intention as teachers, as Arnold suggests (1999:168), to build cohesive groupswhich promote learning, then we must enquire what power we have in understanding andinfluencing these rationalities. The focus of this research project has been on understandingstudent rationalities, yet these may be the rationalities most variable and opaque toteachers. It is in our understanding of the other rationalities how we plan, promotecultural understanding, contribute to our school and other stakeholders, and mostimportantly how we teach that we can build groups who work together to supportlearners whatever their background, aims and expectations.

The fact that a sizeable majority of students reported that their current school is totallydifferent to school in their own country should be a serious point of consideration for EFLteachers in the UK. We must think about the origins and management of student idealsand expectations. In mixed nationality classrooms student rationalities will be varied, theresponses to question one show that this is true of the current data set. But even amongstudents from the same cultural and educational backgrounds there will be differentrationalities.

It would seem sensible to draw a connection between the differences in classrooms and theaffective factors influencing students' perceptions of their classes. Nearly half of allstudents reported that they felt only quite comfortable and nearly a third reported feelinga bit or very uncomfortable in their first week. It is possible that a certain amount ofthis may be due to the stresses associated with any change of circumstances; for example,

Chris Esson

that a new class in a student's home country may be just as uncomfortable. Indeed thesefindings back up Jane Arnold's description of the process of group formation:

In the first occasions participants meet, an element of tension is present in theinteraction: people typically experience unpleasant feelings of anxiety, uncertaintyand a lack of confidence . They must deal with people they hardly know.(Arnold, 1999:159)

This reinforces the fact that it must be the responsibility of teachers to monitor newstudents and to do what is possible to bring them into the class. Whatever the origins ofany class group, it will bring together diverse individuals who must negotiate outcomes ifthe group is to function successfully. This is an an ongoing process. It is worth quotingWright on group dynamics in full:

During the group's activity, people may modify their behaviour and change roles inlight of the contributions of others. This in itself will create new conditions, andmodify expectations. Knowledge will be gained or modified as time progresses andthe activity unfolds. Quite simply, group activity is dynamic (Wright, 1987:11).

While Wright also suggests that classrooms are status-marked and asymmetrical(1987:114) we must remember that despite the prestige that might be given to us asteachers, we are but one part of the groups that are our classrooms. Through ourmethodological choices, and through our teaching, it is our responsibility to fostersupportive learning environments.

When dealing with diverse, dynamic groups there must be a process of open negotiation. Ifstudents come with certain experiences and expectation we must negotiate theseexpectations with the class. Opening class decision-making to the group and getting inputfrom everyone can help to promote group cohesiveness and the ideal of a shared purpose.Teachers must be attentive to affective factors, and, where appropriate, offer choices ormake requests about who students work with, how they work and where they work.

Chris Esson

Bibliography

Arnold, J. (1999) Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Borg, M. (2004) The Apprenticeship of Observation. ELT Journal, Volume 58/3, July2004. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Tudor, I. (2001) The Dynamics of the Language Classroom. Cambridge University Press,Cambridge.

Van Lier, L. (1988) The Classroom and the Language Learner: Ethnography and SecondLanguage Classroom Research. Longman, London.

Wiggins, A. (2014) A veteran teacher turned coach shadows 2 students for 2 days asobering lesson learned. Granted, and... [blog]. 10 October. Available from:

https://grantwiggins.wordpress.com/2014/10/10/a-veteran-teacher-turned-coach-shadows-2-students-for-2-days-a-sobering-lesson-learned/ [Accessed 30/12/14]

Wright, T (1987) Roles of Teachers and Learners. Oxford University Press, Oxford.