The role of a teacher in a primary classroom

Statement: Behaviour management, communication and effective teaching

methods are critical roles that the teacher must implement within the
classroom in order to promote student learning. Discuss.

Within the primary classroom, teachers have several key roles that they must
implement in order to support student learning. Behaviour management is one of the
areas that teachers have a critical role in, as effective management of the classroom
is a crucial in providing opportunities for students to learn. Aspects of behaviour
management that creates a classroom beneficial for learning includes the formation
of teacher-student relationships, the use of rewards and effectively disciplining
students. Communication is also a key role of the teacher within and outside of the
classroom, as this creates a place where students can effectively learn. It also
enables teachers be more effective in their teaching of their students when they
effectively communicate with parents as they learn more about their students.
Furthermore teaching methods such as inclusion is an important role of the teacher,
as this helps to create a classroom where all students are included and have the
same learning opportunities. Therefore there are many important roles of the
teacher, and this essay will look at a few key roles that teachers must implement in
order to create an effective learning environment.

Behaviour management is a key area that teachers must implement within the
classroom, as it influences the ability of the students to learn. One aspect of
behaviour management is the way the students and teachers interact. Yoon (2002)
writes that teacher-student relationships have a significant influence on various
outcomes (p. 485). The way the teacher interacts with his/her class can have an
impact on learning and social outcomes of the individual student and the whole
class. (Slee, Campbell and Speers, 2012). Alderman and Green (2011) believe that
when a teacher is viewed as fun, interesting and personable (p.40), students are
more likely to connect to and respond positively towards the teacher. The opposite
view of teach-student relationships is stated by Yoon (2002) by saying that
disruptive (p. 485) and troublesome students can lead towards critical and

punishing interactions (p.1). This in turn can lead towards a sense of alienation
lead[ing] to intensified anger and defiance (Yoon, 2002, p. 485). The writer would
argue from firsthand experience that positive student-teacher relationships are
formed by the attitudes of the teacher, and that being regarded as a teacher who will
listen to the students is an important aspect of positive relationships. The writer
would argue that although the view of Alderman and Green (2011) is extremely
optimistic; when dealing with difficult students it is important to appropriately deal
with negative behaviour, and this may mean the teacher does not always come
across as the fun teacher. The writer also believes that negative behaviour should
be dealt with effectively without jeopardising the teacher-student relationship in order
to ensure a classroom that understands that they will be dealt with fairly when
negative behaviour takes place in order to ensure learning occurs in the classroom.

Another aspect of behaviour management is the way discipline is conducted in the

classroom. Teachers on a daily basis will deal with behaviour issues in the
classroom, and thus it is an important role that the teacher must participate in (Little,
Hudson and Wilks, 2002). One idea suggested is that a consistent model of
intervention across home and school is needed (Little, Hudson and Wilks, 2002, p.
252). Issues arise with this belief, as each home environment will have a different
measure of discipline. Some different methods include physical discipline or no
discipline at all, and by taking the ideas of Little, Hudson and Wilks (2002), it would
be difficult to have different methods and rules for each student in the classroom.
The writer would contend that a consistent approach should be taken in the
classroom, where the rules are set in the classroom for expected behaviour. This
view is shared by Vijayan, Chakravarthi and Philips (2016) who suggest that rules
should be set to help students choose appropriate behaviours (p.210) rather than
catch the student out (p.210). They recommend that discussing the motivation
behind their actions and the consequences (p. 210) after undesirable behaviour also
leads to less focus on the negative behaviour. They also recommend positive
reinforcement and praise (Vijayan, Chakravarthi and Philips, 2016, p.211) as a
beneficial discipline measure, as it reinforces the desirable behaviour rather than
emphasising the negative behaviour. Timeout is a potential discipline strategy that
has gradually reduced in its use in the classroom over the years, however some

teacher still use this strategy when other methods fail. (Costenbader and ReadingBrown, 1995). However, Costenbader and Reading-Brown (1995) and Ryan,
Sanders, Katsiyannis and Yell (2007) suggest that this method is only successful if
the student does not care about being removed, as otherwise it will be ineffective.
The writer has witnessed timeout strategies within the last four years in the
classroom, and would agree with Costenbader and Reading-Brown (1995) and Ryan
et al., (2007) as using a timeout did not cause students to be better behaved. The
writer would also add that overuse of this strategy will also result in this strategy
becoming completely ineffective in the classroom.

In addition to discipline, rewards are often seen as an effective way to control

behaviours in the classroom. A common method for controlling the classroom is
through rewarding good behaviour or work. Fantuzzo and Rohrbeck (1991) state that
positive rewards has been identified as the most acceptable and widely used
classroom intervention (p. 176) and that there are four categories for giving rewards,
edible, tangible, activity and social (p.176). The lack of understanding towards
which category of rewards was the most successful with students was evident with
Fantuzzo and Rohrbeck (1991) as they state that teachers preferred to give edible
rewards, however social or activity rewards were the most popular with children. In
contrast, Merrett and Jones (1994) noted that public praise was the most popular
reward by teachers in their study. This different methods of rewarding students is a
theme that the writer has also observed, with teachers giving social rewards (such as
a movie day for the end of term), tangible rewards (stickers, toys and certificates)
and even activity rewards (computer time during class). Edible rewards was not
witnessed by the writer, which has been associated with the rise of food allergies in
the recent years. The writer contends that the use of activity rewards is the most
unsupportive strategy, as it was observed to detract from class learning time.
Furthermore, the writer would suggest that although there may be a place for
rewards in the classroom, students should not equate good behaviour with a
guaranteed reward. The value of rewards is opposed by Fantuzzo and Rohrbeck
(1991) by stating that rewards had no significant effect on performance in their study,
and doubted the use of rewards in the classroom.

The area of communication is an important aspect of the role of the teacher both
within and out of the classroom. Within the classroom a key aspect is student
discussion. An important area is whether students should be allowed to talk within
the classroom, and when it is appropriate. Richardson (2010) writes about the fear
teachers have that if you give your students an inch and they often take a mile
(p.83) and that teachers were worried that socialising would take precedence over
productive, on-topic conversations between students (p.83). She also writes that
teachers often prefer to be cautious rather than let the students have the freedom to
discuss, in order to keep the classroom controlled and be assured that students will
stay on task. Kletzien and Baloche (1994) further write about the issues with student
discussion in saying that [teacher-led] discussions are really recitations in which
teachers control the turn-taking, do most of the talking, ask low-level information
questions, and limit students to two or three word answers (p.540-541). Kletzien and
Baloche (1994) state that a true discussion is an open exchange of ideas and
opinions about topics that may not have easy answers (p.541), which is a
contrasting view to Richardson (2010). The writer agrees with the fears of
Richardson (2010) that students may take advantage of learning conversations.
However she would recommend that rules stating the objective of learning
conversations would have to be in place, as well as teacher encouragement to stay
on task. Furthermore, the writer somewhat agrees with the view of by Kletzien and
Baloche (1994); that teacher-led discussions can be restrictive and do not allow for
the open and rich discussions that student conversations can provide. The writer
would contend that the classroom requires a balance of both student and teacher led
times in order to effectively allow the best opportunities to learn.

The other form of communication that is essential in the classroom and is one aspect
of the teachers role is parent-teacher communication. The parent-teacher
relationship impacts a childs development, learning and well-being (Markstrm,
2011, p.465), and thus it is important to have communication between the parents
and the teacher. This view is endorsed by Elksnin and Elksnin (1989), who state that
the teacher can teach more effectively if she is aware of the special interests,
abilities, anxieties, problems and circumstances of each child (p.261-262). One key
area of conflict in this subject is whether face-to-face communication or

communication through technology is more effective. Elksnin and Elksnin (1989),

argue that face-to-face conferences can be daunting for parents, and can be
ineffective as it is primarily a space for teachers to share about the student, rather
than an open space for discussion. This view is shared by Markstrm (2011) saying
that parents can feel intimidated (p.467) in these situations Thompson, Mazer, and
Grady (2015) add a slightly different angle to this view by suggesting that both
technology and face-to-face methods should be used in order for difficult subjects to
be discussed without misreading non-verbal cues. Technology adds accessibility for
both the parent and the teacher, as it can be used to communicate ideas and
information that can be accessed when time permits for both teachers and parents. It
is not restricted to waiting for your turn to talk after school to the teacher, and does
not have time limits such staff meetings or the beginning of the school day. The
writer would contend that communication should be ongoing throughout the school
year, rather than limited to 2 parent-teacher conferences per year. Not only does this
restrict the dread of these conferences, but actively seeks to engage parents in the
school events and daily activities that happen throughout the year.

One key aspect of the teachers role is the way they teach, and how they include all
students within the classroom. Inclusion is often a difficult aspect to effectively
manage in the classroom however is extremely important in ensuring every student
is actively engaged in all learning material and has the best opportunity to learn. In
every classroom there will be students at different levels of learning and abilities, and
it is the teachers job to effectively meet each of their needs and support each child
to progress in their learning (Greenspan, 2005). Foreman (2011) writes that
teachers face the daily challenge of establishing and supporting a rich learning
environment that is stimulating and efficient and, most importantly, suitable to the
diverse needs of the modern classroom (p. 185). The writer would suggest that
teachers can often be worried that they are not adequately meeting the needs of
every student. This opinion is shared by Jordan, Schwartz and McGhie-Richmond
(2009) by stating that a common fear of teachers is that inclusion detracts from the
time available to teachers to instruct their students without special education needs.
(p.536). However, Jordan et al., (2009) contradicts this view by stating that teachers
who are effective overall with all their students are also more likely to be skilled in

inclusive practices (p.536). This is because these teachers are able to manage the
different abilities that occur in every classroom, and understand how to cater for
these abilities. The writer contends that it is important to understand inclusive
practices and how to implement them in the classroom, otherwise it is potentially
possible to have a classroom that focuses on the students with learning difficulties,
and causes other students be prevented from moving further in their learning.

Teachers have an important role in the classroom as they promote opportunities to

aid student learning. It is important to create a classroom where students have
effective relationships with their teachers, that students understand negative
behaviour will have consequences, and that rewards are used in moderation, and
are not expected as a consequence of good behaviour. Furthermore, by
communicating effectively with parents, teachers learn more about their students,
which enables more successful teaching within the classroom. By effectively
implementing student communication in the classroom, teachers allow for greater
learning opportunities through collaboration. Finally inclusion is an important aspect
of the teachers role in the classroom as it enables the teacher to develop learning
experiences and opportunities equally for all students. These are all important
aspects of the teachers role in the classroom, as the enable the teacher to
effectively support student learning.

References:
Alderman, G., & Green, S. (2011). Social Powers and Effective Classroom
Management: Enhancing TeacherStudent Relationships. Intervention in
School and Clinic, 47(1), 39-44. doi:10.1177/1053451211406543

Costenbader, V., & Reading-Brown, M. (1995). Isolation Timeout Used with Students
with Emotional Disturbance. Exceptional Children, 61(4), 353-363. Retrieved
from http://go.galegroup.com.ezproxy1.acu.edu.au/ps/retrieve.do?
sort=RELEVANCE&docType=Article&tabID=T002&prodId=AONE&searchId=
R1&resultListType=RESULT_LIST&searchType=AdvancedSearchForm&cont
entSegment=tPosition=1&searchResultsType=SingleTab&inPS=true&userGr
oupName=acuni&docId=GALE%7CA16541821&contentSet=GALE
%7CA16541821

Elksnin, L., & Elksnin, N. (1989). Collaborative Consultation: Improving ParentTeacher Communication. Intervention in School and Clinic, 24(3), 261-269.
Retrieved from doi.org/10.1177/105345128902400302

Fantuzzo, J. W., & Rohrbeck, C. A. (1991). Teachers' use and children's preferences
of rewards in elementary school. Psychology in The Schools, 28(2), 175-181.
doi:10.1002/1520-6807(199104)28:2<175::AID-PITS2310280213>3.0.CO;2-K

Foreman, P. (2011). Inclusion in action (3rd ed.). South Melbourne, Victoria:

Cengage Learning.

Greenspan, S. (2005). Creating an inclusive classroom. Scholastic Early Childhood

Today, 20(1), 26-27. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/217917558?accountid=8194

Jordan, A., Schwartz, E., & McGhie-Richmond, D. (2009). Preparing teachers for
inclusive classrooms. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(4), 535-542.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2009.02.010

Little, E., Hudson, A., & Wilks, R. (2002). The Efficacy of Written Teacher Advice (Tip
Sheets) for Managing Classroom Behaviour Problems. Educational
Psychology, 22(3), 251-266. doi:10.1080/01443410220138494

Markstrm, A. (2011). To Involve Parents in the Assessment of the Child in Parent

Teacher Conferences: A Case Study. Day Care & Early Education, 38(6), 465474. doi:10.1007/s10643-010-0436-7

Merrett, F., & Jones, L. (1994). Rules, Sanctions and Rewards in Primary Schools.
Educational Studies, 20(3), 345-356. doi:10.1080/0305569940200303
Richardson, A. (2010). Exploring text through student discussions: Accountable talk
in the middle school classroom. English Journal, 100(1), 83-88. Retrieved
from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy1.acu.edu.au/docview/749382231?
OpenUrlRefId=info:xri/sid:primo&accountid=8194

Ryan, J. B., Sanders, S., Katsiyannis, A., & Yell, M. L. (2007). Using Time-Out
Effectively in the Ciassroom. Teaching Exceptional Children, 39(4), 60-67.
Slee, P.T., Campbell, M & Speers, B. (2012). Child, Adolescent and Family

Development (3rd ed). Cambridge University Press: Australia.

Thompson, B., Mazer, J., & Grady, E. (2015). The Changing Nature of Parent
Teacher Communication: Mode Selection in the Smartphone Era.
Communication Education, 64(2), 187-207. Retrieved from DOI:
10.1080/03634523.2015.1014382

Vijayan, P., Chakravarthi, S., & Philips, J. (2016). The Role of Teachers Behaviour
and Strategies in Managing a Classroom Environment. International Journal
of Social Science and Humanity, 6(3), 208-215. Retrieved from DOI:
10.7763/IJSSH.2016.V6.644
Yoon, J. S. (2002). Teacher characteristics as predictors of teacher-student
relationships: Stress, negative affect, and self-efficacy. Social Behavior and
Personality, 30(5), 485-493. doi:10.2224/sbp.2002.30.5.485

Kletzien, S., & Baloche, L. (1994). The Shifting Muffled Sound of the Pick:
Facilitating Student-to-Student Discussion. Journal of Reading, 37(7), 540545. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20172353