Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Abstract
This paper reports students’ perceptions of the classroom discipline strategies utilized in Australia, China and Israel.
It examines data from 748 teachers and 5521 students to identify how teachers’ use of various disciplinary strategies,
and the extent to which these relate to student misbehavior, differ in three national settings. In general, Chinese teachers
appear less punitive and aggressive than do those in Israel or Australia and more inclusive and supportive of students’
voices. Australian classrooms are perceived as having least discussion and recognition and most punishment. In all
settings greater student misbehavior relates only to increased use of aggressive strategies. Implications are discussed.
r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
0742-051X/$ - see front matter r 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.05.008
ARTICLE IN PRESS
lessons may fail to have the desired impact. Often tial for teacher behavior such as shouting all the
it may only require a small proportion of students time, unfairly blaming students, picking on kids,
to misbehave and they become sufficiently dis- and being rude, to stimulate student resistance and
tracting to students and frustrating to teachers subsequent misbehavior.
that the most carefully planned lesson fails to
The present study has shown pupils to attribute
promote effective learning among the students
to teachers a significantly greater responsibility
(Barton, Coley, & Wenglinsky, 1998). This paper
for pupil misbehavior than that they attribute
examines the relationship between discipline pro-
to parents. (p. 93).
cesses and student misbehavior in three different
national settings, namely Australia, China and It is of interest to note that in an earlier Israeli
Israel. study which also examined factors seen to be
Interest in classroom discipline relates not only causing student misbehavior, it was reported that
to the good it can do but also to the damage although students placed their teachers’ attitude
inappropriate discipline can cause. For example, the second most important cause of student
two recent publications emphasize the potential misbehavior, teachers ranked it as 20 out of 26
negative impact of particular discipline strategies. (Guttmann, 1982).
The first conjectures that The impetus for the research discussed in this
paper came after the publication of a study of the
Unnecessarily harsh and punitive disciplinary
relationship between classroom discipline and
practices against students create a climate that
student responsibility and misbehavior in Austra-
contributes to school violence. This issue is little
lia (Lewis, 2001). As a result of that publication,
recognized and scarcely researched. (Hyman &
academics in a number of countries contacted the
Snook, 2000, p. 489).
author with requests to replicate the study in their
The second publication reports the perceptions respective national settings. Two additional set-
of over 3500 school students in Australia (Lewis, tings were ultimately selected. These were China
2001). This study demonstrates empirically that, in and Israel. Australia is a typically western country,
the view of these students, their teachers are China is a typically oriental country and Israel is
characterized by two distinct discipline styles. approximately half western and half oriental.
The first of these was called ‘‘coercive’’ discipline Consequently, the use of these three cultural
and comprised Punishment and Aggression (yell- settings provided the opportunity for some robust
ing in anger, sarcasm, group punishments, etc.). comparisons. Further, since the academics from
The second style, comprising Discussion, Hints, these settings who expressed interest in under-
Recognition, Involvement and Punishment, was taking the research were senior, very experienced,
called ‘‘Relationship based discipline’’. After pre- and involved in teacher training for many years,
senting a thorough data analysis the report the issue of classroom discipline, and the research
concludes: design of the previous research appeared to have
valency in both countries.
Students who receive more Relationship based
In summary, there were two main foci for the
discipline are less disrupted when teachers deal
research. First it permitted a comparison of the
with misbehavior and generally act more
extent of usage of various discipline strategies in
responsibly in that teacher’s class. In contrast,
three significantly different national settings.
the impact of Coercive discipline appears to be
Secondly, the relationship between student mis-
more student distraction from work and less
behavior and classroom discipline could be exam-
responsibility. (p. 315).
