All published articles of this journal are available on ScienceDirect.
Teachers’ Coping Style and Classroom Management Strategies toward Student Misbehavior among Bahir Dar University
Abstract
Background:
Student misbehavior is disrupted during the teaching-learning process, creating psychological and physical discomfort that affects the achievement of educational goals.
Aim:
The current study was to explore the relationship between teachers’ coping styles and classroom management strategies toward student misbehaviour.
Methods:
The researchers used a correlational research design.
Results:
The independent t-test result shows there was a significant teacher gender difference that is observed in student misbehaviour and coping styles. The correlation result indicated a negative relationship between passive avoidant teachers coping styles with recognition and reward and discussion methods of classroom management. Social problem solving was positively and significantly related to recognition and reward and discussion, and negatively correlated to hinting and aggression.
Conclusion:
Teachers' gender and their coping styles were significant predictors of student misbehavior. The study recommended that it is essential to design and build a smooth relationship between student and teacher that can effectively minimize the chances of the happening of student misbehavior, and can solve the problem easier.
1. INTRODUCTION
Higher education is a social institution established to fulfill citizens' social, political, and economic demands such as employability, infrastructure, and ability to criticize and practice political ideas, etc. Nowadays, the management of student disciplinary problems was a familiar concern for many campuses, such as not readiness for class, talking back with friends, dishonesty in class, and exams that might affect the teaching-learning process [1]. Student misbehaviour is a behaviour that disrupts the teaching-learning process and the achievement of educational goals, and it creates psychological and physical discomfort [2].
1.1. Classroom Management
Studies show that at the beginning of class, the teachers should organize classroom rules and regulations are a good implication for managing the classroom effectively [3]. Moreover, students are able to recognize that the most effective teachers in terms of classroom management are those who, right from the beginning of the learning year, clearly set the boundaries of the student’s classroom behaviour and its respective consequences [4].
According to Qinglan et al. [5], teachers have a big role in creating good coping styles to create a positive and smooth classroom environment. Teachers can create such conditions inside the classrooms where students feel safe and learn to work together effectively. Teachers have the power to increase learning by minimizing disruptions through fostering attitudes of trust, tolerance, acceptance, and cooperation among students.
One of the most important activities of a teacher is increasing the provision of quality instruction and to decrease student misbehaviour, and distraction from schoolwork [6]. Theses creates effective classroom management and significant aspect of professional practice with broad implications for student learning and welfare [7].
Sun and Shek [8] study indicates that the achievements of educational goals and teachers’ professional growth were based on teachers’ ability to manage and organize the classroom and students behaviours. Furthermore, Gelpi [9] shows that the teachers should focus on preventing rather than reacting to behaviour procedures establishes a positive classroom environment in which the teacher focuses on students who behave appropriately.
1.2. Teacher Coping Style
Teachers’ coping styles are important to mediating the relationship between teacher concerns about student misbehaviour and their use of classroom management techniques [10]. Specifically, teachers who are more concerned about student misbehaviour use more aggressive classroom management, and teachers who perceive their classes to contain students who are more likely to misbehave more often use aggressive strategies such as punishment. Furthermore, teachers who use avoidant and passive coping strategies employ more coercion and aggressively control towards students, while teachers who use more socially oriented problem-solving coping strategies use more inclusive management techniques such as discussion, hinting and rewarding.
Copying strategies used by teachers are in turn grouped into coping styles, such as passive, avoidant coping, or social problem solving, which are characterized by a number of conceptually and empirically related strategies [6]. The present study also sought to examine Bahir Dar University teachers’ coping strategies and classroom management strategies toward student misbehaviour of them and it was guided by these research questions:
- Are there any statistically significant differences between male and female teachers regarding student misbehavior?
- Is there a significant relationship between teacher coping styles and classroom management techniques towards student misbehaviour?
- How the work experience, gender, and teacher coping styles predicts student’s misbehaviour?
2. MATERIALS AND METHODS
2.1. Participants
The study mainly used correlational design because it intended to explore the relationship between teachers’ coping style and classroom management strategies against student misbehavior. The present study targeted teachers who are teaching in Bahir Dar University Peda campus, three colleges and faculties, and 20 departments by using a stratified random sampling method to select 304 teachers.
2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Teacher Coping Styles
The study was used to measure the coping styles of teachers by using the 17-item version of the questionnaire of Lewis [7]. It contains passive avoidant coping (Worry about what will happen to me; wish a miracle will happen to make things turn out well; blame myself...), social problem solving (Look for support and encouragement from others; work hard; join with others to deal with the problem…), and relaxation (Look on the bright side of things and think of all that is good; Relax, e.g. watch TV, play computer games, go for a walk; Keep fit and healthy…). The five responses were: never, rarely, sometimes, often, and very often, coded from 1 to 5, respectively [7].
