Elementary Teachers' Tolerance of Problem Behaviors

0 downloads 0 Views 2MB Size Report
ior management, because both student groups ... (Kounin, Friesen, & Norton 1966; Mc-. Carthy and ... erable-those classroom behaviors most likely to require ...
Elementary Teachers' Tolerance of Problem Behaviors Author(s): Stephen P. Safran and Joan S. Safran Source: The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 85, No. 2 (Nov., 1984), pp. 236-243 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1001649 . Accessed: 24/12/2014 10:29 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Elementary School Journal.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Elementary Teachers' Tolerance of Problem Behaviors Stephen P. Safran

Joan S. Safran OhioUniversity

The ElementarySchoolJournal Volume 85, Number 2 ? 1984 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. 001 3-5984/85/8502-0007$0 1.00

With the passage of Public Law 94-142 in 1975, placement of handicapped children in a "least restrictive environment" was legally mandated. As a direct consequence, elementary school teachers have increasing responsibility for direct instruction and supervision of learning-disabled (LD) and behavior-disordered (BD) students (Reynolds 1978), but frequently must assume this role without sufficient special educational support services (Peterson, Zabel, Smith, & White 1983). Concurrent with these duties come new demands in behavior management, because both student groups, particularly BD students, exhibit higher rates of inappropriate and off-task behavior than their nonhandicapped peers (Kounin, Friesen, & Norton 1966; McCarthy and Paraskevopoulos 1969; Mooney & Algozzine 1978). In addition, research shows that regular teachers spend significantly more nonacademic time attending to these students and have 60%90% more student- or teacher-initiated interactions with them (Thompson, White, & Morgan 1982). Because educators can be expected to focus more on behaviors they perceive as the most disturbing, this study identifies specific student behaviors that elementary educators find least tolerable-those classroom behaviors most to require extra teacher effort and likely attention. The study of behavior and emotional disorders is subjective and complex, which makes the assessment of teacher tolerance a relative measure. Personal interpretations of etiology are subject to one's conceptual frame of reference, usually comof posed of various combinations

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

~: ::::: :iiiiiiiiiiii Ii-?4s

...... ....

......i~iii

?Ra~a~~s~`i:~:-~9-~~'g i0 ri?-?a_~,i~ &_,~ BB:-MW ~?s~cl~~i~~? i:::r::::_:--:?:::_---:-::-; diiij--_i~:-Afi ..........M ~ii-::_i~i:_-:iii-:~ i:-:ii-i-i:: .:: :::,iiii~i:-i -i~l:-i: I-il-i_:ii-: i~ l.pyi-ii:_i--i R.. -S.7 ;;__::_-A. :-::i ?R

RIM::,:: ::g -:::-l-~:-:-i---:i~?-ii-::il"a,

I.,

:1? ..%,... ... ME_

Am

iii-ii~i.:rii~i:Mm",: i:::::i~i::iiiii-01: ....... .. .. .......... ~ ii

M .-::-: fV.:

':iKA141

sm,

i ~i

die

:'-.

lj-~_::

is~

~

MO

~"'7~~ii~i'

-:

-_ iiiiii~?: i~ii::i~~i~i ii-i::C :::::.::;_

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

"

238

THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL

behavioral models (Kauffman 1982), psymodels (Fachoeducational/humanistic gen, Long, & Stevens 1975), or ecological models (Swap 1974). The literature points out that differences in perspective may result from varying professional viewpoints (Beilin 1959; Conte & McCoy 1980; Fremont, Klingspon, & Wilson 1976), the experiences of teachers, pupils, parents, and significant others, or both. In addition, behavioral standards are frequently perceived as emanating more from the "ideal" than from the "normative" child (Leach 1977). The notion of viewing children's behavior as varying points on a continuum is both supported and qualified by research. Although teachers often perceive disturbed students to be within the realm of "normalcy," they rate them as exhibiting more severe degrees of behavior problems (McCarthy & Paraskevopoulos 1969). Larrivee and Bourque (1981, p. 404) elaborate on this point by stating, "It is clear from results that teacher-rated symptoms of mainstreamed children are extremely similar to such ratings of normal children." There are, however, two major qualifications of this perspective. First, BD teachers do not agree on which behaviors correlate with mild, moderate, and severe levels of disturbance (Olson, Algozzine, & Schmid 1980). Second, educators' behavior ratings show a large degree of withinbehavior variability, suggesting that individual teachers differ on their degrees of tolerance for specific behaviors (Gesten, Cowen, DeStefano, & Gallagher 1980). Levels of tolerance are also influenced teachers' attitudes towards mainstreamby students. Vacc (1969) found LD/BD ing teachers less accepting of emotionally disturbed children than of their nonhandicapped peers, possibly because they perceived students' lack of behavioral improvement in regular classrooms. Vacc and Kirst's (1977) survey of elementary teachers indicated that, despite a general belief that the public schools were indeed