ined in each setting. In conducting this research, it
These findings appear consistent with those of was acknowledged that there are likely to be
Miller, Ferguson, and Byrne (2000) who, after cultural differences associated with styles of
examining students’ perceptions of what factors discipline. For example, differences of opinion
cause classroom misbehavior, highlight the poten- between Chinese and other Americans (Mitchel,
ARTICLE IN PRESS
2001) appear to focus on the relative virtues of cause for concern. The way teachers attempt to
submission to authority versus the child’s right to cope with their concerns may add to their stress
be assertive and individualistic. levels rather than lower them. For example, a
The significance of classroom discipline rests not recent study demonstrates that teachers who are
only on its impact on students’ behavior and more worried about discipline and student mis-
learning, as outlined above. The ability of teachers behavior report greater use of six maladap-
to effectively discipline students is, according to tive coping strategies, namely, wishful thinking,
McCormick and Shi (1999), integrally related to don’t tell anyone, self-blame, worry, disruption
teachers’ sense of professional adequacy. This to sleeping or eating patterns and getting sick
finding appears consistent with the work of God- (Lewis, 1999). These strategies are among those
dard (2000), who reports the results of a study of recently shown to be predictive of a range of
233 teachers’ views of their role. He notes that non-productive outcomes ranging from low self
‘disciplinarian’ was the third most commonly cited concept to depression (Frydenberg & Lewis,
metaphor provided by teachers for their work, 2000). Clearly, the issue of classroom discipline is
ranking only behind ‘leader’ and ‘knowledge of as much significance to teachers as it is to
dispenser’. It is not surprising therefore that any students.
failure on teachers’ part to satisfactorily manage Classroom misbehavior and discipline is a topic
students’ classroom misbehavior can result in that has been studied in Australia (for example,
stress, and in the extreme case, burnout. Overall, Lewis, 2001; Lewis & Lovegrove, 1987; Oswald,
classroom discipline is a well-documented source 1995), China (for example, Gao, 1998; Jin &
of teacher stress (Blase,1986; Borg, Riding, & Cortazzi, 1998; Peng, 1993) and Israel (for
Falzon, 1991; DeRobbio & Iwanicki, 1996; Fried- example, Friedman, 1994; Kaplan, Gheen, &
man, 1995; Keiper & Busselle, 1996; Kyriacou, Midgley, 2002; Romi & Freund, 1999). However,
1980). Some results however may be tenuous as this is the first attempt to systematically examine
teachers experiencing stress as a result of other students’ perceptions of their teachers’ disciplinary
factors (for example excessive workload) may strategies and their misbehavior in these three
perceive student behavior more negatively (White- national settings.
man, Young, & Fisher, 1985) and therefore inflate
its significance as a stressor. Nevertheless, disci-
pline issues rate consistently among the strongest 2. Measuring classroom discipline
of teacher stressors.
Chan (1998), reporting on the stressors of over To measure classroom discipline in three na-
400 teachers in Hong Kong, notes that student tional settings was problematic. Conceptualization
behavior management rates as the second most of classroom discipline strategies in one setting
significant factor stressing teachers. More signifi- could not necessarily be assumed equivalent to
cantly, perhaps, Ingersoll (2001) studied approxi- those in the other two. It would have been possible
mately 6700 teachers in the US and states that to utilize exploratory factor analysis on data sets
approximately 30 percent of the 400 or so who from respective nations to obtain assessments of
chose to leave the profession identify student discipline most appropriate to each setting. It
discipline as one of the reasons that caused them would even have been possible to utilize confirma-
to give up teaching. It needs to be noted that for tory factor analyses and compare goodness of fit
some teachers, the stress associated with classroom measures to examine the extent to which one
discipline relates as much to how they are treated particular measure applied equally to all three
by other teachers and members of the school national settings. However, had students’ views of
administration as it does to their treatment at the classroom discipline provided different measures,
hands of students (Martin, 1994). comparisons would have been prohibited. Conse-
Related research shows that it is not only the quently, since as stated above it was the aim of this
stress arising from ineffective discipline that is a research to undertake a replication, care was taken
ARTICLE IN PRESS
to ensure that the same measures were utilized in Praises the class for good behavior.
each national setting. Praises individual students for good behavior.
To examine the relationship between discipline Rewards the class when students behave well.
strategies and student misbehavior, two steps were
taken. First, the 35 items on the questionnaire used The following two sets of items determine the
in the earlier Australian study were studied by the extent to which teachers attempted to include
colleagues in China and Israel to assess their students’ voice in the decision-making related to
relevance to their respective students. As a result, discipline.
