Social Psychology of Education: Classroom Climate & Interactions - PDF

Unit 5 Social Psychology of Education Climate and interactions in the classroom Psychology of Education Professor Lorena Combadiera Degree in Psychology INDEX CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Teacher as authority: The bases of social power. 3. Teacher as leader. 4....

Unit 5 Social Psychology of Education Climate and interactions in the classroom Psychology of Education Professor Lorena Combadiera Degree in Psychology INDEX CONTENTS 1. Introduction 2. Teacher as authority: The bases of social power. 3. Teacher as leader. 4. Social measurement in the classroom. 5. Classroom climate. 6. Non- verbal behaviour. 2 1. Introduction The field of Social Psychology of Education did not emerge as an autonomous discipline until the late 1960s and early 1970s. It was after the Second World War that the percentage of psychosociological research in education increased, perhaps because many people saw the war as a conflict between fascism and democracy and, therefore, it was believed that the best way to promote democracy was a good education in schools (Lewin, Lippit and White, 1939). 3 1. Introduction 1.1 The classroom as a society The classroom is a mini-society. It has a defined structure and formal goals. It has a “ruler” (teacher) of legitimate authority and “citizens” who enact their roles and interact with each other. These citizens must “work” towards reaching certain goals. Teachers must provide a positive learning atmosphere and make the school experience as enjoyable and satisfactory as possible for students. 4 1. Introduction 1.1 The classroom as a society Each classroom has an informal structure that develops through interactions between students and teachers. But… what happens in the classroom? Explicit and implicit norms are formed. Complex processes of social influence take place such as: 1. Leadership. 2. Social classes and roles. 3. Popularity, prestige, and power. 5 1. Introduction 1.2 Norms, Rules, and Expectations Social norms are behavioural standards, they control group members’ social behaviour in defined circumstances. Norms are the reflections of the group: 1. Values. 2. Goals. 3. Culture. 6 1. Introduction 1.2 Norms, Rules, and Expectations Norms are formed and maintained through the group and control individuals’ behaviour. That is why social behaviour in the group becomes predictable. Norms represent group expectations concerning appropriate and inappropriate behaviour. Most norms are implicit and hidden, although individual members are aware of them and of the consequences of violating them. 7 1. Introduction 1.2 Norms, Rules, and Expectations WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF NORMS IN THE CLASSROOM? 1. Maintenance of routine life in the classroom. 2. Enable effective academic work and learning. 3. To manage interpersonal relationships. 4. Norms on how to interact with teachers and with school authorities. 8  1. Introduction 1.2 Norms, Rules, and Expectations Types of Norms Implicit or Some norms are formal and explicit. Explicit Others are more informal, implicit and hidden. Fixed or Some norms are fixed, static, and consensually accepted. dynamic Others are more dynamic and flexible. «StrongStrong or or Some norms are “strong” and others are “weak” depending on the conformity weak» weak and expected sanctions for violation. 9  1. Introduction 1.2 Norms, Rules, and Expectations Types of Norms Fixed or dynamic The use of electronic devices, punctuality, and participation in discussions. Explicit Attendees should remain silent while the classmate is speaking. Fixed Implicit or Explicit Interruptions for clarification or for students to exchange ideas. Dynamic Prohibiting plagiarism. Strong «Strong or Strong or weak» Everyone to contribute ideas during discussions. Implicit weak Punctuality. Weak 10 1. Introduction 1.2 Norms, Rules, and Expectations Conformity Conformity is the degree to which norms are kept obediently by group participants. Normally group members vary in the degree to which they follow norms. Conformity to normative pressure can: 1. Come from real conviction in their value (through internalization, identification, and attitude change). 2. Be caused by the individual’s need “to fit” in the group and to avoid social pressure, rejection, or punishment. 11 2. Teacher as authority: The bases of social power. 2.1 French and Raven (1959) Coercion Referent Legitimacy Power POWER Expertise Rewards 12 2. Teacher as authority: The bases of social power. 2.1 French and Raven (1959) The basis of this theory is relevant for teachers as authority figures and as managers of their classrooms. The bases of social power are: 1. Reward power: the perceived ability to provide positive consequences or remove negative ones, and the power to reinforce. 