2.2.2. Classroom Management Strategies
Lewis [7] developed who was used to measure five classroom management strategies (punishment, recognition and reward, hinting, discussion, and aggression). The researchers also used these 24 items to indicate how frequently the teacher acted in such a manner “when trying to deal with misbehavior”. The response alternatives for each item were “Never, hardly ever, some of the time, most of the time, and nearly all the time,” and were coded from 1 to 5, respectively. During this study, reliability coefficients for the two scales were found to be .721 and .748 for teacher coping styles and classroom management strategies, respectively.
2.3. Ethical Consideration
Data was collected by respecting the participants’ right to participation. The voluntary nature of their participation and the possibility of withdrawing at any time without reason was explained to the participants, after which informed consent for participation, and for having their anonymous responses published was obtained, ensuring confidentiality in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
3. RESULTS
3.1. Demographic Characteristics of Participants
As indicated in Table 1, participants were 57.9% of male and 42.1% of female teachers and they have a bachelor's degree (87.8%) and master’s degree (12.2). Most of the teachers have between 11-20 years’ work experience (56.2%) followed by above 20 years (25%).
3.2. Gender Deference Regarding Student Misbehaviour
The statistical analysis in Table 2 revealed that there was a statistically significant difference between male and female teachers in student-observed misbehaviour (Truancy (t = -2.05, df = 303, p<0.05), cheating (t = .51, df = 303, p<0.05), disobeying (t = -.77, df = 303, p<0.05), interrupting students and teachers (t = -1.23, df = 303, p<0.05) and aggression (t = -3.76, df = 303, p<0.05). This implies that students are reflecting truancy, disobeying, interrupting students and teachers, and aggression behaviour higher among female teachers than male teachers. On the other hand, male teachers were less in control student cheating behaviour than female teachers.
3.3. Gender Deference Regarding Teacher Coping Styles
At least it is displayed in Table 3; statistical analysis shows that there was a statistically significant difference between male and female teachers in their passive avoidant coping and social problem-solving methods (t = -1.92, df = 303, p<0.05 and t = .63, df = 303, p<0.05) respectively.
3.4. Relationship between Teacher Coping Style and Classroom Management Strategies
Pearson product-moment correlation was computed in Table 4 below to see the relationship between teacher coping style and classroom management strategies. The results revealed that passive avoidant coping was negatively correlated with recognition and reward (r=-.23, p<.05), and discussion (r= -.46, p<.01). The outcome is that the teacher uses more passive avoidant coping that employs less punishment, recognition, and reward and discussion. Social problem solving was positively and significantly related to both recognition and reward (r= .26, p<.01), and discussion (r= .34, p<.01); and negatively correlated to hinting (r=-.28, p<.05) and aggression (r=-.18, p<.05). The findings indicated that teachers who use more social problem-solving coping strategies employ more recognition and reward and discussion towards students, and less use, hinting, and aggression. Teacher relaxation style was positively correlated with recognition and reward (r= .41, p<.01), hinting (r= .22, p<.05), and discussion (r= .21, p<.05). The result shows that teachers use more relaxation, employ more recognition and reward, hinting and discussion with students.
| Variables | N | % |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Male | 176 | 57.9 |
| Female | 128 | 42.1 |
| Educational level | ||
| Bachlors Degree | 267 | 87.8 |
| MA degree | 37 | 12.2 |
| Years of Experience | ||
| 0-10 years | 57 | 18.8 |
| 11-20 years | 171 | 56.3 |
| Above 20 years | 76 | 25 |
| Misbehaviors | Sex | N | Mean | SD | T |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Truancy | Male | 176 | 3.72 | 2.66 | -2.05* |
| Female | 128 | 4.65 | 3.13 | ||
| Cheating | Male | 176 | 3.38 | 2.07 | .51* |
| Female | 128 | 3.21 | 2.01 | ||
| Disobeying | Male | 176 | 4.51 | 1.91 | -.77* |
| Female | 128 | 4.74 | 2.01 | ||
| Interrupting students and teachers | Male | 176 | 5.38 | 1.85 | -1.23* |
| Female | 128 | 5.75 | 1.92 | ||
| Aggression | Male | 176 | 7.20 | 2.37 | -3.76* |
| Female | 128 | 8.41 | 1.78 |
Table 3.