11 items were omitted and 24 were retained. These The first four relate to an emphasis on the class
24 items were agreed by the researchers in each as the determiner of the discipline process.
country to assess the six discipline strategies
reported in the previous Australian study and to Organizes the class to work out the rules for
be of cultural relevance, albeit to differing degrees, good behavior.
in their respective national settings. The strategies Decides with the class what should happen to
measured were Punishing, Rewarding, Involve- students who misbehave.
ment in decision-making, Hinting, Discussion and Makes students leave the room until they decide
Aggression. Examination of a number of discipline to behave properly.
texts (Charles, 2004; Lewis, 1997b; Tauber, 1999; Lets students know that the way they are
Wolfgang, 1995) indicated that one or more of behaving is not how the class expects them to.
these strategies were seen as underlying most of the
available approaches to classroom discipline. For The next four items provide for the voice of
example, Reward and Punishment related to individual students.
Interventionist approaches, Involvement to Inter-
actional approaches and Hinting and Discussion Discusses students’ behavior with them to allow
to Non-Interventional Approaches. Although Ag- them to figure out a better way to behave in
gression was not recommended in any text, it was future.
seen as potentially possible in classrooms in all Lets students talk about their side of things so
settings and necessary to include given its sig- that it can be clearly understood.
nificance in previous research (Lewis, 2001). Gets students to understand why their behavior is
The following four items were designed to assess a problem for others by discussing it with them.
Punishment. Gets students to change the way they behave by
helping them understand how their behavior
Gives out consequences to students who mis- affects others.
behave (e.g. move their seats, detention).
Increases the level of consequence if students The next set of four items relates to a strategy
will not do as they are told (e.g. move seats, that usually precedes more formal intervention by
detention). the teacher, and provides students with awareness
Increases the level of consequence if a misbe- that in the teacher’s eyes, all is not as it should be.
having student argues. It probably also communicates some level of trust
Increases the level of consequence if a misbe- that students will self-regulate their behavior. The
having student stops when told, but then does it following four items were designed to assess this
again. process which was called Hinting.
The four items developed to assess Recognition Describes what students are doing wrong, and
and rewards were as follows. expect them to stop.
Asks students questions like ‘‘What are you
Rewards individual students who behave prop- doing?’’ to get them to think about how to
erly. behave better.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Reminds misbehaving students about the class Students at grade levels 7–12 completed these
rules. items documenting their perception of their
Describes how students are misbehaving to teacher’s use of each classroom discipline stra-
make them decide whether to stop or not. tegy. The introduction to the questionnaire was
brief and indicated that the questions to follow
The final four items were written to permit focused on ‘‘classroom discipline and how you feel
measurement of teacher Aggression. This strategy about it’’. There was no indication as to the
was defined as the use of strategies which, while research questions being addressed. Written ex-
legal, may in some settings negate the student’s planation of response formats were provided as
sense of well-being and possession of natural required.
rights.
rather than reporting to what extent the issues of responses to the sets of four items were considered
classroom discipline and student misbehavior was for internal consistency in each national setting,
an issue of concern to them, the Israeli teachers Cronbach a coefficients were computed for each
indicated the extent it was an issue of importance. set. If the deletion of any item from a set increased
The comparison of the Australian and equivalent the magnitude of the respective a, that item was to
Chinese data showed no significant differences be removed. The reliance on a did not reflect a
(w2 ð4Þ ¼ 2:774, p ¼ :596). belief that high values for internal consistency of
It is of interest to note that in a recent study 294 responses within a set of items was essential to
Australian teachers were asked to indicate their justify the value of a scale. It was assumed, given
levels of concern related to any inability to the diversity of ways in which some strategies may
discipline classrooms as they would prefer. In be operationalized in different national settings,
reporting these data Lewis (1999, p. 162) states ‘‘it that increased likelihood of one behavior in a set
can be argued that the gap between best and of four may only be a weak predictor of the
current discipline practice was, on average, of only utilization of those comprising the remainder of
moderate concern to these teachers.’’ It would the set. Nevertheless, items would be treated as a
appear therefore that the 2 sets of data, collected scale only if each item added shared explanatory
over 3 years apart, from independent samples of variance to the measure.