responsible for mainstreaming, it would be hampered by disturbed students' lack of peer acceptance and the inadequacy of programming in the regular classroom. Underlying this expressed agreement with the principles of mainstreaming may be teachers' fear of a "behavioral contagion" or "ripple effect" in classroom disruptiveness (Safran 1982), although such concerns are not generally supported in naturalistic studies (Kounin et al. 1966; Saunders 1971). Algozzine and his colleagues conducted a series of studies measuring the teacher tolerance phenomenon (Algozzine 1977, 1980; Algozzine & Curran 1979; Curran & Algozzine 1980). Their Disturbing Behavior Checklist I, based on the Behavior Problem Checklist (Quay & Peterson 1967), was developed to assess teacher tolerance by asking teachers to rate how disturbing each of 55 behavioral descriptors was on a five-point scale. A factor analysis produced four major clusters of commonality: general social immaturity (primarily comprised of internal personality variables), social defiance (behaviors of a more visible, disruptive nature), motorically restless (general descriptors of hyperactivity), and socialized delinquent (Algozzine 1979); of these, social defiance was found to be the most disturbing. The author then focused on the importance of matching a student with a specific behavior problem with a high-tolerance teacher in that particular area (Algozzine 1977, 1980). Though not empirically validated, findings suggest that teachers' expectations and ultimate interactions would likely be influenced by levels of behavioral tolerance (Algozzine & Curran 1979; Curran & Algozzine 1980). These individual differences, plus regular educators' indications of lower tolerance for disturbing behaviors than special educators, may influence decisions concerning placement in mainstreamed classrooms (Algozzine 1980). NOVEMBER 1984

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOLERANCE OF PROBLEM BEHAVIORS

To identify aspects of teacher tolerance specific to the elementary classroom and not addressed previously, the present investigation involves collection of teacher ratings of observable, mild to moderate school-related behaviors. Descriptors of internal affect (i.e. "feelings of inferiority"), variables appropriate to the severely disturbed ("engages in self-abuse"), characteristics more relevant to adolescents ("loyal to delinquent friends"), and behaviors that are not education-related ("stays out late at night") were excluded. Examination of this population-specific information will supply a basis for the development of guidelines which may be applied to assist in the appropriate placement and maintenance of LD/BD students in elementary classes. Method Sample Forty-six elementary teachers from graduate courses and workshops offered by Ohio University (93% female, 5% with master's degree) participated in the study. Twenty-six percent reported having 1-3 years of teaching experience, 19% had 46 years, 24% had 7-9 years, 7% had 1012 years, and 24% had more than 12 years. Small-town schools (51%) and rural schools (42%) were heavily represented, with the remainder from suburban districts (7%). One-third of the sample districts had at least 75% of their students were from lower SES groups, 53% were equally divided between low and middle SES, 11% had at least three-quarters middle SES, and only 2% came from entirely upper- and middleincome groups. Their typical student's academic ability was identified by 81% as being about average, by 12% as being below, and by 7% as above. In response to the question of anticipated teacher longevity, 70% indicated that they expected to remain in teaching more than 10 additional years, 9% said 7-10 years, 12% said 4-6 years, and 9% said 1-3 years. Class enrollments were reported as 1-10 stu-

239

dents (2%), 11-17 (2%), 18-24 (35%), 2531 (47%), and greater than 31 (14%). In addition, 40% of the sample described their classes as highly traditional and adhering to rules, 55% as a combination of traditional and open, and only 5% as unstructured, open, and flexible. Instrumentationand procedure Each subject completed the 39-question Teacher Tolerance Scale (TTS), which was developed for this study to assess elementary educators' tolerance of common, observable problem behaviors. To assure content validity, all items and behavioral clusters were acquired from the Devereux Elementary School Rating Scale II (DESB II) (Swift 1982), a norm-referenced teacher rating scale designed to assess an individual student's problem behaviors relative to regular class peers. This methodology has several advantages compared with that used in previous research. All behaviors listed in the scale are observable and specific to the elementary classroom, with "personality traits" and adolescent behaviors excluded. Behaviors included are milder in severity and therefore more applicable to students typically mainstreamed into regular classes. Eleven clusters of behavior (see table 1) are used, allowing greater specificity in interpreting areas of tolerance. TABLE 1. Rank Order, Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of the Behavioral Clusters of the Teacher Tolerance Scale Rank and Behavioral Cluster 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11.