2. Coercive power: the power to punish those who do not conform to your ideas or demands. 3. Legitimate power (organizational authority): the perception that someone has the right to prescribe behaviour and control others due to appointment or election to a position of responsibility (also called normative power). 13 2. Teacher as authority: The bases of social power. 2.1 French and Raven (1959) 4. Referent power: power resulting from admiration, respect, and identification with the leader. 5. Expert power: power results from having distinctive knowledge, expertise, ability, or skills that others need. The leader possesses superior knowledge and skills. 6. Information power: Similar to number 5. Controlling the information. “Information is power”. The leader possesses needed or wanted information. 14 2. Teacher as authority: The bases of social power. 2.1 French and Raven (1959) A student has access to privileged information about an upcoming research project and chooses to share this information selectively with a group of classmates, aiding them in better preparation. Information Power A charismatic student leader, admired by most students, organizes events that foster unity and active participation among peers. Referent Power A student is punished and suspended for cheating on an exam after being previously warned about the consequences of dishonesty. Coercive Power. A department head issues directives on how certain tasks should be performed within the university and expects all employees to comply with these rules. Legitimate Power A student is recognized for their skills and expertise in statistics, and they are consistently sought out by peers for tutoring and assistance with research projects. Expert Power A professor publicly praises students who achieved the highest academic results during the semester, granting them special recognition at a school ceremony. Reward Power. 15 3. TEACHER AS LEADER 3.1 Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) Lewin and his colleagues organized gatherings for ten- and eleven-year-old boys after school where they could enjoy different hobbies. These boys met in small groups and were guided by an adult male. The researchers looked at three different kinds of leadership behaviors during these sessions. AUTHORITARIAN/ DEMOCRATIC/ AUTOCRATIC PARTICIPATORY THE LAISSEZ-FAIRE / LET DO 16 3. TEACHER AS LEADER 3.1 Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) 1. The authoritarian (or autocratic) leader: Told the boys what to do without much explanation. Took no input from the members in making decisions about group activities. Often criticized the boys, arbitrarily paired boys with work partners, and emphasized his authority. 17 3. TEACHER AS LEADER 3.1 Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) 2. The democratic (or participatory) leader: Made sure that all activities were first discussed by the entire group. Let the group make decisions while he provided advice and guidance. Encouraged the development of an egalitarian atmosphere, and rarely criticized the students or gave them orders. 18 3. TEACHER AS LEADER 3.1 Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) : 3. The laissez-faire (let do) leader The leader allowed the students to work in whatever way they wished and rarely intervened in the group activities. The group worked without any supervision and the adult functioned primarily as a source of technical information when necessary. The leader did not offer information, criticism, or guidance. 19 3. TEACHER AS LEADER 3.1 Lewin, Lippitt, and White (1939) Democratic leadership proved to be the most effective in maintaining a balance between productivity and group satisfaction. Autocratic leadership generated productivity, but at the cost of the group's well-being. Laissez-faire leadership resulted in lower productivity and more chaos. 20 Practice in groups: 1. Think of three public leaders who have each one of these three leadership styles. 2. Now, think of three teachers which also have these leadership styles. In both cases, analyze their behaviour, their influence in the group, and the outcomes of their leadership style. 21 4. Social Measurement in the classroom 4.1 Status and Social classes The classroom society is stratified into social classes and characterized by status differences. Hargreaves (1975) defined three main dimensions of social status: 1. Popularity: expressing levels of attraction (popular person) and rejection (unpopular person) among members. 2. Social power: the distribution of leadership and influence potential among members. 3. Prestige: related to special roles or special competencies or attributes. 