Chapter 6 Confrontation in the classroom: teacher strategies When the variety of factors that affect the interactions between teach- ers and pupils in classrooms are considered, it is clear that it is not possible to suggest ways in which teachers can always manage to avoid unnecessary or unhelpful confrontations. The most that any- one who is not present in a classroom can do is to point to some guidelines which can help teachers to avoid confrontations which serve no useful purpose and also, as with the confrontation described later in the chapter, to suggest how this might have been more suc- cessfully managed once the situation that developed had made a confrontation inevitable. The danger is that when the confrontation between a pupil and a teacher is started by either of them – and when there is tension in a class it only needs one of them to say the wrong thing or do the wrong thing for this to happen – it can easily get out of control with consequences both regret. GUIDELINES FOR AVOIDING CONFRONTATIONS Avoiding public denigration of a pupil Although criticism of some pupils cannot be avoided, it is a mistake for a teacher loudly and publicly to denigrate some offender.
This stirs up resentment and hostility if it is frequent, and even if the pupil dare not express this openly, it sours relationships, and is a poor example of adult behaviour. If a pupil is spoken to in a way that demeans him, then he loses face with his peers, and he will seek some way of regaining it when he has an opportunity to put the teacher at a disadvantage. Pupils, especially older ones, resent be- ing ‘bawled out’ as much as adults dislike it, and they see it as a form of bullying, which it is. Confrontation in the classroom: teacher strategies 67 School children are surprisingly unanimous in their comments about what they perceive to be unacceptable behaviour in teachers.
They do not mind strict teachers as long as they are not nasty as well (Mills, 1976; Meighan, 1978), and they do not mind being made to work and behave. It is the teacher who speaks to them in contemptu- ous terms, and who is sarcastic, who frequently brings on confron- tations. Marsh et al. (1978) in their book The Rules of Disorder de- scribe interesting comments that adolescents passed on to them when they interviewed them in their comprehensive school.
The boys had rules governing their reactions to what they considered to be fair or unfair teacher behaviour. They credited teachers with authority and expected them to exercise it to provide the right conditions for learn- ing and acceptable behaviour in class. They had little time for teach- ers who failed to do this. They accepted that criticism or reprimands and punishment, when it was deserved, was legitimate.
But if teach- ers treated them as if they had no status, if they were sarcastic, or punished them unfairly, the boys considered that such behaviour was not legitimate and fell outside the unformulated but mutually understood social contract which operates in classrooms. Then they considered that they were no longer bound by the contract them- selves and thus their subsequent disruptive and antagonistic behaviour was legitimated. Their behaviour was then governed by what the authors described as ‘the principle of reciprocity’. If the teacher was nasty, they were nasty; if he was insulting, they were insulting; if he considered they were not entitled to respect, they showed him none.
They also behaved in accordance with ‘the prin- ciple of equilibration’ so that when they were unfairly put down or denigrated they reacted in a similar fashion to restore their status. Not only did they consider such retaliation legitimate, they felt them- selves free to resort to language which teachers would not use. Ignoring unwanted behaviour The advantages of ‘planned ignoring’ of misbehaviour have already been mentioned in Chapter 3, but it is worth while to emphasise that the planned ignoring of some provocative behaviour is not the same as deliberately overlooking it because the teacher cannot do any- thing else. Only the teacher in the classroom knows whether he can ignore 68 Effective classroom management behaviour or not.
It would not have been appropriate for the history teacher to ignore Martin’s comment that begins the confrontation described later on in this chapter, for in that situation it would not have led to its extinction through lack of reinforcement, although he might have responded differently to it. Ignoring unwanted or pro- vocative behaviour need not be complete ignoring of it, for a teacher may ignore it when it occurs, and return to comment on it when it is not reinforced by his lack of immediate response. We will see how the maths teacher described in Chapter 7 ignored unwanted behaviour, but he did, when it occurred, look steadily at the culprit for long enough to make him feel uncomfortable and leave him un- certain as to what his later reaction might be. Although this ignor- ing is not quite what behavioural psychologists usually mean by ignoring unwanted behaviour, it was very effective.
However, it went with his whole repertoire of management strategies. A teacher can- not rely upon the effectiveness of ignoring behaviour if he has no other strategies which he can deploy. It is confidence in these strat- egies which guides him when he decides to ignore behaviour he does not want, and which will extinguish bad behaviour if the planned ignoring needs reinforcement. Awareness of the effects of non-verbal communications It is very easy for a teacher, especially if she is angry, to forget the effects that non-verbal communications and body language have on pupils.