Negative aggression Poor peer cooperation Impatience Inattention Work organization Socially withdrawn Irrelevant thinking Blaming Confusion Need for direction Failure anxiety

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Mean Score

SD

4.42 3.49 3.43 3.24 3.19 3.08 3.05 3.02 3.01 2.98 2.80

.57 .65 .54 .61 .67 .57 .63 .56 .75 .70 .56

240

THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL

Several modifications were made to the DESB II in the development of the TTS. The number of behavioral clusters was reduced from 14 to 11 creative initiative/ involvement, positive toward teacher, and perserverence were excluded because they lacked applicability to the current study. In addition, minor changes were made so that all items would be negatively worded without varying the content or intent of the question (i.e., "Works well with peers?" to "Works poorly with peers?"). A 1-week test-retest reliability of .75, and a coefficient alpha (Mehrens & Lehman 1973) of .92 were obtained for 32 subjects. Prior to beginning the TTS, subjects were informed about the purpose of the study and asked to complete each item after being asked "How tolerable is it if a student frequently . . .". Responses were recorded on a five-point scale: 1 (extremely tolerable) to 5 (extremely intolerable).

(2) Will not cooperate with other children by sharing equipment or materials? All the clusters rated as more tolerable can be described as inner- or teacherdirected (irrelevant thinking, blaming, confusion, need for direction, failure anxiety). These items, such as "shows worry or gets anxious about knowing the 'right' answers" (failure anxiety) or "is unable to correct errors in his own work" (need for direction) are largely nondisruptive to other students.

Results Findings for the 11 behavioral clusters are reported by rank order, mean scores, and standard deviations (see table 1). Higher mean scores indicate clusters that are least tolerated by elementary teachers; higher standard deviations suggest relative disagreement among respondents in levels of tolerance. The two areas that elicited responses of least tolerance were negative aggressive (4.42) and poor peer cooperation (3.49), both outer-directed behaviors, including such items as "destroys others' property," whichcould disrupt otherstudents. The complete list of specific descriptors for these two behaviors is as follows. For negative aggressive they were (1) Pokes, torments, or teases classmates? (2) Destroys others' property? (3) Verbally belittles others (e.g. puts others down, uses abusive language)? and (4) Breaks classroom rules (e.g., throws things, marks up desk or books)? For poor peer cooperation they were (1) Works poorly with peers? and

Discussion This study supports previous findings that behaviors least tolerated by teachers are outer-directed or disruptive, originating in the student but having an observable, tangible effect on other pupils (Algozzine 1977, 1979). Behaviors described as selfor teacher-directed elicited less negative ratings from the elementary teachers polled. Several causal hypotheses explain this phenomenon. Ashton and Webb that (1982) suggest large class size may have a detrimental effect on educators' sense of efficacy, the belief that personal competence can influence student performance. Given that many elementary teachers are responsible for educating large groups of children (61% of the sample had over 25 students per class), teachers may interpret behaviors that they perceive as threatening or as interfering with group processing and instruction as undermining personal control and professional competence, both major factors in shaping self-efficacy. Dealing with disruptive behaviors also reduces the amount of instructional time available to students. Each effort an elementary teacher makes toward redirecting the LD/BD student lacking in appropriate cooperative and sharing behaviors (poor peer cooperation cluster) contributes to increased nonacademic interactions (Thompson et al. 1982). In addition, teachers frequently interpret these outerdirected student behaviors as more likely to disrupt others and contribute to a poNOVEMBER

1984

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOLERANCE OF PROBLEM BEHAVIORS

tential "behavioral contagion" effect (Kedar-Voivodas & Tannenbaum 1979; Safran 1982). In contrast, the student who, for example, "avoids involvement or communication with others" (socially withdrawn cluster), "forgets directions" (confusion cluster), or "shows worry or gets anxious about work" (failure anxiety cluster), interferes only minimally with the learning and perceived well-being of other students. The similarity in ratings for these clusters does not suggest that these problems are less severe-only that the behaviors are less disturbing to the teacher. This parallels the age-old problem of equity in teacher attention to so-called aggressive versus withdrawn students. LD/BD students characterized as self-directed are less threatening to group management and would likely require less nonacademic time. The regular class teacher of a large group may be under constant pressure and thereby forced into a crisis management intervention system. Because self-directed behaviors do not require immediate intervention, an effective teacher can select the time and place to attend to an individual student's concerns. Suggestionsfor teachers The results of this study have several major implications for the placement and maintenance of the LD/BD students in regular elementary classrooms. With the present shortage of services available to support teachers of mainstreamed pupils (Peterson et al. 1983), regular educators may be expected to manage low tolerance, other-directed behaviors appropriately with minimal aid. For example, teachers can develop consistent classroom rules and use individual student contracts within large groups to establish more precise behavioral expectations and increase rates of appropriate conduct. Time-out procedures (contingent, short-term isolation of a student from group situations) may also reduce peer and group reinforcement of

