One of the challenges of being a teacher is to manage both the group and the individual. Specifically, individual differences of students in the class can influence the learning experience. This article introduces a learning situation wherein it calls for addressing the need of an introvert student.
What’s the situation?
Ian is the pleasant participant and always walks into the training room with a warm smile, displaying a positive disposition. Ian is liked and respected by his co-workers. He has 8 years of on-the-job experience. However, once training begins, his demeanor changes and he physically retreats and never willingly speaks up during class discussion. He ‘keeps his head down’ and seems to always avoid eye contact. Yesterday, a follow-up to an activity, we randomly selected names (written on popsicle sticks) from a jar and his name was selected to answer a question. The question was not especially difficult and was based on the information that was just covered in the lecture. When his name was selected, Ian immediately became red in the face and mumbled “I don’t know. I pass”. Another name was picked from the jar and the participant (Sam) answered the question correctly.
Overview on responding to Ian’s case
It is striking to note that classroom management may have a better effect on achieving student outcomes than decreasing the number of students in a class (Rivkin, Hanushek, & Kain, 2005). In my work as a university lecturer, I have qualms with a class of 30 students or more, believing that I cannot focus on providing individualized scaffolding to each and hence lowers the quality of learning. Yet, I realize that this is not always the case because dealing with more students in a class may be addressed through proper classroom management.
One of the best definitions of classroom management is that of Martin and colleagues (2016) combining the theoretical perspectives of existing classroom management models. To them, classroom management is composed of interrelated aspects: 1) managing teacher emotions, 2) a blend of teacher authority and care, 3) recognizing and responding to individual learner’s personality, 4) developmental and cultural backgrounds, 5) establishing belongingness in a community of learners. Hence, in a physical or virtual classroom, the key is to manage the interrelationship of the teacher, students, and dynamics of the class. As a teacher, I can do this by incorporating the ideas of classroom management in my teaching philosophy and in my instructional strategies.
One of the components of my teaching philosophy is my view of the learner as capable of asking and finding answers to questions. In this deliberate process, the learner continually engages in monitoring and reflection in a way that he/she finds personally meaningful. With this in mind, I find that reaching a learning goal is best facilitated by the collaborative learning relationship between the teacher and the student. In terms of classroom management, this is reflected in students participating as decision-makers on what is best and what will work for the class. In Ian’s case, I put prime importance on how he learns best and I have to make sure that this is considered in the dynamics of our class.
In responding to Ian’s case, I can categorize student engagement into planned and spontaneous strategy (Haug, 2014). Planned (or structured) activities are proactive strategies in dealing with students who have varying levels of personality traits. Spontaneous (or reactive) strategies arise out of the immediate situation, and in this case, the teacher’s knowledge and skills in dealing with students of varying personality traits impromptu. I prefer to call proactive strategies as planned strategies to emphasize that these strategies can be structured ahead of time. Moreover, I prefer the term spontaneous instead of reactive strategies to emphasize that these strategies are not just an immediate response to the present situation but a well-thought-of response to a situation based on the existing knowledge and skills of the teacher.
Now, let us assess the scenario where Ian was involved. Ian has a warm disposition, has a good relationship with his co-workers, and even has credible work experience. However, he tends to socially withdraw and does not speak up in a class discussion. There are observable behaviors like keeping his head down, avoiding eye contact, having a red face when called to participate, and avoiding speaking. These are indicators of an individual high in introversion (Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013). Although such demeanor may be indicative of shyness, this is not the case with Ian because he has credible work experience and has good work relations. Shyness stems out from lack of confidence and fear of being judged in not knowing how to respond in a situation (Martin, 2014). The class discussion is related to his work experience and existing knowledge and skills, so not speaking up is not entirely due to his lack of confidence or knowledge about the topic at hand. We will discuss more about what drives his behavior in a subsection on ‘what is motivating Ian’s behavior’.