teachers, are very consistent. The only scale for which any items were
As stated above, the data in Tables 2 and 3, excluded was Involvement. In both Australia and
which provide a general framework for the Israel, the removal of the item ‘‘Makes students
subsequent discussion on classroom discipline leave the room until they decide to behave
strategies used in classrooms, show that a sub- properly’’ improved the magnitude of the respec-
stantial group of teachers in two independent tive a coefficient. On this basis it was removed
national settings report at least moderate levels of from the scale. Consequently there were only three
concern over student misbehavior in class. In items remaining in the Involvement scale.
addition, the Israeli teachers sampled clearly Table 4 reports the scale means (M), average
highlight the significance of the topic. It is likely item means for the items comprising respective
that part of the teachers’ interest in classroom scales (AIM), standard deviations (SD) and
discipline is based on their perception that, on Cronbach a coefficients for each of the six scales
average, a little fewer than ‘‘some’’ but more than measuring classroom discipline strategies.
‘‘hardly any’’ students in the classes they expect to Inspection of the a coefficients in Table 4 shows
teach are likely to misbehave. that most a’s are moderate. Some are clearly low
To document the reliability of the measures and reflect a loose (although statistically signifi-
of teachers’ discipline strategies, the students’ cant) association between the behaviors related to
Table 4
Discipline strategy usage by country
Scale Country
Punishment (n ¼ 4) 11.98 (3.00) 3.94 .62 13.02 (3.26) 4.28 .75 14.54 (3.64) 4.75 .79
Discussion (n ¼ 4) 17.45 (4.35) 4.30 .72 13.45 (3.36) 4.77 .77 13.10 (3.28) 4.46 .73
Recognition (n ¼ 4) 16.32 (4.08) 4.36 .66 13.16 (3.29) 4.92 .79 12.51 (3.13) 5.32 .83
Aggression (n ¼ 4) 9.22 (2.30) 4.03 .69 11.65 (2.92) 4.22 .62 11.02 (2.76) 4.88 .73
Involvement (n ¼ 3) 11.80 (3.93) 3.37 .49 8.49 (2.83) 3.11 .48 8.49 (2.83) 3.14 .53
Hinting (n ¼ 4) 16.04 (4.01) 3.91 .58 14.62 (3.65) 4.03 .62 14.48 (3.62) 4.04 .66
ARTICLE IN PRESS
one strategy. For example, the Involvement scale’s of strategies also varies by Country the only
a of approximately .5 reflects correlations of .17, strategy to vary rank within a country by more
.26 and .40 between the three respective pairs of than two ranks is Punishment, which ranks as the
items. The likelihood of teachers letting students most common strategy in Australia, and the fourth
know that ‘‘the way they are behaving is not how and fifth most commonly used strategy in Israel
the class expects them to’’ is not highly associated and China, respectively.
with the likelihood of them organizing the class to In interpreting these data, it is of value to note
work out the rules for good behavior and what that there are a number of substantial correlations
should happen to students who misbehave, even between strategies. In each national setting, when
though the latter two behaviors are more likely to correlations greater than .4 are considered, four
co-occur. Another explanation for the low a strategies intercorrelate. These are Discussion,
coefficients is the difficulty inherent in transferring Reward, Hint and Involve. All appear to demon-
strategies conceptualized in one culture to another. strate a positive attitude toward students. In
Nevertheless, despite some concern about the low addition, in each setting, aggression correlates
internal consistency of responses to items in the with punishment, forming a potentially more
Involvement and Hinting scales, it was determined negative response to misbehavior, although in
to use all six scales for purposes of replication, Australia punishment also correlates with hint.
acknowledging the tenuousness of findings relating These patterns of relationships are very similar in
to the less-reliable measures. different national settings, suggesting that teachers
may be seen by students in terms of discipline
‘‘styles’’ comprising a number of strategies.
5. Classroom discipline strategies in Australia, In order to more systematically compare na-
Israel and China tional differences in the extent of usage of different
discipline strategies, a 5-way MANOVA was
Before examining the relationship between performed where Country, level of student mis-
classroom discipline and misbehavior, considera- behavior in class, gender of the student, the gender
tion was given to the comparison of the frequency of the teacher and year level (year 7/8, 9/10 or 11/
of usage of different strategies in differing national 12) were utilized as independent variables and the
settings and the correlations between strategies. six discipline strategies were the dependent vari-
Inspection of the AIM, also reported in Table 4, ables. This enabled the consideration of the
indicates that the pattern of usage of the various students’ age and sex and the sex of the teacher
classroom discipline strategies appears relatively to be considered in the analysis in addition to
similar in Australia and Israel. In both countries, national setting and level of misbehavior. Since
teachers commonly react to misbehavior by letting level of student misbehavior was one of the
students know that there is a problem in the hope independent variables, the analyses also permitted
that they will improve their behavior. In addition, the relationship between discipline and misbeha-
they are more than sometimes likely to Punish vior to be examined in the different settings.
misbehaving students and discuss with them the The analysis indicated a total of seven statisti-
impact their misbehavior has on others in a bid to cally significant effects. Since the analysis investi-
have them determine a better way to behave. They gated 31 predictors, a conservative probability
recognize appropriate behavior more than some- level of .01 was utilized for statistical significance.
times, to increase the likelihood of its reoccur- Table 5 reports the Mutivariate F values (Pillai’s
rence, The two strategies utilized less frequently trace) for the significant effects.
than sometimes are aggression and involvement of Inspection of the data in Table 5 shows that
the class in setting rules and consequences. The three main effects and four interaction effects were
pattern in China is a little different in that students statistically significant. Consideration of the rele-
report greater use of all strategies except Aggres- vant univariate tests and Sheffe tests for post hoc
sion and Punishment. Although the relative usage comparisons (po:05) for year level indicate that
ARTICLE IN PRESS
occurs for students in years 7 and 8. The least is Taiwan. After visiting classrooms in both coun-
offered to years 9 and 10 in both Israel and China, tries they report
and 11 and 12 in Australia. In China the
Classroom observations and interviews suggest
differences are very small for Hinting.
that there could be differences in the ways in
In Israel, there is more Hinting at, and Involving
which students regard their teachers; students in
of, students in years 7 and 8 by men teachers than
Taiwan had more respect for teachers than did
by women. At years 9 and 10 the opposite is the
students in Australia.
case. In contrast, in Australia, women teachers are
Although the teachers in both countries com-
more likely than men to Involve and Hint at
plained about discipline problems with stu-
students in all year levels, although at years 9 and
dents, we noted that there was more evidence of
10 the difference is very small. In China, men
disruptive behavior in science classes in Aus-
teachers are more likely to hint at, and involve,
tralia (described in the first story as answering
students in years 11 and 12. At years 7 and 8,
back and chatting between friends) than in
women are more likely than men to Hint at their
Taiwan. (p. 58).
students.
An assumption of less provocative forms of
misbehavior in Chinese classrooms could explain
6. Discussion the lesser likelihood of the more stringent forms of
disciplinary interventions such as Punishment and
The broad pattern of results indicates that Aggression. The Chinese teachers’ greater usage of
teachers sampled from China appear more inclu- hinting, discussion and inclusion may reflect
sive and supportive of students voices when it confidence on their part that the children will
comes to classroom discipline, and are less listen to them and to their peers, as argued by Jin
authoritarian (punitive and aggressive) than those and Cortazzi (1998). Chinese teachers can also rely
in Israel or Australia. In contrast, the Australian on parents to support them in their attempts to
classrooms are perceived as having least discussion make students self-disciplined (Gao, 1998; Peng,
and recognition and most punishment. Israeli 1993). With regard to the reported greater use of
teachers are situated between these two positions, Aggression and Punishment by women teachers in
even though they exhibit the most aggression. China (in higher year levels), and greater involve-
(Inspection of relevant means shows that their ment of older students by male teachers, it may be
aggression is primarily in the form of yelling in that more traditional respect is accorded to males
anger at their students.) within the Chinese culture, particularly by older
Cultural factors may be posited as part of the students. Consequently male teachers are less
reason for these patterns. In China, teachers are likely than females to need to resort to coercive
held in very high esteem (Li, Xie, & Wang, 1998) strategies to reorient misbehaving students. This
and as argued by Jin and Cortazzi (1998), Chinese explanation could also account for why women
students would ‘‘follow what teachers say out of teachers in China are also less likely to try and
respect’’. In a recent study for example, which involve older students in determining rules, and
compared Chinese and American students’ percep- consequences for misbehavior. An alternative
tions of the aims of schooling, Lau et al. note that explanation may be related to the reported greater
the former were more likely to report that learning stress levels experienced by female teachers in
to respect authority was a significant outcome of China (Dong, 2001; Zhou & Zhao, 1998). Such
education. Consequently, even though Chinese stress is likely to be more pronounced in higher
teachers report as much ‘‘misbehavior’’ in class year levels because of the college entrance exam-
as do Australian and Israeli teachers, the nature of ination, and the low entrance rate of students to
the misbehavior in Chinese classrooms may be less universities.
extreme. These assumptions are supported by the It may be argued that the Australian and
work of Aldridge, Fraser, and Huang (1999) in Israeli teachers’ relative unwillingness to empower
ARTICLE IN PRESS
students in the decision-making surrounding class- unproductive to spend time letting such students
room discipline is related to the lower levels of tell their side of events, trying to get them to
unconditional respect they are likely to receive acknowledge that their behavior is unfair and
from students, and the reduced levels of support needs to change.
parents provide. The fact that the Australian Having argued why it is understandable for
teachers report less use of discussion and more teachers to react to provocative and possibly
punishment than do those in Israel may signify confronting student behavior by becoming more
that the former have relatively less ‘‘legitimate’’ aggressive, this does not excuse such a response. It
power, and need to rely on more ‘‘coercive’’ power is recognized that
(Tauber, 1999) to manage their classrooms. The
greater likelihood for women teachers of years 8 Children who have significant emotional and
and 9 in Australia and Israel to be inclusive could behavioral problems respond less positively to
signify a lesser concern about their legitimate others and this elicits fewer positive responses
power, although as reported, in Israel men and more negative responses from others (Pace,
teachers were more inclusive for years 7 and 8. Mullins, Beesely, Hill, & Carson, 1999, p. 151).
This explanation based on power may also
account for the greater inclusion of younger However, teachers are professionals who need
students in all three countries (although the effect to respond in the best interests of their clients, the
is most pronounced in Israel). That is, students in students. As argued by Roeser, Eccles, and
years 7 and 8 are more likely to accord teachers Sameroff (2000), ‘‘Teachers need to protect
unconditional respect than those in later years. adolescents from situations they perceive as
The results for teachers’ usage of recognition threatening to their self yor threatening to their
and reward for good behavior is difficult to social image’’ (p. 454). If not, then ‘‘adolescents
interpret in a way consistent with the above will feel less motivated to learn and more unhappy
analysis. One might have assumed that teachers and will be more likely to manifest academic or
who have less legitimate power may try to use social problems’’(p. 454). In summary, teachers
more ‘‘Reward’’ power (Tauber, 1999) to compen- cannot allow themselves and difficult students to
sate. The data however show greatest use of be locked into ‘‘a vicious cycle of reciprocal
recognition and reward by the Chinese teachers, causation’’ (Pace et al., 1999, p. 151).
followed by those in Israel, with the Australian In making a recommendation that teachers need
sample of teachers using least. These findings to work harder to foster quality relationships with
suggest an additional explanation for some of the difficult students, we are aware how difficult that
findings that is consistent with the reported may be. However, a clear starting point would be
associations between students’ self-reported mis- to minimize the usage of aggressive disciplinary
behavior and teacher aggression. strategies while increasing the frequency with
As stated earlier, in all three settings, students which teachers recognize students’ responsible
more prone to misbehavior report greater levels of behavior, however rare it may be. Secondly, they
aggressive teacher disciplinary behavior. It may be need to make the opportunity to let students talk
assumed that the more provocative students about their side of things so that it can be clearly
stimulate more anger in teachers and consequently understood, to get them to understand why their
more aggression. Angry or upset teachers, as behavior is a problem for others and to obtain a
argued by Glasser (1997), may not be interested plan for a better future. In many schools in
in being reasonable toward unreasonable and Australia, Israel and China, this conversation is
disrespectful students. They therefore will find it conducted by someone other than the classroom
unpalatable to recognize very difficult students teacher, as a result of a ‘referral’. It is the year
when they act appropriately. Rewarding ‘Nean- level coordinator (class teacher), school counselor
derthals’ for being normal may not come natu- or a senior teacher who gets the advantage of
rally. Similarly, they may find it unpleasant and the relationship power that arises from such
ARTICLE IN PRESS
conversations (Tauber, 1999), whereas it is the DeRobbio, R. A., & Iwanicki, E. F. (1996). Factors accounting
classroom teacher who needs it. for burnout among secondary school teachers. Paper pre-
Encouraging teachers to build rather than sented at the annual conference of the American Educa-
tional Research Association. New York.
destroy good will with students who are more Dong, H. (2001). A psychological investigation of teachers’
provocative is a challenging request. It will not be over strees and anxiety. Journal of Urumqi Adult Education
easy. In the experience of one of the authors who is College, 2, 55–58.
working in schools to achieve this aim it can take Friedman, I. A. (1994). Conceptualising and measuring teacher-
many years of persistent effort accompanied by perceived student behaviors: Disrespect, sociability and
attentiveness. Educational and Psychological Measurement,
considerable support. If teachers are to act in the 54(4), 949–958.
best interests of students in an area as emotive as Friedman, I. A. (1995). Student behavior patterns contributing
classroom discipline, then to teacher burnout. The Journal of Educational Research,
88(5), 281–289.
creating professional work environments where Frydenberg, E., & Lewis, R. (2000). The coping scale for adults:
teachers feel supported by other professionals Construct validity and what the instrument tells us. ERIC
TM031533 ED443 888.:12
and school leaders in relation to their own
Gao, L. (1998). Cultural context of school science teaching and
needs for competence, autonomy, and quality learning in the People’s Republic of China. Science
relationships is essential (Roeser et al., 2000, Education, 82, 1–13.
p. 466). Glasser, W. (1997). A new look at school failure and school
success. Phi Delta Kappan, 597–602.
Goddard, J. T. (2000). Teaching in turbulent times: Teachers’
perceptions of the effects of external factors on their
Acknowledgments professional lives. Alberta Journal of Educational Research,
46(4), 293–310.
Guttmann, J. (1982). Pupils’, teachers’ and parents’ causal
The research project reported in this paper was attributions for problem behavior at school. Journal of
in part sponsored by the Institute for Community Educational Research, 76(1), 14–21.
Education and Research, School of Educatiion, Hyman, I. A., & Snook, P. A. (2000). Phi Delta Kappan, 81(7),
Bar-Ilan University, Israel. 489–501.
Ingersoll, R. M. (1996). Teachers’ decision-making power and
school conflict. Sociology of Education, 68(2), 159–176.
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher
References shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educa-
tional Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534.
Aldridge, J. M., Fraser, B. J., & Huang, T.-C. I. (1999). Jin, L., & Cortazzi, M. (1998). Dimensions of dialogue: Large
Investigating classroom environments in Taiwan and classes in China. International Journal of Educational
Australia with multiple research methods. The Journal of Research, 29, 739–761.
Educational Research, 93(1), 48–61. Kaplan, A., Gheen, M., & Midgley, C. (2002). Classroom goal
Barton, P. E., Coley, R. J., & Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Order in structure and student disruptive behavior. British Journal of
the classroom: Violence, discipline and student achievement. Educational Psychology, 72(2), 191–212.
Princeton, NJ: Policy Information Center, Educational Keiper, R. W., & Busselle, K. (1996). The rural educator and
testing service. stress. Rural educator, 17(2), 18–21.
Blase, J. J. (1986). A qualitative analysis of sources of teacher Kyriacou, C. (1980). Stress, health, and school-teachers: A
stress: Consequences for performance. American Educa- comparison with other professions. Cambridge Journal of
tional Research Journal, 23, 23–40. Education, 10, 154–159.
Borg, M. G., Riding, R. J., & Falzon, J. M. (1991). Stress in Lau, S., Nicholls, J. G., Thorkilsen, T. A., & Patashnick, M.
teaching: A study of occupational stress and its determi- (2000). Chinese and American adolescents’ perceptions
nants, job satisfaction and career commitment among of the purposes of education and beliefs about the
primary schoolteachers. Educational Psychology, 11(1), world of work. Social Behavior and personality, 28(1),
59–75. 73–89.