241

inappropriate behaviors (Kerr & Nelson 1983). Elementary teachers may also effectively adapt various self-control or selfmanagement techniques that have been developed and utilized with greater frequency in small-group settings to improve class performance of LD/BD students. Wang (1981), who identifies self-management as one of eight essential characteristics of effective mainstreaming, reports that, when children are able to control and monitor their own actions, there is a concurrent improvement in achievement and an increase in student-initiated academic interactions. Although she emphasizes academic behaviors, self-management is a term equally as relevant to nonacademic behaviors. The psychoeducational model posits that observable or surface behavior is an outward manifestation of internal conflict, and self-control/management is a direct consequence of behavioral awareness and improved self-concept. Fagen et al. (1975) have developed several affective techniques to be used in small groups to teach primary students to better manage outer-directed behaviors, such as frustration, inhibition, and delay of impulsive actions, and to relax. Although these strategies have strong advocates, little empirical data support their efficacy in decreasing inappropriate observable behaviors; therefore, they should be used cautiously by educators. Another strategy recently developed to assist student self-management of outerdirected behavior is cognitive behavior modification (CBM), self-instruction, or verbal rehearsal. Meichenbaum (1977) emphasizes that children can learn to man-

age their own behavior by using language as an internal mediator. Through a sequence of steps, children are first taught to model verbally and physically a task demonstrated by a teacher and eventually use language to manage actions, by literally covertly speaking to themselves. Using CBM principles, Camp and Bush (1981)

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

242

THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL JOURNAL

have developed the "Think Aloud" program, which consists of a series of structured lessons to assist impulsive and aggressive children to slow down and reflect on their actions in social situations. These procedures have generally been supported by research (Camp, Blom, Hebert, & van Doorninck 1977) and are beginning to be implemented in educational settings. Since these self-management techfor are small niques designed groups or individual intervention, whatever special education support services are available should be utilized as resources in adaptation of the techniques to the regular elementary program. Special educators, whether working in a self-contained, resource, or consultant capacity, may provide a variety of useful supports (Evans 1980). In addition to general assistance in programming, a teacher might request demonstration teaching of self-management skills, presentation or organization of methods and materials for affective units, or in-service education on using cognitive behavior modification. Special educators might be involved as trainers of peer tutors, who can be effective monitors in using verbal rehearsal strategies in largegroup settings. Special educators, guidance counselors, or school psychologists can be called to lead jointly class meetings or "groups" focused on behavioral change. Although this study must be interpreted with some degree of caution because of the small sample size (N = 46) and geographic limitations (largely small town and rural), findings indicate that elementary teachers are least tolerant of outer-directed behaviors-those that disrupt other children (negative aggressive, poor peer cooperation). These responses may be a direct consequence of concerns for the well-being of the group; excessive nonacademic management and time expenditure for the one or few at the expense of the many. To combat these issues effectively, consistent and ongoing special education consultation services are essen-

tial. Without this necessary support, integrating LD/BD students with mild to moderate behavior problems into large classes may be an unrealistic task.

Note

This research was supported in part by a grant from the Ohio UniversityResearchCommittee, Office of Researchand Sponsored Programs. The authors would like to thank the Devereux Foundationfor permissionto modify the DESB II for this study.

References Algozzine, B. (1977). The emotionally disturbed child: disturbed or disturbing.Jour-

nal of AbnormalChild Psychology,5, 205-211. Algozzine, B. (1979). The disturbing child: a validation report(Research Report No. 8). Minneapolis, MN: Institute for Research on Learning Disabilities. Algozzine, B. (1980). The disturbing child: a matter of opinion. Behavioral Disorders, 5, 112-115.

Algozzine, B., & Curran, T. J. (1979). Teach-

ers' predictions of children's school success as a function of their behavioral tolerances. Journal of EducationalResearch,72, 344-347. Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1982, March). Teachers' sense of efficacy: toward an ecological model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, New York. Beilin, H. (1959). Teachers' and clinicians' attitudes toward the behavior problems of children: a reappraisal. Child Development, 30, 9-25.