| Teachers Coping Styles | Sex | N | Mean | SD | t |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Passive avoidant coping | Male | 176 | 2.93 | .984 | -1.92* |
| Female | 128 | 3.30 | .837 | ||
| Social problem solving | Male | 176 | 3.55 | .924 | .63* |
| Female | 128 | 3.43 | .858 | ||
| Relaxation | Male | 176 | 2.78 | .880 | -.24 |
| Female | 128 | 2.83 | 1.085 |
| Punishment | Recognition and Reward | Hinting | Discussion | Aggression | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Passive avoidant coping | -.14 | -.23* | .16 | -.46** | .08 |
| Social problem solving | .09 | .26** | -.28* | .34** | -.18* |
| Relaxation | -.14 | .41** | .22* | .21* | .09 |
| Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | T | Sig. | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | Std. Error | Beta | ||||
| (Constant) | 26.631 | 5.351 | 4.976 | .000 | ||
| Sex | .052 | .980 | -.049 | .053 | .035* | |
| work experience | -.057 | .121 | -.040 | -.472 | .638 | |
| Teachers coping styles | -.172 | .055 | -.294 | -3.122 | .002* | |
3.5. Factors that Predict the Student’s Misbehaviour
A multiple linear regression analysis was used to examine the relationship between student’s misbehavior and predictor variables (work experience, gender, and teacher coping styles). The results indicated in Table 5 stated that the predictors explained 29.3% of variance (R2 = 0.293, Adjusted R2 =0.259, F (3,300) = 2.77, P< 0.05). The analysis showed that sex and teachers coping styles were a significantly higher to predict student misbehavior ((β = .049, t (303) =0.053, P> 0.05) and (β = -0.29, t (303) = -3.12, P< 0.05)) respectively.
4. DISCUSSION
The statistical analysis revealed that teacher gender was an important variable that was the influence observed student misbehaviour. In view of this, students are misbehaving in the classroom like truancy, disobeying, interrupting students and teachers, and aggression higher on female teachers than male teachers. On the other hand, male teachers were less in control student cheating behaviour than female teachers. This implies that the students less cooperative and exhibit more misbehavior with female teachers because students live with male- dominant social norms. Tran [11] also found that students were less likely to listen to female teachers and rather talk among themselves.
Correlation analysis portrayed that passive avoidant teacher coping style was negatively related to recognition and reward, and discuss ways of classroom management. This implies that the teacher uses more passive avoidant coping that employs less punishment, recognition, and reward, and discussion. Consistently, Lewis [7] study shows that teachers who use passive avoidant strategies employ more aggression and punishment techniques towards student misbehavior. Moreover, the current study indicates that social problem solving was positively correlated to both recognition and reward, and discussion, and negatively correlated to hinting and aggression. Teacher relaxation style was positively correlated with recognition and reward, hinting, and discussion. This implies that teachers use more relaxation, employ more recognition and reward, hinting and discussion towards students. In contrast to this finding, teachers who use more social problem solving and relaxation strategies use more inclusive management techniques such as recognition and reward, discussion, and hinting [12]. the results of this study are also consistent with previously reported findings. Teachers who employ poor management techniques, such as aggression combined with punishment, exacerbate their own problems as their coping strategies serve only to intensify the problems they are intended to prevent [10].
Regression analysis showed that teachers’ gender and their coping styles was significantly predictor of student misbehavior. Classroom management is directly linked to classroom environments in which students’ behavioral problems are controlled and higher learning expectations are established [13, 14].
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
In this study, it was found that a teacher's gender was an important variable that was the influence observed student misbehaviour. The results obtained from correlation analyses indicated that there are negative relationships between passive avoidant teachers coping styles with punishment, recognition and reward, and discussion methods of classroom management. Social problem solving was positively and significantly related to both recognition and reward and discussion, and negatively correlated to hinting and aggression. Teacher relaxation style was positively correlated with recognition and reward, hinting and discussion. Moreover, teachers' gender and their coping styles were a significant predictors of student misbehavior.
In light of the findings, the following recommendations are suggested: teachers may be provided relevant training to deal with the issues and problems of classroom management. It is essential to design, and builds a positive student-teacher relationship. Therefore, teachers should adopt preventive discipline and constructive strategies.
ETHICS APPROVAL AND CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE
This study was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of the Colleges of Education and Behavioural Science, Bahir Dar University, with registration number 022/CEBS/BDU/012/2020 on novmber 12, 2020.
HUMAN AND ANIMAL RIGHTS
No animals were used that are the basis of this study. All the humans experiments were conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.
CONSENT FOR PUBLICATION
Informed consent for participation and for having their anonymous responses published was obtained.
AVAILABILITY OF DATA AND MATERIALS
The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The author declares no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.
FUNDING
None.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Declared none.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors certify that they have no affiliation with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial or nonfinancial interest in the subject researched in this manuscript and report no conflicts of interest for this work.