22 4. Social Measurement in the classroom 4.2 Sociometric measurement and sociometric structure of the classroom Moreno (1934) stated the term “sociometry”. o Sociometry: in order to know about classrooms, you must ask the students themselves and reconstruct the social structure from their reports. This idea increased force over the years and has remained valid in psychological measurement to the present day. o Moreno developed measurement instruments to study the implicit social processes in classrooms. The most important index to be studied and measured, according to Moreno was children’s emotional reactions to others: attraction and rejection. 23 4. Social Measurement in the classroom 4.2 Sociometric measurement and sociometric structure of the classroom What was the object of measurement? In the conventional sociometric questionnaire, students are asked to write the names of three students in the classroom whom they like most and find most attractive, and the names of three other students whom they dislike and do not want to be with (rejections). 24 4. Social Measurement in the classroom 4.2 Sociometric measurement and sociometric structure of the classroom What was the object of measurement? Different sociometric criteria can be used: 1. Whom do you like best/or dislike? 2. Whom would you choose to move/ not move with you to another classroom? 3. Whom would you choose to play with outside school? 4. Whom would you want as a close friend? 25 4. Social Measurement in the classroom 4.2 Sociogram 26 4. Social Measurement in the classroom 4.3 Typology Of Sociometric “Student Types” From these combinations, they stated four distinct types of students: 1. Popular student: who receives many liking nominations and no (or very few) disliking ones. 2. Rejected student: who receives many disliking nominations and no liking ones. 3. Neglected student: who receives no nominations of any type at all and is virtually “lost” in the classroom. 4. Controversial student: who receives many nominations, both positive and negative, that is, a student who is liked intensely by some peers but at the same time is disliked intensely by other peers. The controversial student is the focus of much attention in the classroom and evokes polar reactions. She/he is sometimes considered “a negative leader” in the classroom. 27  5. CLASSROOM CLIMATE 5.1 Definition and characteristics Classroom climate: the psycho/ social/ emotional and organizational/ state of the classroom. It reflects students’ : Overall satisfaction: degree of contentedness and the classroom atmosphere and harmony. Classrooms with HIGH POSITIVE CLIMATE: 1. Mutual support and fair division of social influence. 2. Much interpersonal attraction and little friction. 3. Open communication and norms that are supportive of everybody’s success 4. Best academic achievements given students’ abilities. 28  5. CLASSROOM CLIMATE 5.2 Social Comparison It is clear that social comparison processes take place in the classroom and this process can trigger both positive and negative effects. Levine (1983) claimed that this comparison can cause damage to children’s self-esteem and make children adopt unnatural low conceptions of their own abilities. 29 5. CLASSROOM CLIMATE 5.2 Social Comparison Experiment: o In Blanton et al.'s (1999) study, Dutch secondary school students (aged 13) completed a social comparison questionnaire at the end of the second term. o They were asked to write the name of a classmate with whom they preferred to compare their grades in seven school subjects and to rate their own performance in these courses in relation to their peers. 30 5. CLASSROOM CLIMATE 5.2 Social Comparison Results: o The majority of the students (over 90 percent) chose to compare themselves with classmates of the same gender, despite all classes being coeducational. This is called “the similarity principle”. o The grades of the students they compared themselves to were slightly higher than their own grades. More students chose to compare themselves to peers with higher grades (an upward comparison) than to those with lower grades (a downward comparison). o In summary, this study suggests that social comparison in the school environment can influence students' academic performance. A positive comparative evaluation and the choice to compare with peers who have higher grades appear to be factors contributing to future academic success. But this only happens if they have a growth mindset. 31 6. NON-VERBAL BEHAVIOUR. 6.1 Liars Observing the nonverbal behaviour of liars in class reveals several key indicators: o Liars tend to be overly planned, lacking spontaneity, and deliberate in their actions. o They often exaggerate the expression of false emotions, attempting to overcompensate for their deceptive behaviour. o Tension and guilt may manifest in liars, and this unease can be perceptible. Observers may pick up on these emotional cues. 32 6. NON-VERBAL BEHAVIOUR. 