Camp, B. W.; Blom, G. B.; Hebert, F.; & van

Doorninck, W. J. (1977). Think aloud: a program for developing self-control in young aggressive boys. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,5, 157-169.

Camp,B. W., &Bush, M. A. (1981). Thinkaloud: increasing social and cognitiveskills-a problem solving approach for children: primary level. Champaign, IL: Research Press.

Conte, J. R., & McCoy,L. (1980). Teacher and

social worker agreement on behavioral expectations of special children. Exceptional Children, 46, 645-646.

NOVEMBER 1984

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

TOLERANCEOF PROBLEMBEHAVIORS Curran, T. J., & Algozzine, B. (1980). Ecological disturbance: a test of the matching hypothesis. Behavioral Disorders, 5, 169-174. Evans, S. (1980). The consultant role of the resource teacher. Exceptional Children, 46, 402-404. Fagen, S. A.; Long, N.J.; & Stevens, D.J. (1975). Teaching children self-control:preventing emotional and learning problemsin the elementary school. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Fremont, T. S.; Klingspon, M. J.; & Wilson, J. H. (1976). Identifying emotional disturbance in children: the professionals differ. Journal of School Psychology,14, 275-282. Gesten, E. L.; Cowen, E. L.; DeStefano, M. A.; & Gallagher, R. (1980). Teachers' judgments of class-related and teacher-related problem situations. Journal of Special Education, 14, 171-181. Kauffman, J. M. (1982). Characteristicsof children's behaviordisorders(2d ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill. Kedar-Voivodas, G., & Tannenbaum, A. J. (1979). Teachers' attitudes toward young deviant children. Journal of Education Psychology,71, 800-808. Kerr, M. M., & Nelson, C. M. (1983). Strategies for managing behavior problems in the classroom. Columbus, OH: Merrill. Kounin, J. S.; Friesen, W. V.; & Norton A. E. (1966). Managing emotionally disturbed children in regular classrooms. Journal of Educational Psychology,57, 1-13. Larrivee, B., & Bourque, M. L. (1981). Factor structure of classroom behavior problems for mainstreamed and regular students. Journal of AbnormalChild Psychology,9, 399406. Leach, D. (1977). Teachers' perceptions and "problem" pupils. Educational Review, 9, 188-203. McCarthy, G. M., & Paraskevopoulos, J. (1969). Behavior patterns of learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, and average children. Exceptional Children, 36, 69-74. Mehrens, W. A., & Lehman, I. J. (1973). Measurement and evaluation in psychologyand education. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. Meichenbaum, D. (1977). Cognitive behavior modification: an integrative approach. New York: Plenum.

243

Mooney, C., & Algozzine, B. (1978). A comparison of disturbingness of behaviors related to learning disability and emotional disturbance. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology,6, 401-406. Olson, G.; Algozzine, B.; & Schmid, R. E. (1980). Mild, moderate and severe e. h.: an empty distinction. Behavioral Disorders, 5, 96-101. Peterson, R. L.; Zabel, R. H.; Smith, C. R.; & White, M. A. (1983). Cascade of service model and emotionally disturbed students. Exceptional Children, 49, 404-408. Quay, H. C., & Peterson, D. R. (1967). Manual for the behaviorproblemchecklist.Champaign, IL: Children's Research Center. Reynolds, M. C. (1978). Basic issues in restructuring teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 28, 25-29. Safran, S. P. (1982). Resource consultant communication and teacher expectations of behaviorally disordered children. Behavioral Disorders, 8, 25-31. Saunders, B. T. (1971). The effect of the emotionally disturbed child in the public school classroom. Psychologyin the Schools, 8, 2326. Swap, S. (1974). Disturbing classroom behaviors: a developmental and ecological view. Exceptional Children, 41, 163-172. Swift, M. (1982). Devereux ElementarySchoolBehavior Rating Scale II. Devon, PA: Devereux Foundation. Thompson, R. H.; White, K. R.; & Morgan, D. P. (1982). Teacher-student interaction patterns in classrooms with mainstreamed mildly handicapped students. American Educational ResearchJournal, 19, 220-236. Vacc, N. A. (1969). A study of emotionally disturbed children in regular and special classes. Exceptional Children, 35, 197-204. Vacc, N. A., & Kirst, N. (1977). Emotionally disturbed children and regular classroom teachers. ElementarySchoolJournal, 77, 309217. Wang, M. C. (1981). Mainstreaming exceptional children: some instructional design and implementation considerations. ElementarySchoolJournal, 81, 194-221.

This content downloaded from 132.235.61.22 on Wed, 24 Dec 2014 10:29:58 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions