Temáticas aplicadas a los films de Studio Ghibli

The role of ‘teacher as disciplinarian’ has shifted towards one with a focus on positive educational and behavioural development. Teachers exert a large influence on how children develop their moral code (Sternberg, 2013), and consequently societal expectations are placed upon teachers to inculcate appropriate attitudinal and behavioural outcomes (O’Connor, 2008). Recently published Irish guidelines state that teachers’ practice is “motivated by the best interests of the pupils/students entrusted to their care... (and is shown) through positive influence, professional judgement and empathy” (Teaching Council, 2012, p. 5). Attempts to foster desirable behaviours should begin early and be implemented across all environments to which children are exposed, particularly the home and school. Moral education incorporates both curriculum-based education and reinforcement of acceptable classroom (and by extension, societal) behaviour (Raby, 2012). Classroom management is one such method of moral education as it is, by definition, centred upon the premise of order (O’Connor, 2008). Both positive and negative behaviour management approaches may be implemented by teachers, and these can exert a direct influence on the classroom environment and child behaviour outcomes.

Effective classroom management consists of various interrelated components. Specifically, effective classroom management is proactive rather than reactive; it is decisive and focuses on the elimination or reduction of student misbehaviour (Emmer & Stough, 2001). Additionally, effective classroom management involves the promotion of student engagement, and the maintenance of a positive and productive learning environment (Brophy, 1988). Effective classroom management involves the successful structuring of activities and transitions between them (Barbetta, Norona, & Bicard, 2005). The literature clearly shows that teacher- preparedness reduces the opportunity for disruption (McIntosh, Herman, Sanford, McGraw, & Florence, 2004). The smooth transition from one classroom activity to another largely stems from teacher forethought and planning, and from the use of plain instructions (Barbetta et al., 2005; Buck, 1999). It is long been argued that children benefit from provision of clear, concise teacher instructions (Darch,

Kame’enui, & Crichlow, 2003; Moore, 1938). Conversely, unclear or complex commands pose difficulty in terms of compliance and offer opportunity for classroom disruption (Fisher, Adelinis, Thompson, Worsdell, & Zarcone, 1998; Richman et al., 2001).

Classroom management may be achieved by scheduling instruction to maximise engagement, and by ensuring that the number of teacher reprimands do not outnumber praise (Simonsen, Fairbanks, Briesch, Myers, & Sugai, 2008; Sugai & Horner, 2002). Language is a powerful tool for instruction, but it holds potential for misapplication. Semantics, and the manner in which instructions are relayed, are intrinsically linked with how they will be received. For example, whilst many teachers use positive instruction, much communication directed towards children who have behavioural problems tends to be negative or critical in nature (Nungesser & Watkins, 2005). Negative commands (e.g., ‘stop’, ‘don’t’, or ‘hush’) are often directed towards children who engage in perceived misbehaviour (Thornberg, 2006), and disapproval is an inherent feature in this type of command (McNeil & Hembree- Kigin, 2010). Regard for this manner of instruction is becoming less favourable, as new classroom management techniques call for increased attention to child well- being (O’Brien, 2008).

Kounin (1970) reported that teachers who displayed successful management skills were conscious of ongoing student activities and that this meant they could intervene to prevent minor difficulties from escalating to major problems; he referred to this as ‘withitness’. This work, whilst dated, was very influential in stimulating further research into effective classroom management throughout the 1970s and 1980s (Oliver, Wehby, & Reschly, 2011). Teachers skilled in classroom management have also been shown to be more successful in the prevention of problem behaviour (Raver et al., 2008). Moreover, there is evidence to suggest that children educated within well-managed classrooms display significantly less aggression and spend more time on-task than do their peers in matched control groups in classrooms where the teacher engaged in less effective management (Kellam, Ling, Rolande, Brown, & Ialongo, 1998; Webster-Stratton, Reid, & Hammond, 2004). Thus, the collective evidence indicates that developing positive teacher-pupil relationships is intrinsic to successful classroom management, the creation of a positive learning experience for

children, and a positive work environment for teachers. This is not a controversial idea, nor is it new. Humphrey (1945) suggested that “no matter how crowded our teaching schedules may be, we must find a place and time for individual conferences with our students.” (p. 23).

Although teacher-student relationship building is recognised as an ideal, Thomas, Bierman, and the Conduct Problems Prevention Research Group (2006) noted that, when classrooms contain aggressive or disruptive children, it is difficult for teachers to develop and sustain positive relationships with students. This can result in teachers who would otherwise prefer to engage positively with the children in their care, engaging in negative interactions. Indeed, they may become angry or vindictive when continually facing aggressive students (Van Acker, 1993). They may find themselves involved in arguments within the classroom and relying on combative strategies, which have the potential to result in negative cyclical patterns of teacher and child behaviour (Hamre & Pianta, 2001). Using negative classroom management strategies can result in poor outcomes not just for the child, but also for the teacher. As noted by Baker, Lynch, Cantillon, and Walsh, teachers and students are ‘emotional beings’ (as cited in O’Brien, 2008); importantly, emotions cannot be compartmentalised from action or cognition (Hargreaves, 2000). The experience of conflict is known to be uncomfortable (Jablin, 2001), and the strength of emotional responses to conflict is no less acute for adults when the source of conflict is a child. With perceptions of little available support, a teacher’s emotional reaction to classroom conflict is understandably human. The physiological arousal that accompanies conflict is often difficult to manage (Lazarus, 1999), although response- focused emotional regulation has been proposed as a potential mechanism through which people can maintain a measured response.