6.2 Gender Gender differences: o Women tend to exhibit higher emotional expressiveness through facial expressions compared to men (they smile more often). o Women have superior skills in interpreting nonverbal cues. They also demonstrate heightened attentiveness to nonverbal stimuli and show a greater aptitude for detecting deception. o Men seem to possess an advantage in emotional control. They excel in the ability to regulate their emotional displays and inhibit spontaneous expressions of emotion. 33 7. The self. 7.1 Identidad y el ‘Yo’ según Goffman, Mead y Tajfel1. Concepto de ‘Yo’ y Rol Social (Goffman y Mead)Nuestra identidad: Una combinación de los roles que adoptamos o en los que somos socializados.El ‘yo’ se forma a partir de las interacciones y expectativas sociales.2. Teoría de la Identidad Social (Tajfel, 1981)La identidad se construye a partir de los grupos sociales a los que pertenecemos.Para mantener nuestro autoconcepto, necesitamos resaltar nuestras diferencias con otros grupos.Ejemplo: Un grupo de chicos se considera "duro" al criticar a otros por ser "débiles".3. Mantenimiento de Diferencias entre GruposLas diferencias entre grupos a menudo crean características vinculadas.Ejemplo: “Sacar buenas notas” se puede asociar con ser sumiso.4. Estereotipos y PrejuiciosLos estereotipos son ideas generalizadas sobre grupos de personas.Son la base de:Prejuicio: Actitudes negativas hacia otros grupos.Discriminación: Comportamiento que surge del prejuicio.5. Discriminación Racial y SexualEstereotipos basados en el color de piel o el género.Generan discriminación en escuelas y en la sociedad. 34  8. Child-parent interactions. 8.1 A key factor is the ‘home learning environment’: the amount parents read to their children, the number of books in the home, the degree to which parents support their children’s education in and out of school (Sylva et al., 2004). In the study cited, the home learning environment was only moderately associated with factors such as social class and parental education levels, and what parents did with their children had a more important impact than their own background or circumstances. Even more strongly: ‘In the primary age range the impact caused by different levels of parental involvement is much bigger than differences associated with variations in the quality of schools. The scale of the impact is evident across all social classes and all ethnic groups. (Desforges and Abouchaar, 2003) Although parent–child interactions may be the most direct cause of inequalities, it seems likely that family experiences of poverty and low status are important underlying factors. When there are limited and variable financial resources, it becomes pointless to plan ahead, encouraging a reactive approach to life. The lack of control over key resources and careers also engenders a form of learned helplessness and a sense of apathy (Mortimore and Whitty, 1997). It is easy to see how parents in this situation would tend to utilise negative control with their children if they feel that there is little that can be achieved in life. The parents’ perceived lack of control is also likely to limit their ability to take account of their children’s learning needs. 35  Small groups (4-6), you have 15 minutes to build a structure with the materials provided. 1. Who took the leadership? 2. Was anyone excluded? 3. Were there any conflicts? 4. How did you feel working together? 5. What role did each person play? 6. Did anyone feel excluded or ignored? 7. How did these dynamics affect the final outcome? 36  The Diversity Map Write your name on the map and add 3 or 4 characteristics that describe you (origin, interests, skills, personality…) 37 1. How can diversity within the classroom be a strength? 2. How do you feel your differences (or similarities) affect your classroom experience? 3. Do you feel accepted and valued for your differences, or have you ever felt excluded? 4. How does an inclusive environment allow all students to feel part of the group and actively participate? 38 BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES Babad, E. (2009). The social psychology of the classroom. Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. Saul Scheidlinger (1994) The Lewin, Lippitt and White Study of Leadership and “Social Climates” Revisited, International Journal of Group Psychotherapy, 44:1, 123-127, DOI: 10.1080/00207284.1994.11490737. Bozal, A. G. (1989). La psicología social de la educación como disciplina básica en la formación del profesor. RIFOP: Revista interuniversitaria de formación del profesorado: continuación de la antigua Revista de Escuelas Normales, (6), 409-416. Huguet, P., & Kuyper, H. (2017). Applying social psychology to the classroom. APA. 39