In responding to Ian’s case, I connect it with the 5 aspects of classroom management (Martin et al., 2016), my teaching philosophy, and categorize the ideas into planned or spontaneous classroom management strategy.
What will I do in front of the class?
Consistent with my teaching philosophy which views the learner as capable of directing his/her own learning, I will wait patiently for Ian to share his ideas. As an individual high in introversion, it may take some time for him to reflect on the question and to warm-up before responding. In relation to the third aspect of classroom management (Martin et al., 2016), I have to recognize and respond to Ian’s personality and way of learning. It may take some time, but the time delay serves as a window for him to get comfortable and gather energy to participate. So, it is worth the wait. If at some point Ian shares his ideas in front of the class, then I have to make sure that I provide support and reinforce his behavior (Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013) – this reflects the second aspect of classroom management which is balancing teacher authority and care (Martin et al., 2016).
There are planned strategies that I would employ in order to deal with students like Ian. Condon and Ruth-Sahd (2013) mentioned best practices and I mention two of these in relation to Ian’s case. First, giving materials in advance and a specific task on what to do with the materials can benefit Ian as this will give him enough time to reflect on the material. During class, Ian is comfortable with sharing his ideas to a small group of peers (or with a pair), and this collaborative work makes Ian more socially engaged provided that he is able to explore the materials ahead of time. Creating dedicated groups wherein the same members interact throughout the course can help facilitate Ian by slowly opening up with the members on a regular basis (Martin, 2014). Written exercises and concept maps are also two of the effective ways wherein Ian can actively engage in as this involves less interaction with others (Benton, 2004; McLeod, 2010, as cited in Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013).
Second, including a quick discussion on personality traits and its implications toward learning may manage the class in terms of acknowledging individual differences. In this case, a quick ten-item personality test (see BFI-10, Rammstedt & John, 2007) that provides a glimpse on one’s level of openness, conscientiousness, extraversion (low score indicates introversion), agreeableness, and neuroticism (emotional instability) can stimulate a discussion about how one learns best. This way, I am able to direct the dynamics of the class towards respecting individual differences.
How will I respond to Ian?
In line with my philosophy that Ian is capable of directing his own learning, reaching a learning goal is best facilitated by a collaborative learning relationship between me as the teacher and Ian as the student. I will talk to Ian about his situation and what I can do as a teacher to take into account his concern when conducting the session. This can be done in a nonthreatening way by checking in on each student and discussing how they best learn. After the session or during break, I can have a chat with some students including Ian, point out how sharing ideas in front of the class may be threatening, and ask for suggestions on ways to share one’s ideas other than verbally sharing it in front of the class. By asking their suggestions, it will help them invest their time and effort in living up to those suggestions in class – a behavior that is observed at work and in organizations, termed procedural justice (He, Zhu, & Zheng, 2013). Through this, I tap into the fifth classroom management aspect which is establishing belongingness in a community of learners – by letting the students including Ian participate in deciding what is best for the class, I am facilitating a sense of identification with the class.
What should I not do in this situation?
Knowing Ian’s personality, a spontaneous strategy is not to force him to participate verbally and in front of other participants. Such a situation is threatening to him. Instead, I have to find other ways of eliciting participation from Ian like writing his responses or giving him enough time to respond whenever he is ready and comfortable to do so.
One planned strategy is to avoid cold calling which refers to randomly calling someone to answer a question without preparation time (Martin, 2014). It would be helpful not only for Ian but for the entire class to provide materials and respective tasks beforehand to help them prepare well-thought-of responses (Condon & Ruth-Sahd, 2013).
What is motivating Ian’s behavior?
Ian is high in introversion (low in extraversion). The behaviors stated in the situation (e.g., keeping his head down, avoiding eye contact, having a red face when called to participate, avoiding speaking) reflect the typical behaviors of individuals high in introversion. Take note that I am not using the label ‘introvert’ because this may stereotype Ian and I, as a teacher, may act in ways that are biased towards eliciting more introvert behaviors from Ian (see Pygmalion effect by Rosenthal & Jacobsen, 1968). Having certain expectations of how an ‘introvert’ thinks, feels, and behaves, one may unconsciously behave in ways to elicit such ‘introvert’ responses (Babad, 2016). This is something I want to avoid (or at least minimize) in dealing not only with Ian but also with all students of varying personality levels.
Martin (2014) presented a clear neurological explanation of the neurotransmitter receptors and its activity among individuals high in introversion. They have less dopamine receptors than those high in extraversion, which means they require less stimulation and actively avoid overstimulation. They prefer a less stimulating environment, and thus less adrenaline. Their acetylcholine pathway also goes to brain parts associated with reasoning and memory, whereas those high in extraversion have a path that goes to appetite, alertness, and emotions. This explains why individuals high in introversion get their energy from within whereas those high in extraversion get their energy from the outside environment (Myers, McCaulley, Quenk, & Hammer, 1998).
What frameworks or models will help put up a good classroom management strategy?
Classroom management frameworks on PBIS (Positive Behavioral Interventions and Supports), CISD, and three-phase process are helpful in facilitating students like Ian. The ideas from these 3 frameworks can be categorized into either planned or spontaneous strategy.
In terms of planned strategies, PBIS suggests to make classroom expectations conspicuous at all times (Brown, 2019). Hence, a post should be visible throughout the course reminding students that they can participate in ways they are comfortable with and respect each other at all times. This is coupled with providing options for students to participate not only verbally but in other ways which they find non-threatening. Ian can participate verbally if he chooses to, but can also participate in other ways through written work, polls, and other non-socially charged participation.
Moreover, CISD (2017) emphasizes the idea of committing mistakes as an opportunity for growth, fostering a positive learning environment for accepting mistakes and learning from it. As a planned strategy, I have to make sure that I approach Ian’s and other students’ responses in a nonjudgmental way and point out that our classroom is where we commit mistakes and learn from it. This is where the interrelationship of the teacher, students, and class dynamics are being framed into a safe and respectful climate (CISD Practice #2) which provides an assurance to Ian that he can safely share his thoughts and feelings.
Finally, the three-phase process of classroom management (Terada, 2019) and its emphasis on establishing a sense of belonging (phase 1) and maintaining relationships (phase 2) align with Martin and colleagues’ (2016) aspect of classroom management on establishing belongingness in a community of learners. A planned strategy is to find a bank time wherein I talk one-on-one with a student and regularly checks in with them to maintain a collaborative learning relationship – this also reflects one of the components of my teaching philosophy.
In terms of spontaneous strategy, CISD (2017) suggests the use of positive and proactive communication (practice #4). I can have a focused conversation with Ian so I will know his learning needs and respond accordingly. Throughout our conversation, I have to listen with empathy by not judging him and by making sure that I am able to clearly understand how he thinks and feels. Another strategy is to provide ‘think time’ to allow Ian to process the information and respond whenever he is ready (CISD practice #5). This reflects slow-to-warm-up learners, wherein I provide time for them to digest or process the information and patiently wait for their teachable moment. In terms of the second aspect of classroom management (Martin et al., 2016), this is where I strike the balance between my authority as a teacher through soliciting their participation and showing my care by providing them an environment where they can safely learn.
What are my take-aways on this case study?
I would like to anchor on the idea of CISD (2017) that classroom management is the optimal distribution of “proactive (planned) and reactive (spontaneous) approaches to discipline in order to create habits of desirable behavior” (p. 2). Throughout this paper, I aligned my discussion on the aspects of classroom management (Martin et al., 2016), my teaching philosophy, and planned (proactive) and spontaneous (reactive) strategies to classroom management. Thus, the takeaways are reflected in the integration of these key ideas.
In terms of planned strategies, the aspects of classroom management that are given emphasis are the recognition of an individual learner’s personality, developmental and cultural backgrounds, and establishing belongingness in a community of learners. In recognizing an individual learner’s personality, developmental and cultural backgrounds, it is preferable to provide materials ahead of time (or even at the start of the course) to give the learners enough time to explore and process the information accordingly. When it is time to talk about the materials, giving different avenues for sharing (other than verbal participation) can make participation non-threatening. All these have to occur in an open and respectful learning climate where learners feel a sense of acceptance and belongingness.
In terms of spontaneous strategies, managing one’s emotion as a teacher and appropriately blending teacher authority and care are the aspects of classroom management that are emphasized. As a teacher, I have to be mindful of my biases and expectations from the class. The class and the individual students may not always go into the direction I wanted it to be. Same goes with the level of engagement from each student. I have to recognize that students engage in varying levels and ways, so I have to maintain composure throughout the session. There are students who readily participate during class but there are also those who do not. My responsibility is to facilitate the entire class’ learning process through a variety of means to encourage participation.
Both planned and spontaneous strategies of classroom management reflect my view of the learner as capable of directing his/her own learning. My responsibility as a teacher is to systematically provide opportunities for optimal learning. These opportunities can be realized through working on the aspects of classroom management. In the end, other factors in the classroom such as the number of admitted students may not be totally under my control, but on a positive note, I can deal with several barriers to learning in a physical or virtual session through classroom management.
References
Babad, E. (2016). Pygmalion and the classroom after 50 years. In S. Trusz & P. Bąbel (Eds.), Interpersonal and intrapersonal expectancies (p. 125–133). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315652535-17
Batara, J. B. L. (2020, September). BROD Cycle: Mapping your teaching philosophy. https://flowjame.com/2020/09/03/brod-cycle-teaching-philosophy
Brown, C. (2019, March). How to use PBIS strategies in the classroom. https://www.classcraft.com/blog/features/pbis-strategies/
Condon, M., & Ruth-Sahd, L. (2013) Responding to introverted and shy students: Best practice guidelines for educators and advisors. Open Journal of Nursing, 3, 503-515. doi: 10.4236/ojn.2013.37069
Coppell Independent School District [CISD] (2017, February). CISD classroom management framework: A guide for 6 essential classroom management practices. https://www.coppellisd.com/cms/lib/TX01000550/Centricity/Domain/2931/Appendix%20M%20-CISD%20Classroom%20Management%20Framework.pdf
Haug, B. S. (2014). Inquiry-based science: Turning teachable moments into learnable moments. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(1), 79-96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-013-9375-7
He, H., Zhu, W., & Zheng, X. (2014). Procedural justice and employee engagement: Roles of organizational identification and moral identity centrality. Journal of Business Ethics, 122(4), 681-695. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-013-1774-3
Martin, E. (2014). Tips for Teaching: The brain game: Teaching strategies for introverted vs. extroverted students. Bulletin for the Study of Religion, 43(3), 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1558/bsor.v43i3.39
Martin, N. K., Schafer, N. J., McClowry, S., Emmer, E. T., Brekelmans, M., Mainhard, T., & Wubbels, T. (2016). Expanding the definition of classroom management: Recurring themes and new conceptualizations. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 51(1), 31-41. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26174348
Myers, I. B., McCaulley, M. H., Quenk, N. L., & Hammer, A. L. (1998). MBTI manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (3rd ed.). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.
Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(1), 203-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001
Rivkin, S. G., Hanushek, E. A., & Kain, J. F. (2005). Teachers, schools, and academic achievement. Econometrica, 73(2), 417-458. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0262.2005.00584.x
Rosenthal, R., & Jacobsen, L. (1968). Pygmalion in the classroom: Teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual development. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Terada, Y. (2019, February). The key to classroom management: A three-phase process helps build strong teacher-student bonds, which can reduce disruptive behavior. https://www.edutopia.org/article/key-effective-classroom-management
Acknowledgment: My sincere gratitude to Glenn Galy of Vancouver Community College School of Instructor Education for the feedback of the previous version of this article.
flowjame 