For some, they show that she is flustered and they take ad- vantage of this; for others, a threatening demeanour communicates a challenge which they take up. Many confrontations begin, or are maintained, not only by what a teacher says, but by the way she walks, or strides towards a pupil, glares at him or points at him. Once a confrontation starts, it is the angry presence of the teacher in close proximity to a pupil that acts as a powerful irritant in the situation and prolongs and sharpens the crisis. From our own expe- riences, we are aware that we feel uncomfortable if another indi- vidual who does not have our sanction to do it, invades our ‘private space’.
These feelings are aggravated when an angry or unfriendly individual does this – we feel the intrusion more keenly. In the same way, especially with older pupils, a teacher who is obviously an- noyed and is not approaching a pupil with any friendly intention, Confrontation in the classroom: teacher strategies 69 risks making an aggressive response much more probable if she determinedly moves into close proximity to him. It is doubtful whether enough attention is given to this aspect of teacher behaviour in initial training programmes. Role play would be an excellent way of demonstrating to teachers in training what messages they are conveying by their gestures, gait or demeanour which are often a more accurate indication of their feelings than what they are saying, and have a more immediate effect.
Another useful way for teachers to realise how facial expressions and bodily movements are likely to affect pupils is for them to simulate anger or exasperation and walk up to a full length mirror. They could also profit from similar rehearsals while they extend their arms and hands and notice the difference in the effects of those movements, some of them noticeably expressing neutral or positive intentions and some expressing negative or hostile ones. A good deal of effective teaching is theatre, and teachers can learn a great deal from observation of experienced actors. Avoiding physical interventions A very common feature of a crisis in the classroom, which makes a confrontation more probable, is a teacher’s attempting to grab some object a child has which is preventing him from paying attention or distracting others.
In these circumstances, especially if the teacher is bigger and stronger than the pupil, it is tempting for him to make a grab at the personal stereo, or whatever it is that the boy has and has refused to put away, or surrender, when asked to do so. The teacher may be successful in doing this, but grabbing at the radio, or pushing the pupil aside to get hold of it, moves the situa- tion into a much more unpredictable dimension, and may well be- come the first step in a confrontation. The pupil may begin the tantalising manoeuvres of moving it out of the teacher’s risk, perhaps by passing it on to others. There is no way of controlling this catch-as-catch-can manoeuvre, and each move in it increases the teacher’s discomfort, increases the pupil’s satisfaction, and adds to the tension.
For the spectators in the class, it is hard to beat as a diverting spectacle. For the teacher, it has few equals as an exasperating and undignified display of impotence. He may succeed in loosening a pupil’s grip on the radio, but it then falls on the floor and is damaged. The situation now takes a decided 70 Effective classroom management turn for the worse.
Although the pupil was at fault in the first place, the damaged stereo has complicated the situation and lessened the distinction between the rights and wrongs of it. If the stereo was a treasured possession, the pupil who owned it may be so incensed by the damage, accuse the teacher of damaging it, and turn on him with language and behaviour that leads to confrontation. In the ensuing conflict, with its unpredictable consequences, the original offence is lost sight of. At the end of it all, the trigger that began the swift march of events was the teacher’s physical intervention.
This did not cause the crisis – the pupil did that by refusing to switch off or give up the stereo when asked – but the teacher’s grabbing moved the crisis into a confrontation. The Open University film It All Depends Upon Your Point of View’ demonstrates the dangers of a teacher making a physical interven- tion. In it we see a teacher go angrily up to a girl to take a fountain pen from her, who raised her hand with the pen in it as she ap- proaches. This hurried action releases a stream of ink from the pen which sprays across the girl’s blouse.
She looks at it in horror, and shouting ‘It’s all your fault!’ she hits the teacher, or the teacher hits her, or the teacher’s face comes into contact with her hand. In the moment of confrontation, brought on by the teacher’s attempt to grab the pen, no one knew what happened – who struck whom, who struck first, whose hand got in the way, whose face got in the way. The confusion and panic, which so often goes with an unsuc- cessful attempt at physical intervention, emphasises that it is better to avoid it. Reluctance to apologise It is not uncommon to see a teacher make some blunder in classroom management, perhaps by accusing a pupil unjustly, or snapping at one who is not the real culprit, and to be patently in the wrong, and then compound the error by persisting, when an apology would have avoided a confrontation.
It is not demeaning to make an apology. Teachers are not super people who never make mistakes, especially when they are under stress. If a teacher is really in the wrong, then it is courteous, and it shows respect for pupils, to apologise. If they do not do this, which is what they expect pupils to do when they are in the wrong, it is usually because they have the mistaken notion that if they admit to Confrontation in the classroom: teacher strategies 71 making mistakes they weaken their authority.