Attributions and emotional competence

why some teachers experience close relationships with disruptive students (and others don’t)

Kevin F. McGrath*, Penny Van Bergen

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Disruptive student behaviour is a major concern for teachers, causing classroom conflict and emotional fatigue. Whilst student-teacher closeness is known to reduce student aggression and improve behaviour, it is not yet known why some teachers experience close relationships with disruptive students and others do not. This qualitative study therefore examined relational closeness between elementary teachers and disruptive students in Sydney, Australia. Using a teacher speech sample task, we identified eight disruptive students with ‘complicated’ student-teacher relationships: high in both closeness and conflict. Eleven classroom teachers and seven support teachers each spoke about their relationships with the eight students. Speech samples were analysed using an inductive content analysis to determine characteristics that may facilitate relational closeness in spite of student-teacher conflict. Findings revealed two characteristics of teachers’ speech that guided relational closeness: attributions for disruptive behaviour and emotional competence. Not all teachers, however, described a close relationship. These findings provide new directions for interventions that aim to improve student-teacher relationship quality.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)334-357
Number of pages24
JournalTeachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice
Volume25
Issue number3
Early online date22 Jan 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2019

Keywords

  • student-teacher relationships
  • disruptive behaviour
  • closeness
  • emotional competence
  • attributions
  • five-minute speech sample

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Attributions and emotional competence: why some teachers experience close relationships with disruptive students (and others don’t)'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

  • Cite this