In order to respond in a socially appropriate manner and to model expected behaviour in the classroom, teachers must regulate their inner, emotional reactions (Grandey, 2000). They are frequently called upon to suppress their emotions (Hargreaves, 2000; Totterdell & Parkinson, 1999), and if this is a chronic occurrence, it can be regarded as part of emotional labour (Hochschild, 1983). Engagement in emotional labour requires an employee to regulate expression of their inner feelings, to match the organisational vision (Riddell, 2008) and engender a sense of security in

those for whom they care (i.e., for healthcare professionals, their patients; for teachers, their students) (Smith & Gray, 2001). Emotional regulation can be seen as transitioning into emotional labour when the emotional activities of an individual worker are largely regulated by their employers. The ability to regulate emotions in the classroom does not solely rely upon emotional competence; it is influenced greatly by rules imposed on the individual by their professional role (teacher), and by the organisation (school culture) (Hargreaves, 2000).

Teaching demands a high level of personal commitment and, in many cases, emotional labour (Kitching, 2009). The experience of intense emotional reactions, without scope for expression, may exert a high price for teachers (Mackenzie, 2011). Emotional suppression can be viewed as a risk factor for negative physiological outcomes (Panagopoulou, Kersbergen, & Maes, 2002) along with psychological ill- effects such as stress and burnout (Bakker & Heuven, 2006), as will be discussed later in this chapter. Nonetheless, a recent review found that there are also potential benefits to emotional regulation, such as increased role commitment, job satisfaction, and enhanced professional identity (Tsang, 2011). The manner in which emotional reactions are felt and perceived by teachers may be important. For example, in a longitudinal study by Philipp and Schüpbach (2010), teachers who engaged in ‘deep acting’ (i.e., who reported an ability to regard their expressed emotions as appropriate in a given situation) were significantly less emotionally exhausted at follow-up. Similar findings were reported by Näring, Briët, and Brouwers (2006), where teachers who did not display deep acting of emotions, displayed increased levels of depersonalisation (development of negative/cynical feelings towards students). This study also showed that emotional consonance, or the absence of emotional labour, had the best possible outcome in terms of self-reported personal accomplishment (feelings of enthusiasm and competence). Thus, it would seem plausible that the greater teachers’ belief in their externally exhibited emotions, the less likely they are to experience negative psychological effects. The research suggests that providing teachers with only the strategies to respond to challenging behaviour in the classroom, without instilling beliefs regarding response- appropriateness, is unlikely to be effective. Importantly, they must also be confident in their ability to enact this practice, as this increases the frequency of strategy usage (Reupert & Woodcock, 2010).

In a study by Sutton, Mudrey-Camino, and Knight (2009), teachers reported a conscious attempt to moderate the strength and duration of their emotional response to child misbehaviour in order to succeed in classroom management and develop positive teacher-child relationships. However, many participants cited a lack of self- confidence in managing their negative versus positive emotional states. Thus, it would appear that not only are teacher beliefs related to the expression of positive, appropriate responses to child behaviour, but these encompass their classroom management identity. Students undergoing ITE may have a definite image of their future professional selves and hold constructivist, student-centred management ideals (Arnon & Reichel, 2007; Çermik, 2011; Haritos, 2004). Nonetheless, some have argued that the classroom experiences of novice teachers shape and sometimes challenge their self-concept as educators and result in the use of management methods which directly contradict pre-service beliefs (Kaufman & Moss, 2010). The latter authors further note that strongly-felt fears relating to uncontrolled behaviour can dominate student teachers’ academic knowledge of constructivist and child- centred principles. Thus, the idealism of student teachers is replaced by what Veenman (1984) refers to as ‘traditional’ or ‘custodian’ views of teaching. Where learned management techniques prove insufficient, the outcome can be cognitive dissonance (Festinger, 1957) on the part of the teacher. This professional incongruity (perceived dissonance between one’s role and self-perception) stems from an inconsistency between teacher-held views on classroom management, an idealised image of the type of teacher they wish to become, and the reality of the classroom environment.

Research suggests that in terms of pedagogy, teachers who feel that they must conform to a particular school culture are more likely to abandon recommended pedagogical practices that they learned during initial teacher education (Ginsburg, 2007). Teachers who enter a new system of practice and face unexpected management realities may be inclined to adopt any (not necessarily effective) strategy. Terms such as ‘washout’ and ’reality shock’ have been used to describe the loss of skills and knowledge acquired during ITE (Fayne & Ortquist-Ahrens, 2006), when novice teachers first enter the contextual reality of the classroom environment (Cole & Knowles, 1993). In this situation, it is likely that to reduce the discomfort of

cognitive dissonance an individual will change their attitudes towards the issue at hand (Veenman, 1984). This may be done for example, through the identification of behaviour problems as stemming from the home or outside their control as educators. Teacher beliefs regarding their ability to manage effectively have direct application in terms of classroom practices that occur, and are of importance for their own psychological well-being. Moreover, it has been noted that “teachers who have no confidence in their classroom management abilities are confronted by their incompetence every day” (Brouwers & Tomic, 2000, p. 242).