Chan, D. W. (1998). Stress, coping strategies, and psychological Lewis, R. (1997a). Discipline in schools. In L. J. Saha (Ed.),
distress among secondary teachers in Hong Kong. American International encyclopedia of the sociology in education
Educational Research Journal, 35(1), 145–163. (pp. 404–411). Oxford, UK: Permagon.
Charles, C. (2004). Building classroom discipline: From models to Lewis, R. (1997b). The discipline dilemma (2nd ed.). Melbourne:
practise (6th ed.). New York: Longman. The Australian Council for Educational Research.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Lewis, R. (1999). Teachers coping with the stress of classroom and behavioral problems and the social responses of
discipline. Social Psychology of Education, 3, 1–17. elementary school teachers. Contemporary Educational
Lewis, R. (2001). Classroom discipline and student responsi- Psychology, 24, 140–155.
bility: The students’ view. Teaching and Teacher Education, Peng, S. S. (1993). Fostering student discipline and effort:
17(3), 307–319. Approaches used in Chinese schools. Paper presented at the
Lewis, R., & Lovegrove, M. N. (1987). What students think of Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
teacher’s classroom control techniques: Results from four Association (April 12–16, 1993).
studies. In J. Hastings, J. Schwieso (Eds.), New directions in Roeser, R. W., Eccles, J. S., & Sameroff, A. J. (2000). School as
educational psychology, Vol. 2: Behaviour and motivation a context of early adolescents’ academic and social-
(pp. 93–113). The Falmer Press. emotional development: A summary of the research
Li, X. Y., Xie, J. S., & Wang, Z. H. (1998). Reform and findings. The Elementary School Teacher, 11(5), 443–471.
development of Chinese higher teacher education. Jiangxi, Romi, S., & Freund, M. (1999). Teachers’, students’ and
China: Jiangxi Higher Education Publishing House. parents’ attitudes towards disruptive behaviour problems in
Lowell, C., & Gallup, A. M. (2002). The 34th annual Phi Delta high school; a case study. Educational Psychology, 19(1),
Kappa/Gallup poll of the public’s attitude towards the 53–70.
public schools. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(1), 41–56. Romi, S., & Katz, Y. (2003). Affective education: The nature and
Martin, S. C. (1994). A preliminary evaluation of the adoption characteristics of teachers’ and students’ attitudes toward
and implementation of assertive discipline at Robinton high school in Israel. Unpublished paper, School of Education,
school. School Organisation, 14(3), 321–330. Bar Ilan University. Israel.
McCormick, J., & Shi, G. (1999). Teachers’ attributions for Rothstein, R. (2000). Towards a composite index of school
responsibility for their occupational stress in the People’s performance. The Elementary School Teacher, 100(5),
Republic of China and Australia. British Journal of 409–441.
Educational Psychology, 69, 393–407. Tauber, R. T. (1999). Classroom management: Sound theory and
Miller, A., Ferguson, E., & Byrne, I. (2000). Pupils’ causal effective practice. Pennsylvania: Bergin & Garvey.
attributions for difficult classroom behavior. British Journal Whiteman, J. L., Young, J. C., & Fisher, L. (1985). Teacher
of Educational Psychology, 70, 85–96. burnout and the perception of student behavior. Education,
Mitchel, K. (2001). Education for democratic citizenship: 105, 299–305.
Transnationalism, multiculturalism, and the limits of Wolfgang, C. H. (1995). Solving discipline problems: Strategies
liberalism. Harvard Educational Review, 71(1), 51–78. for classroom teachers (3rd ed.). Massachusetts: Allyn and
Oswald, U. (1995). Difficult to manage students: A survey of Bacon.
children who fail to respond to student discipline strategies Zhou, Z., & Zhao, D. (1998). A study on the symptoms of
in government schools. Educational Studies, 21, 265–276. anxiety and related factors of primary and secondary
Pace, T. M., Mullins, L. L., Beesely, D., Hill, J. S., & Carson, school teachers. Journal of China Civilian Medicine, 10(5),
K. (1999). The relationship between children’s emotional 305–306.