THE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR ADDRESSING DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS FROM EXPERT JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS IN TAIWAN

THE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

FOR ADDRESSING DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS FROM

EXPERT JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS IN TAIWAN

Dissertation

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of

Doctor of Philosophy

Lynn University

By

MENG-LING TSOU

AUGUST 8, 2005

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

UMI Number: 3217965

Copyright 2005 by

Tsou, Meng-Ling

All rights reserved.

INFORMATION TO USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy

submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and

photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper

alignment can adversely affect reproduction.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript

and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized

copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.

®

UMIUMI Microform 3217965

Copyright 2006 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.

All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against

unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.

ProQuest Information and Learning Company 300 North Zeeb Road

P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346


O rder Number:

THE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR ADDRESSING

DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS FROM EXPERT JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL

TEACHERS IN TAIWAN

Tsou, Meng-Ling, Ph.D.

Lynn University, 2005

Copyright 2002 , by Tsou, Meng-Ling. All Rights Reserved

U.M.I.300 N. Zeeb Road

Ann Arbor, MI 4810 6


APPROVAL OF DISSERTATION

THE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR ADDRESSING

DISCIPLINE PROBLEMS FROM EXPERT JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL

TEACHERS IN TAIWAN

By MENG-LING TSOU

Frederick L. Dembowski, Ed.D. Dissertation C om m ittee Chair

s hi-Date

Y / d Y j o ^

Richard C. Cohen, Ed.D. Dissertation C om m ittee M em ber

Date

Leah Kinniburgh, Ph.D.o '

F' /x M s-Daie

Dissertation C om m ittee M em ber


Acknowledgments

I sincerely thank Dr. Frederick L. Dembowski, Dr. Richard B. Cohen, Dr. Leah

Kinniburgh, and Dr. Valeria Fabj. Without them, this dissertation would have been

impossible. Secondly, I appreciate the unconditional support from my family. Thirdly, I

want to express my gratitude to the dean of my school, Mr. Jing-Jhe Yu, who encouraged

me to go on, and to my classmate, Martha Bryant, who often gave me a hand. Finally, I

praise all principals and expert teachers who helped me by participating in my surveys.

They are not only good teachers for their students, but also great teachers who help

students around the world by sharing their effective strategies.


Abstract

This study explores effective classroom management strategies in Taiwan for

decreasing problem behaviors of junior high school students, an area of frustration for most

junior high school teachers in that country (Chiou, 2002). Poulou and Norwich (2000)

found that poor classroom management is one of the primary causes of student behavior

problems. Several other studies indicate there is a strong relationship between student

behavior and academic achievement (Hester, Gable & Manning, 2003). Successful

classroom management can improve student behavior and enhance effective learning.

This study gathered many effective classroom management strategies from the U.S.

literature and from expert homeroom teachers in Taiwan. It intended to help non-expert

teachers improve student behavior and classroom management in the future. A

three-round Delphi Technique was used to determine the most frequent problem behaviors

and the most effective strategies as identified by expert teachers.

This study is modeled partly on Bowman’s (2002) work surveying discipline

strategies from successful African-American teachers, but this survey focuses on

Taiwanese junior high school homeroom teachers. Surveys of other groups are

recommended as the focus for future research.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Acknowledgements..................................................................................................................ii

ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................ iii

LIST OF TABLES.................................................................................................................vii

LIST OF FIGURES.................................................................................................................x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY.............................................................1

Introduction and Background.............................................................................................. 1Purpose.................................................................................................................................. 2

Statement of Problem....................................................................................................... 2Overview of Design......................................................................................................... 4

Definitions of Terms.............................................................................................................7Assumptions.......................................................................................................................... 8Justification........................................................................................................................... 9Delimitations and Scope.................................................................................................... 12Summary..............................................................................................................................13

Chapter 2: LITERATURE REVIEW................................................................................... 16

Introduction......................................................................................................................... 16Literature Review...............................................................................................................17

Problem Behaviors..........................................................................................................17Classroom Management Strategies...............................................................................25

U.S. Strategies for Managing Student Behavior......................................................25Taiwanese Strategies for Managing Student Behavior........................................... 62

Relationship of Classroom Management Strategy and Problem Behavior................ 64Duties of Homeroom Teachers .................................................................................... 68

Duties of Taiwanese Homeroom Teachers.............................................................. 68Duties of U.S. and Japanese Homeroom Teachers..................................................78

School Student Behavior Contest................. 82

iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS Continued

Theoretical Framework for the Study............................................................................... 89Summary............................................................................................................................. 89

Chapter 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.......................................................................91

Problem and Purpose Overview........................................................................................ 91Research Question............................................................................................................. 93Design................................................................................................................................. 93Instrumentation.................................................................................................................100Population and Sample.................................................................................................... 103Data Collection.................................................................................................................107Data Analysis....................................................................................................................108Summary........................................................................................................................... 112

Chapter 4: RESULTS......................................................................................................... 114

Organization of Data Analysis.........................................................................................116Description and Analysis of Results............................................................................... 122Explanation of Results..................................................................................................... 185Summary........................................................................................................................... 190

Chapter 5: DISCUSSION................................................................................................... 195

Summary of the Study..................................................................................................... 195Interpretation.................................................................................................................... 201Limitations.......................................................................................................................203Practical Implication....................................................................................................... 205Recommendations for Further Research.........................................................................208Conclusions......................................................................................................................209Ethics................................................................................................................................. 217

V


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Continued

APPENDIXES.....................................................................................................................219

Appendix A: Taiwanese Classroom Management Strategies....................................... 219Appendix B: The Letter to Principal............................................................................... 222Appendix C: The First Questionnaire.............................................................................223Appendix D: The Second Questionaire..........................................................................225Appendix E: The Third Questionaire..............................................................................227Appendix F: Pilot Test Survey Instrument.................................................................... 230Appendix G: Translation Certification...........................................................................232Appendix H: Informed Consent Form............................................................................233Appendix I: A Letter of Employment.............................................................................236Appendix J: Explanation of Every Strategy in the Third Questionnaire..................... 237Appendix K: IRB Approval Letter................................................................................. 253

REFERENCES.....................................................................................................................255

BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................................................281

VITA..................................................................................................................................... 284

vi


LIST OF TABLES

Number

Table 4.1 Names of Cities and Counties in Taiwan and Number of Junior High Schools

Table 4.2 Response Rates of Letter to the Principal

Table 4.3 Response Rates of First, Second, Third Questionnaires

Table 4.4 Frequencies of Sex, Age, Level of Education, and Year of Teaching Experience of Participants

Table 4.5 Mean of Problem Behaviors in Pilot Test

Table 4.6 Mean of Problem Behaviors in the First Questionnaire

Table 4.7 Output of Correlation Analysis of the First Questionnaires

Table 4.8 Output of Reliability Analysis of the First Questionnaire

Table 4.9 A Comparison of Results between Pilot Test and the First Questionnaire

Table 4.10 Mean of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework”

Table 4.11 Output of Correlation Analysis of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework”

Table 4.12 Output of Reliability Analysis of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework”

Table 4.13 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework”

Table 4.14 Mean of 16 Strategies for Addressing “Using obscene or vulgar language”

vii

Page

116

117

119

120

122

124

126

128

131

135

136

137

139

143


Table 4.15 Output of Correlation Analysis of 16 Strategies for 144Addressing “Using obscene or vulgar language”

Table 4.16 Output of Reliability Analysis of 16 Strategies for 145Addressing “Using obscene or vulgar language”

Table 4.17 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 16 Strategies for 147Addressing “Using Vulgar or Obscene Language”

Table 4.18 Mean of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Bullying” 151

Table 4.19 Output of Correlation Analysis of 17 Strategies for 153Addressing “Bullying”

Table 4.20 Output of Reliability Analysis of 17 Strategies for 154Addressing “Bullying”

Table 4.21 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 17 Strategies for 155Addressing “Bullying”

Table 4.22 Mean of 18 Strategies for Addressing “Not cleaning 159classrooms or throw trash wherever”

Table 4.23 Output of Correlation Analysis of 18 Strategies for 161Addressing44 Not cleaning classrooms or throw trash wherever”

Table 4.24 Output of Reliability Analysis of 18 Strategies for 162Addressing “Not cleaning classrooms or throw trash wherever”

Table 4.25 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 18 Strategies for 164Addressing “Not cleaning classrooms or throw trash wherever”

Table 4.26 Mean of 14 Strategies for Addressing “Being 170absent-minded during class”

Table 4.27 Output of Correlation Analysis of 14 Strategies for 171Addressing “Being absent-minded during class”

Table 4.28 Output of Reliability Analysis of 14 Strategies for 172Addressing “Being absent-minded during class”

Table 4.29 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 14 Strategies for 173Addressing “Being absent-minded during class”

Table 4.30 A Comparison of Results in the Third Questionnaire 178

viii


Table 4.31 Answers to the Open-ended Question in the First 179Questionnaire

Table 4.32 Answers to the Open-ended Question in the Third 182Questionnaire


LIST OF FIGURES

Number Page

Figure 1.1. Research Map. 6

Figure 3.1 Taiwan Map 105

X


CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY

Introduction and Background

This study intended to find effective classroom management strategies for teachers to

address problem behaviors. After literature review, the researcher decided to use 3-round

Delphi Technique and surveyed expert junior high school teachers in Taiwan. She

gathered problem behaviors from literature to design the first questionnaire in order to find

frequent problem behaviors. Then she organized classroom management strategies from

literature for helping her to categorize strategies expert junior high school homeroom

teachers wrote on the second questionnaire and to design the third questionnaire. After

three rounds of survey by mail, SPSS was used for data analysis. Finally, frequent problem

behaviors and effective classroom management strategies for addressing them were found.

1


Purpose

Statement o f Problems

“For over 40 years, researchers have been studying . . . students who are potential or

actual problems to themselves or others,” such as juvenile delinquents, at-risk youths, or

gang members (Belvel & Jordan, 2003, p. 80). In Taiwan alone, in the period from 1993 to

2002, there were 34 theses and dissertations about classroom management (Tai, 2003).

However, among them, only one study surveyed effective strategies, and the participants

were vocational school common homeroom teachers (Tai, 2003). However, that study does

not specifically explain which problem behaviors those strategies are addressing (Hwang,

2001).

Many authors and educators discuss effective classroom management strategies, but

they do not specifically point out which strategy can addresses which behavior problem.

For example, in Behavior Management Strategies fo r Teachers, Harlan (1996) does not

focus on specific problems or students from specific grades. Emmer, Evertson, and

Worsham (2003) focus on the secondary level, but do not explain which strategy addresses

which specific student behavior problem. Nelsen, Duffy, Escobar, Ortolano, and

Owen-Sohock (2001) list almost 80 behavioral problems and provide several suggestions

2


for each problem, but they do not assess their effectiveness.

Kosier (1998) states that when a student refuses to complete assignments, teachers

can offer assistance, administer reinforcement, review expectations and consequences, and

contact parents and/or principals. However, he does not use statistical data to analyze

which one of them is the most effective strategy for addressing the problem of refusing to

complete assignments. Bowman (2002) surveyed African- American teachers to acquire

ten effective strategies, but again, she does not state which strategies address which

problems.

A few empirical studies apply a strategy on their sample to determine its effect on

specific classroom management problem behaviors. Fast, Fanelli, and Salen (2003)

determined that mediation is effective for addressing violence. Robinson, Smith, and

Miller (2002) studied the effect of teaching problem-solving skills to address social deficits

of middle school students. Pfiffher, O’Leary, Rosen, and Sanderson (1985) compared the

effect of response cost and reprimands on disruptive student behaviors. Response cost

typically involves either the loss of a token in a token based program, “or the loss of

privileges” and reprimands are “those that are quiet, [and] delivered with eye contact, or

delivered in close proximity to the child” (Pfiffher, et al., 1985, p. 348). Stewart (2003)

3


analyzed relationships between school climate and misbehavior. Baker, Lang, and Lawson

(2002) discussed solutions for classroom management problems that occur when teachers

implement inquiry lessons. However, these studies analyze the effectiveness of only one or

two strategies, and teachers need more strategies to deal with many problem behaviors that

occur in their classes each day.

Overview o f Design

A research plan had been formulated to identify the most frequent problem behaviors

of junior high school students in Taiwan and to determine which strategies were more

effective for addressing these behaviors. The major research questions are as follows:

(1) What are the most frequent problem behaviors of junior high school

students in Taiwan? and,

(2) What classroom management strategies do expert junior high school

homeroom teachers in Taiwan use to cope with these frequent problem

behaviors?

This study used a three-round Delphi Technique. The first questionnaire contained 29

5-point Likert scale questions and one open-ended question. The second questionnaire

contained five open-ended questions. The third questionnaire contained 82 3-point Likert

4


scale questions. Finally, it obtained consensus from expert teachers.

In the Delphi Technique, the second questionnaire was based on responses that were

compiled by the first questionnaire and the third questionnaire was based on responses that

were compiled by the second questionnaire. Problem behaviors that were identified from

the literature were used in designing the first Delphi Technique questionnaire. Classroom

management strategies were collected from the U.S. and Taiwanese education literature to

help the researcher interpret the strategies that expert homeroom teachers provided on the

second questionnaires. Next, the criteria for identifying expert homeroom teachers were

summarized from the literature and were used for developing the criteria to be used by

principals for selecting expert homeroom teachers in Taiwan. Finally, the most frequent

problem behaviors and the most effective strategies were obtained by consensus from

expert junior high school homeroom teachers. The research map follows.

5


Figure 1.1 Research Map

junior high school teachers

commonteachers

homeroomteachers

expertteachers

classroommanagement

strategies

discipline problems

^ ^ s t u d e n t s ' problems beh that can be observed, measure

and frequently occure irJ

The research process of this study was as follows. The researcher collected

problem behaviors and strategies from the literature review to design the pilot test survey

questionnaire (see Appendix F). The researcher sent the pilot test questionnaire to 41

junior high school teachers, who knew the purpose of this research and were not expert

homeroom teachers. The researcher sent criteria to principals of junior high school in

Taiwan for them to recommend expert teachers to be participants (see Appendix B). The

researcher next sent informed consent materials to participants to invite them to join the

survey (see Appendix H) and then sent the first questionnaire to expert teachers who were

willing to participate (see Appendix C). From the mean of problem behaviors of first

6


questionnaire, the researcher found the top five frequent problem behaviors (see Table 4.6)

and then designed the second questionnaire (see Appendix D) to elicit effective classroom

management strategies from participants. The researcher organized answers and

categorized them into several strategies (see Appendix J) and used these categories of

strategies to design the third questionnaire (see Appendix E). The third questionnaire was

sent and, through the responses of the third questionnaire, the effective strategies expert

teachers had used were shown after statistical calculation (see Table 4.30). Because of the

technological condition in Taiwan, all papers were sent by mail rather than by the Internet.

Through this process, the researcher discovered effective classroom management

strategies that decreased specific problem behaviors.

Definitions of Terms

Strategy: “Methods or ways of accomplishing a goal” (Bowman, 2002, p. 11).

Classroom management: The application of discipline practices, behavioral

interventions, and “actions in orchestrating supportive learning environments” (Evertson

& Harris, 1999, p. 60).

Student discipline: A topic within the field of classroom management (Weinstein,

1999) which involves ensuring healthy and safe life, managing the learning environment,

7


arranging schedules of activities, establishing classroom rules, and setting the norm of

group-life (Li, 1994).

Problem behavior: Behaviors that reduce “potential academic achievement”

(Supapom, et al., 2003, p. 329), “militate against classroom learning for the student or

others, [and] represents a physical danger to the student or others” (Gable, Hendrickson,

Tonelson & Acker, 2000, p. 205).

Junior high school: The compulsory education system that children who are 13,14,

and 15 years old must enter (“Level of Education,” 2004).

Taiwanese homeroom teacher: One who plays many roles, from instructor to

counselor to friend, and must supervise the problems and progress of students of his/her

class (Liu, 1997).

Expert homeroom teacher: An effective classroom manager who is able to develop

an environment suitable for learning, and thus enhance the effect of studying, to promote

interaction between teachers and students, and finally help students build a sound

personality (Hwang, 2001).

Assumptions

The expected result of this study is that there will be effective strategies that can

8


decrease problem behaviors. Teachers are expected to get assistance in leading student

discipline from the findings of this study. Professional peers are expected to do further

research with other countries. Problem behaviors frustrate teachers and affect students

learning. They can be brought from the school into our society. If leading students to be

disciplined is successful, teachers will contribute to their students both effective learning

and good discipline.

Justification

There are three primary purposes of this study. The first is to provide teachers with

classroom management strategies for decreasing frequent problem behaviors that will

assist them in managing their classrooms. Freiberg (1999b) believes that problem student

behaviors have a ripple effect. They influence not only the individual who misbehaves, but

also his/her “classmates, the school learning environment, and the nearby community”

(Freiberg, 1999b, p. 93). Many problem students who misbehave in schools may drop out

of school and go on to engage in other delinquent behaviors (Freiberg, 1999b). Belvel and

Jordan (2003) also point out that many criminals who are imprisoned had been students

who misbehaved in their classrooms. McKenna (1995) believes that a student can be

changed through education and “the more education we acquire, the more our humanity is

9


developed” (p. 190).

Interventionists believe that a child’s development is influenced by environmental

conditions (Taubert, 1999). In school, teachers are the controllers of the environment

(Wolfgang & Glickman, 1980) and must “insure the proper learning behaviors” (Wolfgang

& Glickman, 1980, p. 15). Teachers are the agents “who first subject children to the

discipline of their society” (Chambliss, 1996, p. 158). Chambliss (1996) also points out

that to become productive members of society, children must experience discipline in

school. “Schools are the seedbed of the society that we want for the future” (Wayson, 2004,

f 5). When students are taught to behave well, they will become, hopefully, well-behaved

citizens.

The second purpose of this study is to provide classroom management strategies to

teachers for helping students achieve effective learning. Decreasing problem behaviors

contributes to the effectiveness of teaching and learning, because “our goals will not be met

and the skills and concepts will not be learned if students are misbehaving. . . or if they are

being distracted by the antics of other misbehaving students” (Harlan, 1996, p. 7). “An

effective teacher is an effective behavior manager;. . . instructional and managerial

successes are inseparable” (Harlan, 1996, p. ix). “Effective discipline . . . [is] a

10


necessary . . . pre-condition of effective learning” (Munn, Johnston & Chalmers, 1992, p.

5). To achieve effective teaching and learning, teachers need to apply the management

strategies for establishing a successful learning environment (Brophy, 1999). A teacher’s

major tasks are keeping his/her class in order and ensuring that learning occurs (Zabel &

Zabel, 1996). “Good classroom management enhances instruction by helping to create a

good environment for learning.” (Emmer, Evertson, Sanford, Clements & Worsham, 1989,

p. 117). “Classroom management and instruction are different sides of the same coin and

must be seen as one issue” (Freiberg, 1999a, p. 79).

The third purpose of this study is to provide homeroom teachers with effective

classroom management strategies for preventing future acts of student violence. School

violence impedes the chance of students being fully educated and may result in the same

consequences of societal violence—death and victimization (Casella, 2001b). Maslow’s

theory can support the importance of a safe learning environment— “Only a child who

feels safe dares to grow forward healthily. . . and safety must be gratified” (as cited in

Belvel & Jordan, 2003, p. 77). The school must provide a safe learning environment to

students because schools have the duty “to maintain student discipline and to protect

11


children from violence that occurs while they are attending the very schools to which the

state has bound them to attend” (as cited in Mitchell, 1998, p. 1223).

“All teachers have observed students’ ‘problem behaviors’ regardless of their career

stage (e.g., preservice neophytes to veteran teachers), the subject matter they teach, or

the . . . grade level they teach” (Supapom, Dodds & Griffin, 2003, p. 328). “Managing the

problem behavior of students has consistently been a top priority. . . , particularly [for]

those working with students identified as exhibiting severe problem behaviors” (O’Neill,

Johnson, Kiefer-0’Donnell & McDonnell, 2001, p. 101). In Taiwan, many junior high

school teachers are frustrated by problem behaviors (Chiou, 2002). This is partly because

in the Taiwanese compulsory education system, teachers cannot expel students or deprive

them of their educational rights, no matter how they behave.

The study is researchable and feasible. 1109 first questionnaires were sent and 628

were replied. Then 628 the second questionnaires were sent out and 399 were replied.

Finally 399 the third questionnairse were sent and 350 were replied. It took four months.

Answers to two research questions were found.

Delimitations and Scope

The literature review covered the time frame from 1990 to 2003. The major types of

12


literature included empirical studies, review articles (critical analysis), theoretical

articles/books, methodological articles, and case studies. Forms of literature included

periodical (hard copy), periodical (electronic), non-periodical (book), non-periodical

(chapter in a book), doctoral dissertations (including abstracts), audio-visuals, and

government documents. The literature were about definition of terms, importance of

discipline, kinds and causes of problem behaviors, strategies to cope with problem

behaviors, criteria of expert teachers, research results of applying specific strategies, duties

of homeroom teachers, and student behavior contests. The literature review leads the

findings of problem behaviors and classroom management strategies from junior high

school homeroom teachers in Taiwan.

In order to get a better results, all junior high school principals in Taiwan were asked

to recommend expert junior high school homeroom teachers according to criteria the

researcher provided. There are 718 junior high schools in Taiwan, so the researcher had

spent a lot of money on postage. However, because of the number, the result can be

generalized to the country.

Summary

Chapter One discusses the problems that were found in literature and explains the

13


purposes of this study. It also provides an overview of methodology of this study, which

intends to help teachers solve the problems of student behavior and succeed in classroom

management.

Chapter Two includes a literature review that introduces many problem behaviors,

U.S and Taiwanese classroom management strategies, student behavior contests in

Taiwanese schools, and duties of Taiwanese homeroom teachers. The literature review

also provided the foundation on which the design of questionnaires was based.

Chapter Three fully explained the research methodology-the nature of the Delphi

Technique and how this research was conducted. While the methods are addressed here,

the questionnaires developed for the study are included in the appendices.

Chapter Four shows the results of this study. Through statistical calculation with

SPSS software, the most frequent problem behaviors of Junior High School students in

Taiwan and the effective classroom management strategies Taiwanese expert homeroom

teachers had used were revealed.

Chapter Five includes a summary and interpretation about the findings as well as

conclusions and recommendations. The feedback of participants was gratifying to the

researcher. Many of the teachers who contributed their time and knowledge praised the

14


project. They expressed their concern over problem behaviors and the need to match

classroom management strategies with specific behaviors. Many noted they were looking

forward to reading the results of this study.

15


CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

The motive of this research is to find effective strategies to decrease the problem

behaviors of junior high school students in Taiwan. Chapter Two describes the results of

other research studies on this topic and provides a comprehensive review of the literature.

The problem behaviors of students are described as well as classroom management

strategies that were found in U.S. and Taiwanese literature. In addition, empirical studies

that discuss several effective strategies for decreasing problem behaviors are presented.

In a presentation of Taiwanese school policies, student behavior contests, used as

incentives for positive student behavior, are described. The duties of Taiwanese

homeroom teachers are introduced, providing insight into the differences between U.S. and

16


Taiwanese classroom management systems and the challenges of homeroom teaching.

Literature Review

Problem Behaviors

Overt behaviors are those behaviors that appear on the surface (Harlan, 1996).

Covert behaviors are the values, attitudes, or feelings that cannot be counted or measured

(Harlan, 1996). Both can lead to student behavior problems in the classroom. Other terms

used to refer to behaviors that cause student behavior problems are: inappropriate

behaviors and disruptive behaviors (Hester, Gable & Manning, 2003), misbehaviors,

unacceptable behaviors (Harlan, 1996), and problem behaviors (Brownell &

Walther-Thomas, 2002).

There are many student behavior problems reported by teachers. Many teachers

state that their students are noisy, off-task, unmotivated, and rude to the teacher and other

students. Many students are aggressive and often fight. Other complaints are that students

cannot stay seated and do not follow directions (Clement, 2002). Kaplan, Gheen, and

Midgley (2002) list disruptive behaviors, which include teasing, talking out of turn, getting

out of one’s seat, lack of respect for others, violence, and vandalism. Barton-Arwood,

Wehby, Gunter, and Lane (2003) report elementary student problem behaviors that include

17


falling out of chairs, sleeping, refusing to talk, blaming others, hitting peers, screaming,

and destroying materials. O’Neill, Johnson, Kiefer-O’Donnell, and McDonnell (2001)

suggest that classroom management failures can result in self-injury, physical aggression

toward others, destruction of property, severe verbal noncompliance, verbal aggression,

and behaviors that are disruptive to the school or classroom environment. Bucher and

Manning (2003) assert that school violence includes unacceptable social behaviors ranging

from aggression that threatens or harms others, to bullying, threats, sexual harassment,

gang violence, extortion, and other forms of intimidation. Charles lists several categories

of student misbehaviors that range from goofing off and causing class disruptions, to more

severe elements of misbehavior including defiance of authority and aggression (as cited in

Hester, et al., 2003, p. 131).

Kalb and Loeber (2003) state that disobedience is a recurring problem. Kulinna,

Cothran, and Regualos (2003) provide six types of student behavior problems that include

aggression, low attentiveness or irresponsibility, failure to follow directions, doing illegal

or harmful activities, distracting or disturbing others, and having poor self-management.

Marzano (2003) reports other student behavior problems include “school-wide bullying,

verbal harassment, use of drugs, obscene language and gestures, gang behavior, sexual

18


behavior, repeated disruption of classes, disregard for the safety of others, fighting, theft,

and truancy” (p. 109). Stewart (2003) finds that misbehaviors, which include violating

school rules, being suspended, and getting into physical fights, add to the behavioral

problems in schools.

The pervasiveness of classroom behavior problems is illustrated by Meyers (2003),

who has listed college student behaviors that irritate teachers, including talking during

lectures, eating and drinking noisily, arguing with the instructor, sleeping during class,

missing classes, acting bored or apathetic, and leaving class early.

Yang, Schaller, and Parker (2000) use the ADHD checklist to rate some elementary

school students in Taiwan as well as reveal Taiwanese elementary student problem

behaviors. These include leaving seats, talking excessively, blurting out answers,

interrupting others, and engaging in physically dangerous activities.

Yen (2002) found that some first grade and fourth grade Taiwanese students exhibit

the following behaviors: using vulgar language, destroying public property, destroying

things when angry, fighting with others, smoking, and drinking alcohol. Chen, Chen,

Fagot-Campagna, and Narayan (2001) surveyed 6318 participants and found that some

Taiwanese youth, by age 13-15 years old, had already used tobacco, betel quid, alcohol,

19


and illicit drugs. However, adolescents (aged 13-18 years) had lower rates of smoking

tobacco products, drinking, and illicit drug use, and “the prevalence of illicit drug use

among adolescents in our study (0.6%) was much lower than the prevalence reported in the

United Kingdom (5%) and United States (4.8%)” (Chen, et al., 2001, p. 1133).

A comprehensive list of problem behaviors was retrieved from the literature on

classroom management and student discipline written about both the United States and

Taiwan. Kerr and Nelson (1983), Emmer, Evertson, Sanford, Clements and Worsham,

(1989), Zabel and Zabel (1996), Harlan (1996), Burstyn (2001a), and Belvel and Jordan

(2003) mention the following problem behaviors in their books.

1. sleeping (Lee, et al., 2004),

2. truancy (Cotton, 2004),

3. tardiness,

4. leaving the room without permission (Winter, 2003),

5. cheating during quizzes,

6. being withdrawn or sullen,

7. lack of involvement in learning activities,

8. prolonged inattention

20


9. violating classroom rules and procedures,

10. sassy back talk,

11. crude remarks,

12. rudeness,

13. talking out of turn,

14. making noise,

15. chewing gum,

16. getting out of turn in line,

17. not putting paper in the wastebasket,

18. assault,

19. vandalism,

20. whispering,

21. writing and passing notes,

22. blurthing out words,

23. teasing,

24. cursing,

25. talking back,

21


26. getting out of their seats at inappropriate times,

27. resisting work,

28. daydreaming,

29. delay in starting daily transition task,

30. giving excuses,

31. misusing art or lab supplies

32. asking the teacher digression questions in an apparent attempt to delay the

teacher from handing out an exam,

33. writing on desks,

34. throwing objects

35. tearing materials,

36. stealing,

37. tapping pencil/object,

38. falling out of chair intentionally,

39. making inappropriate gestures,

40. blowing bubble gum,

41. making faces,

22


42. dropping objects intentionally,

43. talking loudly,

44. yawning loudly,

45. burping loudly,

46. making ridiculous comments to get a laugh,

47. talking out of turn,

48. complaining,

49. resisting requests,

50. delaying tasks,

51. pretending to conform,

52. shooting a gun,

53. showing a lack of respect for others (sometimes called disrespecting others),

54. name calling, and

55. sexual harassment.

Some problem behaviors do not often occur in the classroom. For example, fighting,

pushing, shoving, slapping, suicide (or suicide attempts), assault, tattling, poking, hitting,

bumping others, biting, kicking, spitting, tripping, pinching (Burstyn, 2001a; Belvel &

23


Jordan, 2003; Harlan, 1996), and “smoking” (Emmer, et al., 1989, p. 108; “Treasure Chest

of Classroom Management,” 2003) are usually done outside the classroom.

Some problem behaviors start before students go to school, but can impact the class.

Examples are: bringing incomplete homework, having unexcused absences, being late

(“Treasure Chest of Classroom Management,” 2003), losing textbooks, homework or

papers, not doing homework, and forgetting to bring textbooks or assignments (Harlan,

1996).

While the disruptive problems may come from a variety of contributing factors,

Achenbach categorized eight syndromes, each of which may be underlying contributors to

classroom management problems: “(I) withdrawn behavior, (II) somatic complaints, (III)

anxious/depressed behavior, (IV) social problems, (V) thought problems, (VI) attention

problems, (VII) delinquent behavior, and (VIII) aggressive behavior” (as cited in Robinson,

Smith, and Miller, 2002, p. 258). Lane (2003) lists behaviors that students exhibit to

disrupt the classroom environment, which include acting out, verbal and physical

aggression, coercive tactics, anxiety, depression, and somatic complaints. Scott and

Lindberg (2000) asked subjects to report problems of various kinds in all 12 different

somatic complaint scales, and these somatic complaints included tension-type headache,

24


gastrointestinal difficulties, etc. Lane (2003) also introduces three categories of social

skills, which are cooperation, assertion, and self-control; and three categories of problem

behaviors which are hyperactivity, externalizing, and internalizing.

Classroom Management Strategies

With such a comprehensive list of problem behaviors, investigations of classroom

management strategies were sought in the U.S. literature and strategies were organized

using 22 categories. Strategies from Taiwanese literature were explored and will be listed

below as well. The Taiwanese literature provides fewer strategies, which is the reason why

they are not categorized.

U.S. Strategies fo r Managing Student Behavior

Administering strict measures. The strictest measures of classroom management

include using policemen, installing metal detectors, giving out referrals, and imposing

detention and suspension. It is not uncommon for a school to invite police and other law

enforcement officials to address students on the long-term ramifications of misbehavior

(Casella, 2001a). When the relationship between the police and the youth is good, the

effect of this strategy is positive and can be significant (Casella, 2001a). Such activities are

most successful when schools follow-up this introduction to law enforcement by sending

25


violent students to formal judicial hearings (Casella, 2001b). The formalization of school

policies to ensure total safety (Mercy & Rosenberg, 1998) can go as far as including the

installation of metal detectors to prevent weapon-related violence in the school (Alexander,

Alexander & Alexander, 2001).

Referral is another strict measure that involves sending problem students to the

principal’s office or other professionals (Harlan, 1996). “This penalty is best reserved for

serious infractions” (Harlan, p. 185). In this situation, teachers can refer students to the

counseling office to receive their penalty (Rosenberg & Jackman, 2003); on the other hand,

sending students to the office may give away power and imply that teachers are not in

charge of their classrooms (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Many schools send problem students

to alternative educational settings (Williams, 2001b).

Rather than integrating such programs into the student’s day, Elliot, Hamburg, and

Williams (1998) advise that after-school programs are the appropriate venue for teaching

students the value of discipline. They posit that the classroom is for teaching, not for

discipline, so teachers need to practice zero tolerance for problem behaviors if they are to

create a classroom that has more instructional time (Browne, 2002). However, some

educators oppose zero tolerance, suspension, or expulsion (Casella, 2001a), especially

26


since suspension deprives students of the opportunity for education (Browne, 2002). It has

been noted that suspension does not change students who have received repeated

suspensions (Mendez & Knoff, 2003), and repeated suspensions contribute to negative

outcomes, including academic failure, negative school attitudes, and school drop-out

(Mendez & Knoff, 2003). Expulsion and suspension send problem students to

communities where they learn additional forms of misbehavior from youths who are also

on suspension or have already dropped out of school (Casella, 2001 a). Slee (1999) concurs

that suspension and expulsion are ineffective, and must only be a measure of last resort,

confirming Browne’s (2002) recommendation that a good school should be positive and

helpful so that it can change student behavior.

Applying classroom leadership. A new term, “classroom leadership,” has been

introduced (Belvel & Jordan, 2003) and is distinguished from classroom management.

According to Belvel and Jordan (2003), classroom management is about using methods or

skills to control the order in the classroom, but “classroom leadership focuses on the

direction . . . , the vision of how the semester or year will look and feel, and motivation

through relationship, inspiration, mutual respect, and common goals” (Belvel & Jordan,

2003, p. 6). They suggest that a teacher should shift from being a classroom manager to a

27


classroom leader who guides students to mutual goals set by both parties, because

leadership is a shared endeavor more than a hierarchical structure (Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

Assisting students in developing a sense o f self. Helping students develop

self-control, self-direction, self-discipline, and self-regulation is more important than

regulating student behavior (Belvel & Jordan, 2003; Brophy, 1999; McLeod, Fisher &

Hoover, 2003; Mercy & Rosenberg, 1998). Wolfgang and Glickman (1980) think that

students should develop self-improvement as well as self-directed behavior. Belvel and

Jordan (2003) add that, since students have to learn to obey rules, it is important for them to

act on the basis of internal values (Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

Freiberg (1999a) states that discipline comes from the self, and any attempt to

change student behavior is incomplete if it relies on regulation, but lacks emphasis on

fostering self-control (Brophy, 1999). “Students are expected to be self-reliant and

responsible by the impulse from within themselves, not by coercive outside forces” (Rinne,

1997, p. 5). Only when students are willing to do the right things in absence of external

monitors does the effectiveness of discipline strengthen (Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

Fostering internal control means leading them to independence rather than mere obedience

(Harlan, 1996).

28


Students are a part of the classroom, so they should share in classroom

responsibilities (Freiberg, 1999a). The opportunity for self-discipline must be offered, and

putting students in charge of observing themselves, or leading them to see how much

self-control they have, is a method for developing self-discipline (Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

Some of the strategies for teaching students to take control of their behavior include

thinning, which is reducing the frequency of rewarding a student; fading, which involves

reducing dependence on extrinsic reinforcement by shifting from extrinsic to intrinsic

reinforcers; and asking students a series of questions that can inspire impulsive young

minds to reflect on themselves and behave better (Zabel & Zabel, 1996).

Motivating students to see purposes in the curriculum and making them feel valued

can lead them to self-discipline (Slee, 1999). Cognitive management, such as asking

students questions when they break rules, can also lead students to self-discipline

(McEwan, Gathercoal & Nimmo, 1999) because using questions can redirect their thinking

(Nelsen, Lott & Glenn, 1993). Students who have the desire to be accepted by society are

the ones who are more likely to achieve self-discipline (Johnson & Johnson, 1999).

Rinne (1997) asserts that critical thinking and self-reliance contribute to

self-discipline. Encouraging students to be responsible for their behavior is necessary

29


(“Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003).

Reflection is essential for self-discipline (McLeod, et al., 2003). Glasser (1986)

recommends asking students to contemplate on whether their behavior is helping or

hurting them by asking them to determine if their actions have good or bad effects on their

performance and acceptance in the classroom (Emmer, et al., 1989, p. 172).

Being a role model (awareness o f non-verbal language). Teachers need to be a

role model for students (Belvel & Jordan, 2003; Davidson & Maurer, 1998). It is said that

“the best teaching technique is modeling” (Harlan, 1996, p. 255), and other researchers

concur, suggesting that actions often speak more directly to students than words (Rinne,

1997; Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Rinne (1997) suggests that this is related to the dominant

sense of sight rather than hearing, and students are known to imitate someone they like or

admire (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). A teacher’s dress and grooming often reveal much

information that can influence student the behaviors of students (Zabel & Zabel, 1996).

Teachers can demonstrate moral models within the curriculum (Leshnoff, 2003) and with

judicious use of discipline, function as a role model in the classroom (McEwan, Gathercoal

&Nimmo, 1999).

Greeting students, smiling at them, listening to them effectively, skillfully, and

30


with understanding, and maintaining eye contact with them are like deposits that teachers

make in the emotional bank accounts of their students (Harlan, 1996). In acting as role

models, such nonverbal language is significant. Research has shown that students respond

to eye contact, proximity, facial expressions, and gestures—and this response can serve to

exacerbate or minimize misbehaviors (Harlan, 1996; McLeod, et al., 2003). Teachers must

be more aware of their changes in voice, tone, pitch, pace, intonation, and pauses, rather

than of their the teaching content, so that students can understand and follow both the

explicit and nonverbal elements in the classroom (Nelsen, et al., 1993; Zabel & Zabel,

1996). Curwin and Mendler (1997) state that nonverbal communication empowers

relationships. Therefore, a teacher’s physical distance from his/her students reflects their

relationship (Zabel & Zabel, 1996).

Building good relationships. Teacher-student relationships have a significant

impact on middle school student behavior (Marzano, 2003; O’Neil, 2004). Glasser (1986)

provides a historic reference when he notes that before World War II, schools maintained

discipline by throwing out problem students. Belvel & Jordon, seeking a less punitive and

more compassionate reaction to discipline-related problems, quote Abraham Lincoln: “If

you would win a man to your cause, first convince him that you are his sincere friend” (as

31


cited in Belvel & Jordon, 2003, p. 38).

Algozzine and Kay (2002) note that relationships are pivotal in the classroom.

Freiberg (1999b) adds, “caring is the heart and soul of teaching” (p. 83). Many studies

indicate that successful teachers show encouragement, bonding, caring, and genuine

concern toward students (Belvel & Jordan, 2003; Casella, 2001a; Freiberg, 1999a; Harlan,

1996). Kohn (1996) goes a step further, stating that students need love, freedom, power,

and fun. Belvel and Jordan (2003) say that teachers need to think of the needs of students,

decide with their students the best courses of action, help students see their strengths, as

well as care, nurture, and respect students and create a spirit of cooperation. This echoes

the recommendations of Curwin and Mendler (1997), who state that the teacher should

teach students with enthusiasm and encouragement.

Zabel and Zabel (1996) recommend providing great enthusiasm, showing extra

affection, and building common interests to build order in the classroom. Utley, Kozleski,

Smith, and Draper (2002) suggest using positive behavior support (PBS) strategies,

emphasizing on culturally appropriate interventions, to cope with urban multicultural

youth who exhibit challenging social behaviors. They enthusiastically give culturally

different students support to decrease problem behaviors.

32


Browne (2002) provides a school principal as an example to demonstrate the

importance of care. This principal asks teachers to care more for students in order to give

them the feeling of being a part of the school, and he himself contacts gang members and

eats lunch with students in the cafeteria. Nelsen, et al. (1993) suggest that teachers should

respect students, celebrate their good performance instead of expecting too much,

encourage them instead of giving orders, and notice how they are acting instead of

assuming there will be no problems.

Moreover, teachers need to make a connection by having role-bound relationship

with their students and should memorize a student’s name in a positive way (McLeod, et al.,

2003). Mercy and Rosenberg (1998) remind teachers that sincerity is an important element

in the teacher-student relationship. “Students are facilitators for the operations of the

classroom” (Freiberg, 1999a, p. 13) and they should be allowed to make choices (Froyen,

1993; McLeod, et al., 2003; O’Neil, 2004; Rinne, 1997).

Constructing partnership with parents. The lack of parental involvement is a

major cause of discipline problems in schools (Casella, 2001a). Parental involvement is

important (Curwin & Mendler, 1997; Duhaney, 2003), and its absence is a predictor of

student misbehavior (Stewart, 2003). Positive parental involvement plays an important

33


role in decreasing problem behaviors of students because when teachers and parents

collaborate, consistency is created between the school and the home (Algozzine & Kay,

2002). To address the lack of parental involvement, many schools provide training

programs to teach parents discipline techniques (Kalb & Loeber, 2003), and some schools

provide counseling sessions for parents (Browne, 2002). These programs can help parents

fully understand student codes of conduct. Schools must notify parents quickly, especially

when there is a need for law enforcement to intervene on behalf of their children (Browne,

2002).

Freiberg (1999b) suggests that teachers should contact parents at the beginning of

the year. Since the essence of the teacher-parent relationship is collaboration (Harlan,

1996), teachers should be good listeners (Nelsen, et al., 1993), should be able to negotiate

(Burstyn & Stevens, 2001; Mercy & Rosenberg, 1998), and should be able to use effective

communication skills (McLeod, et al., 2003) toward other people. Parent-teacher

conferences need to be “solutions-oriented, productive, and informative” (Harlan, 1996, p.

112) so that a positive mutual agreement can be achieved. Being a good non-evaluative

listener and making parents feel heard helps communication (Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

When speaking, teachers must talk directly to parents, deal in the present, speak

34


courteously, take responsibility, and make their statements clear (“Strategies for

Classroom Management,” 2003). Long-term and frequent communication can build a

partnership between teachers and parents (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Effective

communication contains constructive assertiveness and empathic responses, as well as

stresses problem solving (Emmer, et al., 1989).

Conveying high expectations. Teachers need to convey explicitly their

expectations to their students (Algozzine & Kay, 2002; Brophy, 1996; Harlan, 1996; Rinne,

1997). “The most successful teachers give simple, straightforward instructions so that

students know exactly what is expected of them” (Hester, et al., 2003, p. 133). They then

follow their instructions with encouragement to enhance student performance, so

expectations should implicitly include the message, such as You can, and I assume you will

to the student (Rinne, 1997).

Creating positive classroom community. A sense of community and belonging is

important in assisting teachers who work to integrate positive behaviors in a classroom. A

social network can reduce misbehaviors and can serve to correct them (Elliot, et al., 1998).

Without a positive learning community, a student may be isolated when in distress, and

may misbehave as a device for seeking help or instructions (Elliot, et al., 1998).

35


Social bonding has the power for coping with violence problems, (Elliot, et al.,

1998). Relationships within groups can help teachers with behavior management

(Noguera, 2002) by providing opportunities for discussing, sharing, and solving personal

problems (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). In a student community, students should share

control (McLeod, et al., 2003). Students solve problems through teamwork (Rosenberg &

Jackman, 2003) as they learn to function in a caring community (Kohn, 1996).

In a strong community, cooperative learning develops commitment, caring,

assistance, support, encouragement, and praise among students (Johnson & Johnson, 1999).

A cooperative environment also supports conflict resolution (Casella, 2001c). It has been

shown that students can cooperatively solve drug and alcohol abuse problems (Casella,

2001a) when teachers and students work as partners (Freiberg, 1999b).

In a person-centered classroom, leadership is shared, and management is a form of

guidance, so teachers and students can share and cooperate in partnership (Freiberg, 1999a).

A cooperative relationship helps students leam and maintain order together (Froyen, 1993).

Effectively managing space and seats. Teachers should notice space and seat

management (Emmer, et al., 1989; Froyen, 1993; Evertson & Harris, 1999; Zabel & Zabel,

1996) as they design a comfortable setting for learning, because “a classroom’s physical

36


environment has a strong effect on student behavior” (Zabel & Zabel, 1996, p. 159).

Environmental stimuli such as sound, temperature and lighting influence students’

performance (Harlan, 1996;Froyen, 1993). Student work, instructionally relevant material,

homework guidelines, rules, schedules, and other items of interest can be posted on the

wall and bulletin boards (Emmer, et al., 1989; Froyen, 1993). Regarding managing the

space, most people mention decorating the wall, but Emmer, Evertson, Sanford, Clements

and Worsham (1989) think that teachers can also decorate the ceiling.

A good seating arrangement helps students pay attention (Harlan, 1996). The

teacher should avoid having students face windows, the doorway, or eye-catching displays

that may distract their attention (Emmer, et al., 1989). When arranging seats, the teacher

should mix low-achieving students with high-achieving students (Rinne, 1997). Some

degree of separation from each other for aggressive students is necessary (Belvel & Jordan,

2003; “Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003).

Belvel and Jordan (2003) suggest that the classroom can be divided into three areas:

1. personal conversation space for teacher-student talks,

2. a learning center for instruction of curriculum, and

3. a literacy center for reading.

37


In some classrooms, there is a neutral reflection space for students to collect

themselves (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Open education is a style of teaching that encourages

flexibility of space (Rinne, 1997) to give the feel of “a classroom without wall[s]”

(Anonymous, 1997, p. 95). It advocates “arranging classrooms with various learning

centers rather than rows of desks” (Anonymous, 1997, p. 95).

Establishing classroom rules. Setting rules, schedules, policies or procedures are

effective strategies to ensure good discipline (Duhaney, 2003; Evertson & Harris, 1999;

Leshnoff, 2003; Rosenberg & Jackman, 2003). Harlan (1996) states that classroom rules

should be reasonable, and teachers need to guide students to understand that these rules are

good for them. This confirms Belvel and Jordan’s (2003) writing on the importance of

students understanding that rules exist for the purpose of protecting them (Belvel & Jordan,

2003). When teachers emphasize the benefits of rules, the tone needs to be positive

(Emmer, et al., 1989).

Glasser (1969) reminds teachers that rules can be changed as situations change, and

that rules are most effective when they are created by teachers and students together. The

advantage of working together in developing rules is the sharing of core values that defines

acceptable behaviors and helps create rules that are embraced by the class (Munn,

38


Johnstone & Chalmers, 1992).

Rules and procedures need to be established and then must be taught, explained,

rehearsed, and enforced, especially in the beginning of the school year (Harlan, 1996),

which is the key period for establishing rules (O’Neil, 2004). Zabel and Zabel (1996)

suggest the following principles for teachers to remember when establishing class rules:

1. the process is as important as the rule itself,

2. the statement of the rules should be positive,

3. rules should not be too complicated to understand,

4. rules should be written in the students’ own words, and

5. the number of rules should be limited.

Rules can build an appropriate class atmosphere for learning, and rules teach students to

respect the rights of others (Emmer, et al., 1989).

The Florida Department of Education suggests that teachers should develop rules

and procedures, post an everyday schedule, discuss changes with students when necessary,

frequently remind students of the rules and procedures, and make students aware of the

consequences of violating the rules (“Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003).

Teachers should remind students of rules rather than punishing them after they break rules

39


(McLeod, et al., 2003).

Exploring causes o f behavior problems. Discovering the root causes of

misbehavior may assist in addressing it (Stevens, 2001). Educators first need to define the

problem, then identify the causes, and finally develop and implement interventions to deal

with it (Mercy & Rosenberg, 1998). Wolfgang and Glickman (1980) find that

misbehaviors may result from a student’s mental or physical capabilities, emotional

experiences, and lack of values. The Florida Department of Education lists many causes of

misbehaviors. These include “students finding that ‘acting out’ is more interesting than a

boring lesson or more rewarding than another failure experience. Students . . . are not

involved in the learning activity, do not understand the task, or cannot obtain assistance

when it is needed” (“Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003, f 6).

Burstyn (2001a) and Williams (2001a) suggest that maybe the cause is that some

problem students come from families or communities whose values are not the same as

what are taught in school. Other family factors that can lead to problem behaviors include

child abuse, deficient child-rearing, family function disruption (marital disharmony),

parental criminality, and violent interactions among siblings (Elliot, et al., 1998). Conflicts

may be caused by poor communication, incorrect expression of anger, or misuse of power

40


(Burstyn & Stevens, 2001). Disruptive behaviors may be caused by boredom and lack of

challenge (Browne, 2002).

Misbehaviors can be caused by social learning problems, such as learning too many

misbehaviors, never being taught appropriate behaviors, or not learning enough

appropriate behaviors (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Linda Albert believes that students

misbehave for the purpose of achieving “attention, power, revenge, and avoidance of

failure” (as cited in Taubert, 1999, p. 183).

Students who carry weapons to school may have been victims or witnesses to

violence (Burstyn, 2001a, 2001b). Williams (2001b) found that the most violent students

have low levels of literacy, and they neither consider the consequences nor control their

emotions. Aside from this, they believe that violence is part of life, that toughness is a way

of survival, that weapons are means of protecting themselves, that it is safe to join gangs,

and that they lose nothing and gain a great deal by fighting or inciting violence. Many

students fight for reasons such as rumors, theft, relationship problems, and getting attention

(Casella, 2001b). Many male students believe that violence symbolizes masculinity and

they protect their girlfriends from the attention of others (Bender, 2001). Elliot, et al. (1998)

find that the causes of violence are showing off fighting skills, toughness, being proud of

41


joining gangs, displaying a symbol of manhood, owning physical space, gaining social

status, exacting rough justice, and taking advantage of opportunities. Other causes of

violence include being proud, looking for respect, and escaping from being labeled as

acting “white” (Gordon, 2001).

Students feel that they gain hope when misbehaving (Burstyn, 2001b).

Academically unsuccessful students often cause trouble (Curwin & Mendler, 1997).

Children often act quickly before they think (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Students offend or

hurt others because they cannot meet their psychological needs sufficiently (Belvel &

Jordan, 2003). Sometimes they are curious and want to try to misbehave, or they are

unable to control themselves (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Misbehaviors may also be caused

by the student’s defiance or hostility toward the teacher or an attempt to save face in front

of peers (Emmer, et al., 1989). It is also possible that misbehavior is a sign that a healthy

student is responding to an unhealthy learning environment (Freiberg, 1999b).

Another cause of misbehaviors may be the pursuit of power or superiority, or the

desire to make time pass faster (Kohn, 1996). The causes of misbehaviors can be the drive

of being accepted, feeling competent, and being respected. These may be caused by their

environment, poorly designed curriculums, or peer pressure (O’Neil, 2004).

42


Harlan (1996) and Duhaney (2003) recommend using antecedents, behaviors, and

consequences (the ABC strategy) to help teachers find the causes of misbehavior. The

ABC strategy involves “identifying and describing the problem behavior, measuring the

frequency, intensity, and the duration of the behavior, and identifying the antecedents and

consequences that maintain the behavior” (Dykeman, 2003, p. 227). This “postulates that

behavior could be prevented by removing the precipitating antecedents” (Volicer & Hurley,

2003, p. 841). Parental behavior can be an antecedent for child noncompliance (Kalb &

Loeber, 2003). “An individual’s conditioning or learning history determines [the] rate of

behavioral change” (Harlan, 1996, p. 111).

McLeod, et al. (2003) suggest designing individual intervention plans for different

cases. Glasser (1986) asserts that when a student talks back to the teacher, it is likely that it

is the teacher’s fault not the student’s fault; therefore, he suggests restructuring classes to

foster student satisfaction and show them the value of the classes. Harlan (1996) points out

that students who are defeated at academic or athletic performance are likely to seek

recognition for success by misbehaving.

Fostering a positive classroom climate. Teachers should foster a classroom

climate that is warm, supportive and caring to prevent misbehaviors and help students

43


succeed (Harlan, 1996). Such a supportive climate can minimize anxiety and resistance

(O’Neil, 2004). When the classroom climate is competitive and intolerant, violence is

more likely to happen (Burstyn & Stevens, 2001). But when teachers develop norms of

nonviolence, students can feel safe to study in that environment (Elliot, et al., 1998). The

classroom climate for learning must be positive (Emmer, et al., 1989) and should be

productive, so that the students could produce the desired outcomes (Algozzine & Kay,

2002).

Holding class meetings. Class meetings offer students opportunities to express

ideas and concerns. Meetings can prevent discipline problems and can offer opportunities

for a discussion of how the class must function and how it can be improved (Belvel &

Jordan, 2003; Glasser, 1969; Johnson & Johnson, 1999; Zabel & Zabel, 1996). Class

meetings provides a cooperative climate where students can reflect, discover how others

feel, solve problems together, share opinions, give suggestions, exchange experiences,

communicate accountability, and encourage each other (Nelsen, et al., 1993). It is an event

where students can feel free to discuss anything and learn to avoid making the same

mistakes again (Nelsen, et al., 1993). Class meetings should focus on solving problems,

achieving a positive conclusion, and sharing information (Harlan, 1996).

44


Issuing rewards and punishm ent Appropriate feedback is necessary to encourage

or teach appropriate behaviors (Madsen & Madsen, 1991). Punishment suppresses

problem behaviors, but does not eliminate them, and instead, it can make students conceal

their misbehavior to escape punishment (Harlan, 1996).

Traditional carrot-and-stick methods applied in the classroom are more likely to

create a group of students who watch for the chance to avoid the “stick” (Belvel & Jordan,

2003). Belvel and Jordan (2003) note that when students are punished, they often focus on

anger and resentment, rather than on reflection. Curwin and Mendler (1997) oppose

punishment because “when initial threats fail, more severe threats are issued” (p. 36).

According to Kohn (1996), while punishment may satisfy a desire for justice, it

demonstrates the use of power and warps the teacher-student relationship.

Conversely, Zabel and Zabel (1996) believe that punishment is a necessary strategy

for addressing behavior problems. Punishment teaches students a lesson in testing the

boundaries and violating rules (O’Neil, 2004). Nonphysical punishments, such as loss of

privileges, loss or delay of activities, correction of misbehaviors, overt correction of

behaviors, required interactions between students, and time outs are better than physical

punishment (Harlan, 1996). The demerit system is another type of nonphysical

45


punishment (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Penalties such as a reduction in score or grade, fines,

check or demerit systems, detention after school, in-school suspension, referral, restitution,

and confiscation can also be used to address behavior problems (Emmer, et al., 1989;

Harlan, 1996). Wolfgang and Glickman (1980) recommend isolation and physical

intervention. Reflection is a kind of punishment that requires students to reflect upon what

they have done; restitution asks students to fix or replace property that they have destroyed;

restoration forces students to leave the classroom in order to restore or collect themselves;

and restriction requires a temporary loss of privileges (McLeod, et al., 2003).

Giving clear, firm, and tough demands can stop misbehaviors (Zabel & Zabel,

1996). Teachers must speak firmly and calmly, and must not accept excuses (Kohn, 1996).

When misbehaviors are not serious, teachers can use “planned ignoring,” which means

“deliberately not responding to a problem behavior when a student is seeking attention for

behavior that you disapprove o f’ (Zabel & Zabel, 1996, p. 196) or extinction, which means

not paying attention to a problem behavior (Zabel & Zabel, 1996). Nonverbal interfering

such as facial expressions, eye contact, gestures, and proximity control can also stop

misbehaviors (Zabel & Zabel, 1996). Letting students suffer the natural and logical

consequences of misbehavior is better than administering punishment (Brophy, 1999;

46


Kohn, 1996; Roseberg & Jackman, 2003; “Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003)

If punishment is the chosen strategy for dealing with classroom behavior problems,

it should be delivered immediately (Freiberg, 1999a). Teachers should punish students in

private to allow students to maintain their dignity (Curwin & Mendler, 1997), finding time

to talk and handle problems quietly with students, so that the students can maintain their

self-esteem (O’Neil, 2004; “Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003). The purpose

of negative reinforcement or punishment is to change misbehaviors, and not to torture

students (McLeod, et al., 2003).

Teachers should not let students earn rewards too easily, but also not to make them

feel it’s too difficult to gain rewards. Penalties should not be too harsh or used too

frequently (Emmer, et al., 1989). Excellent performance should be defined by objective

standards (Froyen, 1993). Acknowleding times when students are being good can help

maintain good behaviors (Evertson & Harris, 1999; O’Neil, 2004). Teachers can set up

frequent and consistent rewards (Froyen, 1993). Reinforcement, like punishment, should

be delivered immediately; otherwise, the effect becomes weaker (Harlan, 1996). Rewards

must be appealing to students (Froyen, 1993). The same reward may be evaluated

differently for each student (Madsen & Madsen, 1991).

47


Token economy systems, such as a star, a point, or a mark, is a reward strategy that

is often used (Belvel & Jordan, 2003; Duhaney, 2003). Rewards, such as award certificates,

extra-credit assignments, weekly point systems, and giving public recognition to several

students at the same time are examples of effective rewards (Emmer, et al., 1989). Praise is

a reward that is often recommended (Kohn, 1996) to motivate progress, but “praise should

be sincere, targeted to the specific behavior” (Harlan, 1996, p. 71). Positive reinforcement,

such as social reinforcers, privilege reinforcers and tangible reinforcers are also effective

rewards (McLeod, et al., 2003). Commendations, positive attention, and recognitions can

also serve as positive rewards (Harlan, 1996).

The effect of rewards is mostly extrinsic rather than intrinsic (Emmer, et al., 1989).

When extrinsic rewards are no longer available, internal motivation is reduced (Emmer, et

al., 1989). Finally, it is important to note that rewards are not necessary if an activity is

highly interesting (Emmer, et al., 1989).

Keeping records. Recording student behavior is an effective discipline strategy

(McLeod, et al., 2003). Data on students’ behaviors guides teachers to make decisions in

order to improve student behavior, and collecting and recording student data can track their

progress (Algozzine & Kay, 2002; Froyen, 1993). The teacher can record how many times

48


students talk out of turn in one period, or ask the students to record their behaviors in a

diary (Zabel & Zabel, 1996). Long-range records, grade books, behavior records,

attendance records, and homework completion rates help monitor student behaviors

(Emmer, et al., 1989). A checklist for recording daily behaviors can guide students to

frequently examine their own behaviors (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Checklists should

include traits such as being cooperative, responsible, honorable, prepared, motivated,

careful, friendly, patient, sympathetic, tolerant, peace-making, positive, diligent, caring,

self-controlled, and hard working. Checklists will assist in training students how to behave

(Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

Performing appropriate response. When teachers see students misbehaving, a

quick and firm response may help solve the problem (Algozzine & Kay, 2002; McLeod, et

al., 2003). Sometimes teachers must perform a immediate response; for example, handling

student absence problems (Froyen, 1993). Responding to student problem behaviors with

assertiveness and humor is necessary (Belvel & Jordan, 2003; Brophy, 1999; Nelsen, et al.,

1993; Zabel & Zabel, 1996). When students misbehave, the teachers’ responses must

provide corrective feedback and step-by-step directions to help students improve without

labeling them (Emmer, et al., 1989; “Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003). All

49


responses should be consistent so that students are not confused or will not be tempted to

test the limits of a teacher (Algozzine & Kay, 2002; Harlan, 1996; Kohn, 1996; “Strategies

for Classroom Management,” 2003).

Preventing problems. The adage, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of

cure” is an important technique in classroom behavior management (Freiberg, 1999b; see

also Emmer, et al., 1989). An effective teacher does not handle disruption, but prevents it

(Brophy, 1999).

Prevention takes many forms. Casella (2001a) suggests that educators and parents

should attend training programs for prevention of drug and alcohol abuse. Burstyn and

Stevens (2001) thinks that teachers can incorporate violence prevention into the existing

curriculum. Belvel and Jordan (2003) and Williams (2001b) believe that having students

write reflective journals can prevent or solve their problems. The first day of school is also

important (Rinne, 1997) because resolving student uncertainties on the beginning of the

year can prevent problems for the rest of the year (Emmer, et al., 1989).

Scanning the class frequently is considered monitoring for prevention (“Strategies

for Classroom Management,” 2003). Teachers need to observe nonverbal cues from

students, such as boredom, confusion, or restlessness, so that problems can be prevented

50


(Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

Algozzine and Kay (2002) provide some strategies for teachers hoping to prevent

problems. “Withitness,” the ability to spot misbehavior before it starts, is a prevention

strategy (Kohn, 1996; O’Neil, 2004; Marzano, 2003; Tauber, 1999). An effectively

presented lesson helps teachers prevent problem behaviors (Tauber, 1999). A good teacher

can develop the skills to read students’ minds to prevent or solve many problems (Rinne,

1997).

Stewart (2003) finds that “student GPA, family income, gender, and ethnicity are

significant predictors of school misbehavior” (p. 596), and so they suggest that teachers

should observe these predictors to prevent misbehaviors. Kalb and Loeber (2003) find that

childhood noncompliance can last a long time and can be used by teachers to predict

aggression problems. Therefore, finding if a student has childhood noncompliance can

prevent the harm of aggression problems. However, not all prevention programs can

produce long-term changes (Casella, 2001c).

Promoting instructional quality. Effective instruction helps maintain classroom

discipline just as good discipline ensures a good learning environment that contributes to

effective instruction (Emmer, et al., 1989). The quality of instruction and student

51


achievement are strongly related (Zabel & Zabel, 1996). When teachers promote

participation, students seldom have a chance to misbehave (Belvel & Jordan, 2003).

Therefore, fostering involvement is important (Froyen, 1993). cooperative group work

can also strengthen classroom participation (“Strategies for Classroom Management,”

2003).

Teachers need to conduct effective instruction in order to maintain students’

attention in classroom activities (Evertson & Harris, 1999); however, it is a high-quality of

engagement that ensures that students are not only engaged, but are also learning (Brophy,

1999). Removing distractions and stimulating interests make students pay attention

(Harlan, 1996). A smaller class size allows teachers to check on whether their students pay

attention or not (Rinne, 1997), and frequent checking and monitoring ensures that students

are working on their tasks (Evertson & Harris, 1999). Varying activities prevent students

from losing interest (Brophy, 1999; McLeod, et al., 2003).

Teachers can change the materials, move desks around, vary the classroom routine,

vary the method of instruction, or take the whole class outside to maintain their students’

interests (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Teachers can also design lessons in various ways,

allowing students to achieve multiple objectives (Froyen, 1993). Teachers should move

52


around the room while teaching in order to remind students to pay attention (“Strategies for

Classroom Management,” 2003).

Teachers need to help students organize their thoughts so that they know how to

focus their attention (“Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003). Catching their

students interest and increasing student motivation helps them learn (“Strategies for

Classroom Management,” 2003). When materials are related to students’ lives, they are

more readily engaged (“Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003) because linking

education with their life outside of school will increase their interest (Froyen, 1993).

Teaching activities should be relevant, interesting, and purposeful; otherwise, student

alienation or resistance may occur (Slee, 1999).

Effective time management helps students spend time engaged in learning in the

classroom (Froyen, 1993; Harlan, 1996). Instructions should be presented in a logical

sequence (Madsen & Madsen, 1991), and teachers should design the sequence of teaching

activities for students to be engaged. An effective sequence is: daily review, development

of lesson, seatwork, homework, and finally, special review (Froyen, 1993). Emmer, et al.

(1989) explain that an effective sequence is this: opening the period, checking classwork or

homework, recitation, content development, discussion, seatwork, small group work, and

53


closing. A checklist can help teachers follow classroom procedures carefully and can

avoid giving students time to misbehave (Emmer, et al., 1989).

Planning is the key for time management (Zabel, et al., 1996). Teachers and

students should have all books and materials ready by the start of class (Belvel & Jordan,

2003; Emmer, et al., 1989). The teacher needs to make use of the teachable moment,

because during these moments the students are ready and willing to participate (Rinne,

1997).

An effective lesson flow leads students to follow the instructions (Emmer, et al.,

1989). For a lesson to be highly effective, teachers need to avoid dangles, flip-flops,

fragmentation, and overdwelling because these destroy the momentum of lessons (Froyen,

1993; Harlan, 1996; Brophy, 1999). “When a teacher starts an activity and then leaves it in

midair, that behavior is a dangle” (Harlan, 1996, p. 148). “A flip-flop is when one activity

is started and then stopped while another is begun, and then the original is started again”

(Harlan, 1996, p. 148). “Overdwelling occurs when a teacher goes on and on after

instructions are clear to students” (Harlan, 1996, p. 148). “When activities are broken

down into overly small units,” it is called fragmentation (Harlan, 1996, p. 148). A good

pace helps students maintain interest (Zabel & Zabel, 1996). “When the next step is

54


available and the student is ready, the pace is just right” (Rinne, 1997, p. 136).

Wait time is necessary when teachers ask questions. Teachers need to pause and

wait before calling on students to answer questions (Froyen, 1993; Rinne, 1997;

“Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003). Longer wait times result in greater

student involvement, “higher-quality responses, and more positive student attitudes”

(Rinne, 1997, p. 138).

Transition times must be quick and quiet (Froyen, 1993). Teachers can establish a

beginning-of-period routine (Emmer, et al., 1989) or develop transition activities

(“Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003) to ensure that the transtion time is quick

and quiet. Defining appropriate behaviors for transitions and explaining their rationale are

also necessary (Emmer, et al., 1989). Zabel and Zabel (1996) state that teachers should

rarely let students go out to recess.

When instructions and directions are clear and precise, students perform desired

behaviors (Harlan, 1996). Teachers need to tell students exactly “what they will be doing,

why they are doing it, how they can get help, what to do with completed work, and what to

do when they finish or if they do not finish on time” (Harlan, 1996, p. 160). Clarity can

result in improved student attention and participation (Evertson & Harris, 1999; Zabel &

55


Zabel, 1996).

Teachers must notice diverse student learning styles (“Strategies for Classroom

Management,” 2003). “There are visual learners who leam best by seeing, auditory

learners who leam best by hearing, and kinesthetic-tactile learners who depend on

movement and leam best by touching and manipulating” (Harlan, 1996, p. 161). There are

“global versus analytic learners, right-and left-brained learners, and impulsive versus

reflective thinkers” (Harlan, 1996, p. 161) whose learning style component is

psychological stimuli. When learning styles are taken into consideration, students seldom

feel frustrated or misbehave (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Aside from these learning styles,

teachers must notice student developmental levels so that students can easily engage in

activities (Madsen & Madsen, 1991).

“The difficulty and appeal of the task . . . determine rate of behavioral change”

(Harlan, 1996, p. 111). When being provided work at the right level of difficulty, students

seldom misbehave (Brophy, 1996; “Strategies for Classroom Management,” 2003).

Challenging activities can make students spend more time on academics (Harlan, 1996).

Work assignments (Harlan, 1996) and richness of learning materials (Rinne, 1997) involve

students in academic learning. The achievement goal theory contends that “the emphasis

56


on mastery and performance goals in the classroom is related to student patterns of leaning

and behaviour” (Kaplan, et al., 2002, p. 191). Academic achievement also influences

behavior (Elliot, et al., 1998). If teachers design activities to allow students to meet their

highest academic achievements, disruptive behaviors can be minimized (Kaplan, et al.,

2002).

Signing teacher/student behavior contracts. Contracts between teachers and

students are called classroom contracts, behavioral contracts, or contingency contracts, and

these may help change certain behaviors (Zabel & Zabel, 1996; Rosenberg & Jackman,

2003; Duhaney, 2003). Belvel and Jordan (2003) personally believe that asking students to

write a contract is the last step in solving behavior problems. Freiberg (1999b) also thinks

that teachers can ask students to sign a positive contract to promise to improve, when all

other strategies fail.

Teaching appropriate behaviors. Madsen and Madsen (1991) believe that

appropriate behaviors are learned. Teachers need to teach students good study habits, how

to pay attention for long periods, and even the desire to leam (Madsen & Madsen, 1991).

Focus geared toward shaping desired behavior is more important than eliminating

misbehaviors (Brophy, 1999). “Effective middle school educators teach students the

57


appropriate replacement behaviors that serve as the same function as the misbehavior”

(Hester, et al., 2003, p. 133). For example, teachers need to teach students social skills to

help them get along with others (Belvel & Jordan, 2003; Duhaney, 2003; McEwan,

Gathercoal & Nimmo, 1999; Rosenberg & Jackman, 2003).

Algozzine and Kay (2002) describe the basic social skills that students must leam,

and to teachers introduce steps to teaching those skills. Connecting/bonding skills,

interactive skills, communication skills, and decision-making and problem-solving skills

are social skills that all students need (Belvel & Jordan, 2003). Cooperation skills,

assertion skills, responsibility skills, empathy skills, and self-control skills must be taught

especially in secondary schools (Zabel & Zabel, 1996). Nelsen, et al. (1993) suggest that

teachers encourage students to be honest. Students should also be taught decision-making

skills (Belvel & Jordan, 2003; McLeod, et al., 2003).

Students must also leam problem-solving skills (Burstyn & Stevens, 2001), a need

addressed by Belvel and Jordan (2003), who designed a model specifically for

problem-solving. Zabel and Zabel (1996) suggest using small problem-solving groups.

Cognitive-behavioral interventions (CBI) is a strategy that stresses cognitive

problem-solving skills. It is effective because most discipline problems result from

58


inappropriate responses to anger (Robinson, et al., 2002). Casella (2001a) introduces the

eight skills in dealing with conflict: respecting others, seeing others point-of-view, staying

in control, keeping calm, being empathetic, giving others the chance to save face,

apologizing, and using humor.

When students have difficulty solving the problem of conflict and anger, a school

can help them by offering them conflict resolution and anger management programs

(Browne, 2002). Belvel and Jordan (2003) provides twelve ways to relieving anger. They

suggest these: run and scream toward the fence, “write your problem and put it into a paper

bag and throw it away, draw on and jump up and down on a bag, create a class earthquake,

write a fantasy letter, shoot hoops, walk around a path, kick a ball, throw a ball at the wall,

pound a pillow, tear up phone books or rip old scrap paper” (p. 230). While these may

seem a bit simplistic, teachers may need to work with students to help them build positive

interpersonal relationships (Guerra & Burstyn, 2001).

Students need responsibility training (Nelsen, et al., 1993; Rinne, 1997). Instilling

a sense of social responsibility will develop moral character in a student (Leshnoff, 2003).

If teachers provide students a clear idea of what is expected of them regarding assignments,

students will be responsible enough to complete their own work carefully and on time

59


(Emmer, et al., 1989). When the teaching connects to personal and cultural values and

beliefs, perhaps through acting or role playing, personal behavior is more likely to change

(Belvel & Jordan, 2003; Nelsen, et al., 1993; Zabel & Zabel, 1996).

Values can be taught, too. Character education focuses on teaching moral or civic

values (McEwan, Gathercoal & Nimmo, 1999; Luschen, 2001). Teachers should use

directive statements to clarify values (Wolfgang & Glickman, 1980). Frequent and

ongoing values activities can help to “value vacuum” students who have not learned values

(Wolfgang & Glickman, 1980).

Using teachers’ power. Forty years ago, French and Raven found that teachers

have five powers: coercive, reward, legitimate, referent, and expert (as cited in Taubert,

1999). A teacher’s power maybe used to foster a good relationship between them and their

students (Froyen, 1993). Reward and coercive powers lead students to comply with

teacher requests and demands (Froyen, 1993). Legitimate power leads students to believe

that the teacher has a right to prescribe standards (Froyen, 1993). Teachers usually possess

superior knowledge in one field, so they own referent and expert power to convince

students to follow them (Froyen, 1993).

Utilizing peer influence. Peer approval has a significant impact on student

60


behavior (Madsen & Madsen, 1991). Evidence indicates that adolescents desire peer

approval (Hester, et al., 2003). When students are in their normal peer group, they often

behave well (Mercy & Rosenberg, 1998). So to make use of peer influence, teachers can

pick up good monitors to carry out leadership in the classroom (Freiberg, 1999b) or be role

models to influence peers towards good behavior (Algozzine & Kay, 2002). Peer tutoring

is a successful approach for students (Zabel & Zabel, 1996). Teachers can use peer tutors

to influence aggressive students to help classmates and tell aggressive students that they

will be qualified to tutor other aggressive students after they change and improve (Zabel &

Zabel, 1996).

Mediation is a strategy that uses peer influence to resolve conflicts (Algozzine &

Kay, 2002; Burstyn, 2001a; Casella, 2001c; Duhaney, 2003; Harlan, 1996; Mercy &

Rosenberg, 1998; Stevens, 2001). Peer mediation is believed to be an effective

intervention strategy, resolving conflict through the use of one-on-one interaction (Stevens,

2001). It should be noted, however, that Williams (2001c) does not think that

cross-cultural mediation is effective, especially when the mediator is always white and the

disputant is black, because this creates cultural tension.

U.S. strategies acquired from theoretical literature seldom explain where they are

61


effective for addressing which problem behaviors. It is unknown where they are effective

for which grade of students. This literature gap also occurs in the following Taiwanese

strategies.

Taiwanese Strategies fo r Managing Student Behavior

Besides the existence of a literature gap, most Taiwanese theses and dissertations

research elementary school rather than junior high school classroom management.

Therefore, this study used U.S. strategies and Taiwan strategies to design the second

questionnaire to explore the mystery in the literature gap—what the effective strategies for

addressing specific frequent problem behaviors of Taiwanese junior high school students

are.

Chou (2000) uses the qualitative methods, such as interviews and observations to

compare the differences in classroom management techniques between an expert teacher

and a novice teacher in junior high schools. In his study, he found that the expert teacher is

concerned with student needs, raises sense of self-worth, notices diversity, offers

immediate feedback, actively contacts and cooperates with parents, and helps solve

conflicts with a positive attitude (Chou, 2000).

Lee (1997) observed a junior high school teacher and obtained some classroom

62


management strategies, which include encouraging engagement, evoking motivation,

creating a cooperative task-oriented and democratic learning environment, using various

media to increase interest, and noticing diverse needs. Later, Lee (2002) surveyed 42

teachers and found that not paying attention is the most significant problem in the

classroom, and that most parents are willing to cooperate with teachers.

Tsai (2004) suggests that teachers create interactive class websites to assist in

managing the class. Hsu (2002) suggests that teachers train group supervisors, enhance

interests, teach students to respect others, train students to help each other, and to

cooperate.

Chuang (2002) believes that good interaction can build a harmonious classroom

climate and suggests that the teacher and students should devise a common goal. Teachers

must be role models, so “whatever is expected of students, teachers are expected to achieve

the same and indeed to perform better” (Cheng & Wong, 1996, Tf 22).

Some of the Taiwanese classroom management strategies were not seen in the

literature that dealt with the American educational system. The researcher collected them

from many Taiwanese websites and listed them in Appendix A so that the U.S. reader may

have an accurate picture of how Taiwanese teachers handle problem behaviors (see

63


Appendix A).

Relationship between Classroom Management Strategies and Problem Behaviors

The following 14 empirical papers were able to find which strategies were effective

for addressing which specific problem behaviors, although theoretical literature seldom

does. However, among thousands of related empirical papers, few were about strategies

for addressing problem behaviors of junior high school students. Therefore, the literature

gap still exists in empirical literature.

Grant, Acker, Guerra, Duplechain, and Coen (1998) designed a school and

classroom enhancement program to increase knowledge, skills, and communication for

teachers to provide the curriculum to teach students to solve social problems, and to assist

teachers in identifying student needs and exploring existing resources for students in

grades two, three, five, and six. They found that this program was effective for those

students with higher levels of risk of aggression.

Lewis, Sugai, and Colvin (1998) used reactive and punitive strategies, proactive

interventions, social skill instructions, direct interventions, verbal praises, teaching rules,

and positive reinforcement to reduce the frequency of problem behaviors of elementary

school students in three school settings. Problem behaviors in this study includes running,

64


grabbing, yelling, talking loudly, cutting in line, making threats, getting out of their seats,

misusing equipment, using inappropriate language, interfering with games, arguing,

climbing on structures, and playing with objects.

Todd, Homer, and Sugai (1999) asked a fourth grade student to use a cassette tape

and a card to evaluate his own behaviors. They found that self-monitoring, which meant

maintaining on-task behaviors, and self-recruited praise, which meant getting positive

attention from the teacher and peers, could decrease the frequency of problem behaviors

and increase on-task behaviors.

Kamps, Tankersley, and Ellis (2000) used a similar prevention program that

included social skills instruction with reinforcement, peer tutoring, and parent support to

reduce inappropriate behaviors of kindergarten and grade one students. These

inappropriate behaviors included aggression, grabbing, out-of-seat behaviors, and negative

verbal statements. This prevention program also resulted in improved compliance with the

teacher’s directions, and the students became engaged in positive interactions with peers

during free time and play groups.

Mitchem, Young, West, and Benyo (2001) applied a program, which included

“peer-assisted” and “self-management” strategies, to ten target students and their

65


classmates in a middle school. The teachers explained the rationale for self-management

and elicited examples. Students compared ratings of their behaviors with their partners to

see how well they met class expectations of the rules. The results were that the ten target

students’ on-task behavior improved, and the simultaneous on-task behavior of the entire

class also improved. Behaviors aimed at gaining teacher attention also increased

appropriately, but the percentages which followed their teachers’ instructions varied across

students and conditions. When these four researchers systematically withdrew from this

program, the maintenance of on-task behavior rates declined.

Soodak (2003) facilitated parent involvement, collaborated with parents, held class

meetings to foster friendship, and setting classroom rules to encourage respect to deal with

a fifth grade student. Consequently, student problem behaviors, such as speaking

offensively to an adult, threatening a classmate, and hitting another student, decreased.

Lohrmann and Talerico (2004) used teacher-directed instructions and role-playing

to teach and reinforce consistent behavioral expectations to ten fourth and fifth grade

students, and found that talking-out behavior decreased, but the results for out-of-seat and

incomplete assignments behavior were ambiguous and inconclusive.

Token economy systems, where tokens were exchanged for tangible items, had

66


been found to be effective in behavior management (Gunter, Coutinho & Cade, 2002).

Aside from this, the response cost also decreased inappropriate behavior and increased

on-task time (Gunter, et al., 2002).

Warger and Repeck (1998) found that positive behavioral support, which is built

upon the partnership of educators, families, and community members and was used from

prevention to intensive intervention, could reduce the rates of expulsions in a school.

Garrick and Laurel (2003) stated that using behavioral assessment, antecedents,

and consequences-based (ABC) strategies could assist students with attention-deficit

hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Cancio, West, and Young (2004) found that teaching students to manage their own

behaviors and parent participation were effective strategies for homework completion and

accuracy for six middle schools students.

Utley, Kozleski, Smith, and Draper (2002) found that a proactive strategy could

minimize behavior problems, especially when challenging social behaviors.

Bucher and Manning (2001) concluded that positive reinforcement and providing

behavioral contracts can deal with the problem of talking.

Weller (2000) found that identifying root causes was an effective method for

67


dealing with attendance problems.

Duties o f Homeroom Teachers

Duties o f Taiwanese Homeroom Teachers

In 1981, the Taiwanese Ministry of Education set a policy regarding duties of

homeroom teachers in junior and senior high schools. In 2003, the policy was rescinded,

and each school was challenged to establish its own policy based on the following

recommendations:

1. homeroom teachers must understand student interests, specialties,

learning attitudes, and family environment,

2. homeroom teachers must help improve student academic achievement,

behaviors, and health,

3. homeroom teachers must encourage students to perform better,

4. homeroom teachers must help students develop normally,

5. homeroom teachers must help create sound personalities in their students,

6. homeroom teachers must change the bad habits of students,

7. homeroom teachers must be in contact with parents frequently,

8. all homeroom teachers must hold a meeting at least once every school year,

68


9. homeroom teachers must participate in professional development

programs to improve counseling skills, and

10. homeroom teachers must do referrals whenever necessary (“Duty of

Homeroom Teachers,” 2004).

The Teacher Training Center in National Chung-Hsing University in Taiwan lists

the following duties for junior high school homeroom teachers:

1. train classroom helpers,

2. improve academics, moral values, behaviors, and health,

3. monitor students to ensure order and safety during each class, breaks, “self

study” periods, siesta time, and “cleaning” periods,

4. stay at the school for at least seven hours,

5. accompany students in hoisting and lowering the flag,

6. maintain student discipline and order in school meetings, class meetings, and

other activities,

7. check homework,

8. act as hall guard and crossing guard in turn,

9. visit parents frequently,

69


10. handle attendance of students,

11. interview students to provide basic counseling,

12. understand student thoughts, abilities, and hobbies,

13. hold class meetings, instructing students to participate in national contests,

14. read weekly journals and “daily communication” books (In Taiwan, each

student has such a book in which the teacher and student parents write to

facilitate communication. Everyday, the student shows it both parents after

school and shows it to the teacher when in school.),

15. evaluate student behaviors at the end of each semester,

16. attend homeroom teacher meetings, and

17. help students have a normal life (“Duty of Homeroom Teachers,” 2004).

Sheng-Ping Junior High School in Chiayi County lists the following duties for

homeroom teachers on the school website:

1. hold class meetings,

2. manage space and seating arrangement,

3. notice student safety,

4. interview students to provide basic counseling,

70


5. read student weekly journals,

6. handle accidents,

7. record academic and behavior performance,

8. help students solve problems,

9. enhance academic and behavior performance,

10. hold parent-teacher meetings,

11. accompany students on field trips,

12. notice student health,

13. instruct students to provide service for the community,

14. help students in extracurricular activities,

15. visit parents,

16. check the Daily Record of Teaching (the class secretary writes brief accounts of

what the teachers teach in each period.),

17. help students make career plans,

18. push students to pass the High School Entrance Exam,

19. check students’ satchels, and

20. accomplish any other tasks that the school assigns (“Duty of Homeroom

71


Teachers,” 2004).

San-Min Junior High School in Kaohsiung City lists 40 duties for its homeroom

teachers. They are:

1. arrive at the school before 7:30 a.m.,

2. maintain student discipline while hoisting the flag,

3. check whether students are wearing uniforms,

4. accompany students during “self study” period,

5. check the Daily Record of Teaching (the class secretary writes down brief

accounts of what the teachers teach in each period.),

6. monitor students during “cleaning” period,


8. read weekly j oumals,

9. hold class meetings,

10. attend homeroom teacher meetings,

11. instruct students to engage in extracurricular activities and to have healthy

hobbies,

12. arrange student seats,

72


13. select class helpers,

14. assign teacher assistants,

15. monitor students during “cleaning” period,

16. hold parent-teacher meetings,

17. accompany students on field trips,

18. help students choose a club (such as Music Club, Athletic Club, Painting Club,

etc.),

19. instruct students in filling out necessary academic forms,

20. assist the school nurse in examining student health,

21. guide grade student behavior (morality) performance,

22. attend school meetings,

23. record student behavior and background information,

24. instruct students on how to live a normal life,

25. counsel problem students,

26. interview students,

27. visit parents,

28. facilitate communication between the parents and the school,

73


29. handle absenteeism problems,

30. prepare students to win national contests,

31. lead students to love reading,

32. monitor tests,

33. be a leader for important activities,

34. work with the Student Affairs Office to reward and punish students,

35. send report cards to parents,

36. check student satchels (to ensure they are not bringing weapons or drugs to

school),

37. help improve student behavior, moral values, habits, and hobbies,


39. help severe problem students, and

40. perform any other duties the school assigns (“Duty of Homeroom Teachers,”

2004).

From the above three examples, the duties of Taiwanese homeroom teachers can be

understood. They are similar because each school designs it according to the policy of the

Ministry of Education. Below, two examples are provided to explain how homeroom

74


teachers can take charge of classroom management.

Jhan (2005), a homeroom teacher of Fang-He Junior High School in Taipei City,

designs a classroom management plan. Concerned with student behavior, she tells

students:

1. to go to school before 7:30 and start cleaning the classroom,

2. to enter the classroom on time when the bell rings and keep quiet before the

teacher enters,

3. to pay attention during class and raise their hands whenever they have questions,

4. to obtain the teacher’s approval before leaving theirs seats or classroom,

5. to clean tables, put chairs under the table, turn off fans and lights, close doors

and windows, and be on time when having outdoor classes, and attend hoisting

the flag ceremony,

6. to bring their textbooks, notebooks, and stationery every day,

7. to turn in homeroom on time,

8. not to cheat on exam,

9. to communicate with teachers and classmates with a respectful attitude,

10. not to violate or hurt classmates (physically or verbally),

75


11. not to vandalize school property and not to steal,

12. to be polite and use “please,” “thanks,” and “sorry” frequently,

13. not to be loud and not to run during the break,

14. not to interfere with classmates while they play on the playground and to report

to teachers when they are disturbed,

15. discipline themselves and appreciate others, do their best, and treasure

everything, and

16. cooperate with classmates, love their school, maintain order, keep clean, and be

polite.

Her strategies developed for dealing with student behavior problems are:

1. being firm and positive when asking students to be responsible,

2. canceling privileges,

3. enforcing after-school detention,

4. handling students who violate the school or class rules with the Student Affairs

Office faculty, and

5. contacting parents.

Fu (2005), a homeroom teacher of Nan-Gang junior high school in Taipei City has

76


the following classroom management plan. He asks students:

1. to love, respect, and cooperate with classmates,

2. to learn to be a good citizen,

3. to learn democracy and know how to communicate,

4. to work toward building the mutual goal of the class,

5. to pursue class honors,

6. not to bully,

7. to obey school and class rules and follow teachers’ instructions,

8. to “clean-up” everyday and put trash in the wastebasket,

9. to turn in homework on time,

10. to pay attention and not to make noise during class,

11. to ask questions whenever they don’t understand instructions,

12. to go to school on time,

13. to have honor and responsibility.

His strategies, developed through his experience as a teacher, are:

1. being a role model,

2. understanding students by increasing interaction between teachers and students,

77


3. using the “daily communication” book, using lunchtime or siesta time to

communicate with students,

4. pushing students to study hard,

5. fostering warm class climate,

6. holding class meetings,

7. establishing class rules with students,

8. contacting parents,

9. encouraging students,

10. asking content teachers about the performance of his students.

Duties o f U.S. and Japanese Homeroom Teachers

Taiwanese “dao shih” has always been translated into English as “homeroom

teacher,” but this is not an accurate translation. Because Japan governed Taiwan for about

50 years (Syn, 2005), the Taiwanese “dao shih” is similar to the Japanese “tannin no

sensei”, that is also often translated into “homeroom teacher.” Below, there is an

introduction of the duties of a U.S. homeroom teacher. The duties of the Japanese

homeroom teacher are also mentioned because it can help readers understand that there are

differences between the U.S. homeroom teacher and the Asian homeroom teacher.

78


“American homeroom teachers and the Japanese ‘tannin no sensei’ [do not]

perform the same duties” (Rhodes, 1994, f 1). Japanese homeroom teachers “share

responsibilities in running student councils, club activities, and whole-grade and

whole-school activities, events, and ceremonies” (Sato & McLaughlin, 1992, [̂ 37). These

duties are seen by American teachers as extra work, “and in many districts these activities

become subjects for collective bargaining and are regulated by contracts” (Sato &

McLaughlin, 1992, If 37).

“In America, homeroom is little more than a place to take the roll and pass on

information to students” (Rhodes, 1994, f 2) and “an American onlooker might experience

the feeling that teachers (other than the homeroom teacher) are guests in the students’

room” (Rhodes, 1994, f̂ 3). In the U.S., “homeroom is an administrative device and

homeroom teachers merely keep records” (Wayson, 2004, K 2) and homeroom is a place

where “students receive their schedule of classes” (“Parent Bulletin,” 2004,1 4). Every

student meets the homeroom teacher about 20 to 30 minutes “to dispose of all nonacademic

school business” and “the homeroom teacher often offers friendly advice to students”

(Dickerson, 1999, p. 113).

All Japanese homeroom teachers are asked to handle student behaviors, but only

79


some U.S. homeroom teachers are assigned to do so. The Japanese homeroom teacher

serves as “the point person for the behavior of any student in the class, wherever the

behavior occurs. Students spend a greater portion of their day with the homeroom teacher

than is the case in the United States, and this teacher is included in virtually all of the

communication flows about behavioral issues concerning students” (Brinton, 2004, p. 99).

However, in the U.S., only some schools have programs that prevent antisocial behaviors

in which homeroom teachers are assigned to take the responsibility “for frequent

communication and contact with parents and assume an active role in creating

collaborative home-school links” (Miller, Brehm & Whitehouse, 1998, p. 370). The

responsibility Japanese homeroom teachers take “stands in sharp contrast to the greater

diffusion of control and responsibility across adults for student misbehavior in American

middle school” (Brinton, 2004, p. 99).

Wynne (1997) conducted an informal survey of 50 U.S. secondary school

principals about the power of homeroom structure. “Power in this case meant the

capability of a high school’s homeroom structure to affect—to a greater or lesser degree -

student feelings, attitudes, or behaviors. Such power was derived from certain homeroom

characteristics” (Wynne, 1997, p. 45). These characteristics are:

80


1. the frequency in which the homeroom meets,

2. the length of time spent in homeroom meetings in a typical week,

3. if each student stayed with the same homeroom group for four years,

4. if the students were reorganized annually among the rooms,

5. how long did the assigned faculty member stay with the same students in a

homeroom, and

6. how many were the number of tasks allotted to rooms, or to the faculty room

managers, e.g., intra-room contests, homework and discipline monitoring,

intramural athletics, fund raising, counseling. (Wynne, 1997)

The results were that the “[U.S.] homeroom practices varied greatly along the

measure o f ‘power.’” (Wynne, 1997, p. 47) and “in many instances, teachers [were]

unfamiliar with the duties involved in homeroom proctoring” (Wynne, 1997, p. 49).

Wynne (1997) advocates that if homeroom meetings take about 100 minutes per week,

“where the same students and teachers were together for four years, and where diverse

activities were allotted to the room as an entity” (p. 46), then the highest possible power

would be generated.


School Student Behavior Contest

In Taiwan, student behavior contests and the student code of conduct in junior high

schools look at a number of behaviors. Students in the same class must obey items listed in

the school student behavior contest and they must obey the student code of conduct which

contains appropriate behaviors school demands and the problem behaviors school prohibit

in order for them to win in a contest.

In Luen-Bey Junior High School of Yunlin County, the contest is focused on the

rules that:

1. students must wear uniforms,

2. students are forbidden to dye their hair,

3. there is no truancy,

4. students must go to school and enter classroom on time,

5. students do not make noise,

6. students eat lunch in the classroom and listen to the broadcast of the faculty (the

principal and dean sometimes make announcements during lunchtime),

7. students are seated during class,

8. students do not eat while walking between classes,

82


9. students study hard during “self study” period,

10. students must be present when the vice class leader calls the roll in each class,

and

11. students park bicycles at the appropriate place (kindergartens have school buses

but the other schools do not) (“Items of Student Behavior Contest,” 2004).

Items of school student behavior contests of the Wey-Lee Girls’ Junior High School

of Taipei City include:

1. going to school and entering classroom on time,

2. being quiet during class,

3. sitting up straight,

4. studying hard during “self study” period,

5. not leaving seats or the classroom without permission,

6. gathering quickly and quietly while hoisting and lowering the flag,

7. listening to the lecture of the principal or dean after hoisting lowering the

flag,

8. wearing uniform, and

9. quietly taking a nap during “siesta time” (lunch period is 12:00-12:30 and

83


siesta time is 12:30-1:00) (“Items of Student Behavior Contest,” 2004).

Items of student behavior contest of Jiann-Cheng Junior High School of Taipei City

are:

1. obeying the school rules,

2. being polite,

3. wearing uniforms,

4. not wearing earrings, necklace, rings, or bracelets,

5. keeping clean, and

6. not chewing bubble gum (“Items of Student Behavior Contest,” 2004).

Items of student behavior contest of Sheng-Ping Junior High School of Chiayi

County are:


2. not making noise during class,

3. going to school and entering the classroom on time,

4. studying hard while subject teachers are giving instructions,

5. taking a nap quietly during “siesta time,” and

6. obeying school rules (“Items of Student Behavior Contest,” 2004).

84


Items of student behavior contest of Wen-Chang Junior High School of Taoyuan

County are:

1. being polite,

2. doing recycling,

3. obeying school rules,

4. studying hard during “self study period,”


6. taking a nap during “siesta time,” and

7. not making noise in class (“Items of Student Behavior Contest,” 2004).

According to the Student Code of Conduct of junior high school in Taipei, students

who do the following behaviors get scores:

1. cooperating with classmates,

2. helping classmates,

3. encouraging classmates,

4. being class helpers (such as being class president, cleaning crew leader, name

taker, social coordinator, class treasurer, class secretary, master of ceremonies,

teacher’s assistant.),

85


5. being hardworking and frugal,

6. being polite,

7. sending anything that is picked up to the Lost and Found center,

8. being an ethical athlete (not cheating),

9. showing improvements in behavior,

10. helping younger children, older citizens, the disabled, and pregnant women,

11. winning any national contests,

12. loving their country,

13. being just,

14. speaking up when they see any crime committed,

15. loving, respecting, and taking care of parents,

16. respecting teachers,

17. loving siblings,

18. helping others,

19. never speaking up,

20. being brave,

21. being a model for all students,

86


22. having good academics performance, etc. (“Student Code of Conduct,” 2004).

The following behaviors are punished:

1. being impolite,

2. quarreling with schoolmates,

3. not paying attention in class,

4. not bringing textbooks, stationery, or satchels to class,

5. not listening to class helpers’ advice,

6. not wearing uniform,

7. being dirty,

8. not turning in weekly journals or homework,

9. not expressing respect while hoisting and lowering the flag,

10. being rude,

11. not being responsible,

12. not engaging in community service,

13. keeping anything that is picked up rather than sending it to the Lost and Found

center,

14. theft,

87


15. not obeying the hall monitor,

16. truancy,

17. fighting,

18. engaging in gang activity,

19. defiance to faculty,

20. cheating on an exam,

21. extortion,

22. driving without a license,

23. use/possession of drugs, alcohol, or weapons,

24. smoking,

25. gambling,

26. misbehaviors that tarnish the reputation of the school,

27. vandalism,

28. entering illegal places (for example, students under 18 cannot drink alcohol, so

they should not enter a bar or other places where they might be persuaded to

drink alcohol, engage in violence, theft, or become a prostitute), and

29. other behaviors that do not meet the norms and expectations of the school and

88


society (“Student Code of Conduct,” 2004).

Theoretical Framework for the Study

The researcher had reviewed various kinds of literature. Every kind of literature

concerning problem behaviors and classroom management strategies is included.

However, literature that is not published in twenty or twenty one century is excluded

because students may change their behaviors. How students behave nowadays may be

different from how students behave in ancient time.

Summary

After the literature review, many problem behaviors were found. However, a

literature gap was found too, i.e., the literature did not reveal which were the most frequent

problem behaviors. There were many classroom management strategies in the literature

too and they were introduced in the above. However, the similar literature gap exists.

There were only some empirical literature that explored the relationship between

classroom management strategies and problem behaviors, i.e., which strategies were

effective in addressing which specific problem behaviors. Therefore, a study that could

find answers for these literature gaps was conducted by the researcher.

After the literature review, it was recognized that Taiwanese homeroom teachers

89


needed to deal with student behaviors every day and the school student behavior contests

could enhance the teacher’s abilities to discipline students, so homeroom teachers who

were good at handling student problem behaviors were invited to participate in this study.

It was also noted, after the literature review, that Delphi Technique was an appropriate

method for this study, so it was used in this study. The methodology is presented in the

next chapter in detail.

90


CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

This chapter presents the methodology and research design. It contains nine

sections, including “Problem and Purposes Overview,” where problems and purposes are

summarized. In “Research Question,” two research questions are introduced. “Design”

gives a big picture of the methodology of this study. In “Instrument,” the survey

instruments—the first questionnaire, the second questionnaire, and the third

questionnaire—are explained. In “Population and Sample,” the population and sample are

described. In “Data Collection” and “Data Analysis,” the methods of collecting data and

analyzing data are explained.

Problem and Purposes Overview

Many Taiwanese junior high school teachers have been troubled by student

91


problem behaviors (Chiou, 2002). They need effective strategies to manage these

behaviors, but the literature does not provide answers, i.e. the specific classroom

management strategies for addressing certain problem behaviors could not be found in the

literature. Some empirical literature explores the relationship between classroom

management strategies and problem behaviors, but they are not enough for Taiwanese

homeroom teachers to solve a variety of behavior problems that occur every day.

The purpose of this study is to look for effective strategies for addressing specific

problem behaviors for junior high school homeroom teachers. It uses a three-round Delphi

Technique. In the first round, the five most frequent problem behaviors of junior high

school students in Taiwan were found by using questions that sought responses on a

5-point Likert scale and an open-ended question. In the second round, a number of

effective strategies that expert homeroom teachers, who were recommended by principals,

had used for addressing the five most frequent problem behaviors of junior high school

students, were explored by five open-ended questions. In the third round, 82 3-point Likert

scale questions let each participant have an additional opportunity to confirm the

effectiveness of each strategy provided by teachers who responded to the second

questionnaire.

92


As a result, this study discovered the first five frequent problem behaviors of junior

high school in Taiwan, and the effective strategies for addressing each of these five

frequent problem behaviors by means of three rounds of the Delphi Technique. The

findings of this study can provide teachers with effective strategies to manage student

problem behaviors.

Research Questions

There are two major research questions in this study:

1. What are the most frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students in

Taiwan?

2. What classroom management strategies do expert junior high school

homeroom teachers in Taiwan use to cope with these frequent problem behaviors?

There were many problem behaviors exhibited by junior high school students

in Taiwan. This study intended to find out the most frequent ones. There were a

variety of strategies that homeroom teachers usually used, but this study looked for

effective strategies from expert homeroom teachers.

Design

These research questions were investigated through Delphi Technique.

93


Quantitative methods were used to determine the frequency of problem behaviors and the

effectiveness of strategies, and were used in the descriptive and statistical analyses of the

study.

The technique does not require participants to meet face-to-face (Stuter, 2003), so it

is especially useful for conducting surveys of qualified samples over a wide geographic

area and over time. It was used because it allowed for the collection of data from expert

homeroom teachers across Taiwan without the expense or time needed to meet each of

them.

The Delphi Technique is conceived as a way of obtaining the opinion of experts

(Rosenbaum, 1991, f 4). It reaches a wide geographic distribution of people who are

relatively homogeneous and fairly well-educated. The participants are experts in

“understanding some current situations, attitudes, or interests” (“Data Collection

Techniques,” 2003, f 1). The method is also used for “obtaining group input of ideas and

for problem solving” (“Delphi Techniques,” 1994, f 1). This study aimed to obtain

strategies from expert homeroom teachers. They were all homogeneous and well-educated.

They understood what strategies were effective. Their strategies solved behavior problems.

Therefore, the Delphi Technique was selected for this study.

94


During the 1980s, the use of the Delphi Technique was widespread. Rosenbaum

(1991) found that from 1985 to 1989, 80 doctoral research studies employed the Delphi

Technique, with 54 of them were concerned with educational issues. Among them, 12

were about educational administration and 11 addressed areas of interest in curriculum and

instruction. This search for the literature indicates that the Delphi Technique is suitable for

doctoral research studies in education. Block, Oakar, and Hurt (2002) used the Delphi

Technique to survey characteristics of highly effective literacy teachers and they believed

that the Delphi Technique was an appropriate analytical method for group communication

through which individuals could provide professional judgments. Cannon (2002) used a

two-round Delphi Technique to study the improvement of student teaching.

An article from the Michigan State University Extension reported eight

advantages of the Delphi Technique:

1. participants remain anonymous,

2. it is not expensive,

3. it avoids pressure or individual dominance,

4. it produces reliable judgments or forecasts,

5. it allows sharing and reasoning,

95


6. it is beneficial for independent thinking and ongoing formulation,

7. it reaches agreements between participants who are antagonistic to each other,

and

8. “a well-selected respondent panel. . . can provide a broad analytical

perspective on potential growth impacts” (“Delphi Techniques,” 1994, 3).

The four primary features of the Delphi Technique—anonymity, interaction

with feedback, statistical group response, and expert input—demonstrate that it is

well-suited to provide answers for the research questions raised by this study. The

Delphi Technique has been particularly useful in dealing with issues that can benefit

from subjective judgments, including such questions as, “Which strategies do expert

teachers find effective?”

The Delphi Technique allows respondents to generate specific and high

quality ideas because of the characteristics of isolated writing, which allow

respondents to think thoroughly about a complex problem, and prevent respondents

from reacting to others’ ideas (Rosenbaum, 1991). Moreover, this characteristic

reduces or eliminates conformity pressures through anonymity and isolation, and

provides for equal participation from all respondents (Rosenbaum, 1991).

96


The Michigan State University Extension study also listed six disadvantages of

Delphi Technique, saying that:

1. judgments may not be representative,

2. it tends to eliminate extreme positions and cause a middle-of-the-road

consensus,

3. it takes a lot of time (about 30-45 days),

4. it cannot be seen as a complete solution to forecast,

5. it requires skills of written communication, and

6. it needs the commitment of the participants (“Delphi Techniques,” 1994).

The Delphi Technique may be conducted through the use of a mailed survey

instrument (Snyder-Halpem, Thompson & Schaffer, 2004). It attempts to achieve a

consensus through several rounds of mailed surveys. The results of the survey instruments

are similar to those obtained from discussions or meetings. This study used the mailed

survey instrument because participants, who might not be good at typing Chinese

characters, were asked to list many effective strategies on questionnaires.

The Delphi Technique is a method used for the “systematic solicitation and

collation of judgments on a particular topic through a set of carefully designed sequential

97


questionnaires interspersed with summarized information and feedback of opinions

derived from earlier responses” (Gould, 2004,1 2). In this study, which used a three-round

Delphi Technique, the second questionnaire (see Appendix B) was based on responses that

were compiled from the first questionnaire. The third questionnaire was based on

responses compiled from the second questionnaire. Therefore, in such a three-round study,

the participant “has at least one opportunity to re-evaluate his/her original answers, based

on feedback of the group response” (Rosenbaum, 1991, f 3).

The homogeneous groups of experts used in this survey were expert homeroom

teachers, because Chinese students discuss both academic concerns and personal issues

with their homeroom teachers (Liu, 1997) and “homeroom teachers make a heavy

commitment to the overall growth of their students” (Liu, 1997, ^11). The homeroom

teacher’s dedication to student growth helps them meet academic and behavioral

requirements in school (Liu, 1997). When Liu (1997) was a homeroom teacher in

Mainland China, she “worked with students in diagnosing their academic problems,

addressing discipline problems that occurred in any teacher’s class, and making home

visits” (Liu, 1997, T|12).

In Taiwan, there are many contests among classes (for instance, singing contests,

98


drawing contests, chess contests, clean-up contests, etc.). The student behavior contest is

one contest that evaluates the performance of student behaviors. The homeroom teachers

who could manage and lead their classes to win the student behavior contest were

considered to be the expert homeroom teachers and were invited to participate in this study.

As part of the study, junior high school principals were asked to select expert homeroom

teachers according to the criteria the researcher provided (see Appendix B).

The first questionnaire was sent to the participants in order to determine the most

frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students in Taiwan. It contained lists of

problem behaviors (see Appendix C), and the respondents were asked to rate the frequency

of each behavior on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was reached regarding the most

frequent problem behaviors. In the second survey instrument (see Appendix D),

open-ended questions were used to collect strategies used to address some of the problem

behaviors. The third Delphi survey instrument (see Appendix E) obtained a consensus on

the strategies used. Finally, problem behaviors and effective strategies were listed in rank

order in Chapter Four of this dissertation.

The research survey instrument was examined through pilot tests to enhance

validity and reliability. The pilot survey instrument included a list of the foremost problem

99


behaviors as identified in the literature review. In the pilot tests, several teachers who were

familiar with the project read the pilot survey instrument (see Appendix F) and determined

if they required revision. Pilot testing helped identify the problem behaviors that should be

listed on the first questionnaire. Because the pilot test survey instrument had an

open-ended question that could collect more problem behaviors from participants, after the

pilot test was completed, some problem behaviors that pilot test participants wrote down in

the open-ended question were added to the first questionnaire. Some problem behaviors

were removed from the survey instrument after pilot test and finally the first questionnaire

was made (see Appendix C). Equivalent conditions were ensured through the use of

standard processes for the development and dissemination of the survey instruments.

Questions about each participant’s age, years of teaching, gender, and level of

education were included in the second questionnaire (see Appendix D), because these

variables might influence the choice of strategies. The age range of the teachers was 25 to

65, the range of years of teaching experience was 3 to 40 years, level of education was

either college or graduate school, and the gender was either male or female.

Instrumentation

The research protocols were appropriate for use by the target population. Many

100


Taiwanese theses and dissertations have used questionnaires in surveys, so this fact

indicated that teachers in Taiwan are willing to respond. Additionally, with 719 junior high

schools in Taiwan, questionnaires are the most effective instruments that can be used for

reaching the schools.

The Delphi survey instrument was written in Chinese by the researcher and the

Chinese version was translated into English by a certified translation agency that was

recommended by the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in Miami (Appendix G).

The drafts of the three rounds of questionnaires were reviewed by dissertation

committee members “to establish the face validity” (Gould, 2004, Tf 19) and to “improve

the questions, format, and the scales” (as cited in Gould, 2004, n.d., 1 19). The Delphi

participant “usually has at least one opportunity to re-evaluate original answers based on

feedback of the group response” (Rosenbaum, 1991, f 3), so successive rounds of

questionnaires can enhance the content validity (“The Delphi Technique,” 2003). The

reliability is ensured because “statements about the researcher’s positions, the central

assumptions, the selection of participants, and the biases and values of the researcher

enhance the study’s chance of being replicated in another setting” (Gould, 2004, n.d., 121).

Although there was potential for researcher bias, face validity and concurrent validity of

101


the technique were described as, “Delphi studies may have more validity and reliability

than many other . . . research methods” (Bowles, 1999, p. 32).

The Delphi questionnaire of this study was a researcher-developed instrument.

The procedures for developing the survey instrument began with developing and

pilot-testing the first questionnaire, sending the first questionnaire for participants to

answer independently, and receiving replies from the participants. At that time, the

researcher analyzed the data, summarized responses, and then used the feedback

summary to develop the second questionnaire for the same respondent group. Each

participant answered the second questionnaire independently and returned it to the

researcher. For a second time, the researcher analyzed the data, summarized

responses, and then used the feedback summary to develop the third questionnaire for

the same participant group. Each participant again answered the third questionnaire

independently and returned it to the researcher. Finally, the researcher analyzed and

summarized the data in the third questionnaire. When data collection and analysis

were complete, the researcher prepared a report that served as the dissertation, which

also provided the study results of the participants.

The Delphi Technique can be modified in many ways. This study followed the

102


conventional method of three rounds. There were three questionnaires. They

contained open-ended questions that could acquired more data and 5-point Likert

scale and 3-point Likert scale that had the advantages of quantitative methods that

were ideal for ranking the problem behaviors and strategies. Open-ended questions

were used to compensate for the disadvantages of the quantitative method. For

example, there might have been problem behaviors that the researcher did not put in

the 5-point Likert scale, so by asking participants to write down frequent problem

behaviors that were not listed in the 5-point Likert scale the open-ended questions

helped the researcher discover more problem behaviors.

Population and Sample

One important feature of the Delphi Technique is expert input (“The Delphi

Technique,” 2003). The Delphi Technique has been conceived as a way to “seek a

consensus among homogeneous groups of experts” (Rosenbaum, 1991,% 11). Participants

of the Delphi Technique projects are often selected by “nominations of people (or

self-nominations) with some expertise” (Gould, 2004, n.d., f 8). The other feature of the

Delphi Technique is anonymity (“The Delphi Technique,” 2003).

The sample size necessary for valid statistical analysis should be determined.

103


However, “the ideal panel size has not been identified,” so suggestions vary (Bowles, 1999,

p. 32). “Thirty is frequently used as an upper bound . . . usually between 10 and 20 people

is reasonable” (Gould, 2004, 4). “With a homogenous group of people, 10 to 15

participants might be enough” (as cited in Gould, 2004, n.d., ^ 8). Cannon (2002) selected

34 educators as the sample in the two-round Delphi study in his dissertation. Birch,

Duplaga, Seabert, and Wilbur (2001) surveyed professional preparation priorities for 50

high school teachers and 46 middle school teachers in their three-round Delphi study.

This study consists of hundreds of participants, with the number of participants

gradually decreasing during the three rounds. In the beginning, 1109 expert junior high

school homeroom teachers were recruited, with 628 of them replying in the first round, 399

in the second round, and 350 in the third round.

The population for this study is the homeroom teacher. This population was

selected because Taiwanese homeroom teachers were in charge of “addressing discipline

problems that occurred in any teacher’s class” (Liu, 1997, p. 12). The study participants

were expert junior high school homeroom teachers in Taiwan. They were recruited from

Keelung City, Taipei City, Taipei County, Taoyuan County, Hsinchu County, Hsinchu City,

Miaoli County, Taichung County, Taichung City, Changhua County, Nantou County,

104


Yunlin County, Chiayi County Chiayi City, Tainan County, Tainan City, Kaohsiung County,

Kaohsiung City, Pingtung County, Taitung County, Hualien County, Yilan County,

Lienchiang County, Kinmen County, and Penghu County.

Figure 3.1 Taiwan Map

5HrWKteitmgCiiy

MJkRTaipei County

WnWkyikm County

WtWtWXantou County County

SMSSVtmlin County

mmm/chttwiCity SM ^'Chiayi County

m m m - Imtung County

%

All Taiwanese theses and dissertations were listed in a website. No theses or

dissertations that investigated classroom management had surveyed the whole country and

most of them surveyed only one or two areas (“Dissertation and Thesis,” 2005). This study

is unique because it focused on the whole country.

Wu (1999), in his dissertation, asked principals to recommend good teachers

105

m mUenchkmg County

Kinmvn ( aunty

Taoyttan Cmtmy-I^JB St Hsinchu Cotmty/WfffR

Hsinchu Ctty/f&xVIifo

Miaoii Coutily-HSM 1%

Taichung CountyWt'PJBi mehmgCity^tp f t

Chtmgfma C.'atm&QMfM

mm.Penghu County

1 mi i 'aunty s m ® Ittman City * * *

Kaohsiung CoufUytfaitSEtik

KaohshtngCity/ffl&m

Pingtung CmMty.mM.fR


because he found that many American researchers did so, too. Bowman, in her dissertation,

(2002) also asked principals to recommend successful teachers, and “the selection was

based upon his or her understanding of which teachers are the most successful in terms of

discipline strategies” (p. 43). The method of sampling in this study involved asking every

junior high school principal in Taiwan to use his/her professional judgment to recommend

three homeroom teachers from all homeroom teachers whose classes had excelled in the

student behavior contest in his/her school. The researcher provided principals with criteria

to assist in identifying expert teachers (see Appendix B).

With regard to the teachers who were selected as participants for this study,

principals were asked to recommend teachers with the following characteristics:

1. they are certified full-time teachers,

2. they pass the evaluation of their principal’s professional judgment,

3. they have at least three years of teaching experience, and

4. their classes have frequently won the student behavior contests (see Appendix

B).

Among the above criteria, being a certified full-time teacher is a basic requirement. Three

years of teaching experiences was decided because three years is enough for a teacher to

106


get tenure in the U.S. Principal professional judgment is used to balance the student

behavior contest because the former is subjective and the latter is more objective.

An appropriate participant group was selected with the assistance of principals in

junior high schools in Taiwan. The researcher sent letters with criteria checklists (see

Appendix B) to 718 junior high school principals in Taiwan. Each principal was asked to

recommend three expert homeroom teachers. Of these, 380 principals replied and they

recommended a total of 1109 expert homeroom teachers. Upon receiving names of

potential participants from the principals, the researcher sent informed consent form (see

Appendix H) for the participants to sign. The literature reports “drop-out rates of between

50 per cent and 78.8 per cent” (Bowles, 1999, p. 32). Retention was expected, so recruiting

expert junior high school homeroom teachers in Taiwan in the beginning ensured there

were sufficient responses for the final round of surveys. The strength of this sampling

method was in the selection of “experts” and in the number of cases in the sample.

Data Collection

Three questionnaires were delivered to each “expert homeroom teacher” in a

uniform and standardized way. They were delivered and receive by mail, so the data

collection methodology used was mailed surveys. “The minimal time to complete a

107


three-round conventional Delphi is about 45 days” (Rosenbaum, 1991, f 6). Because

this research needed the recommendation of participants by principals, in addition to

the three-round Delphi Technique, the whole collection period took 4 months. Each

round (three Delphi rounds and one for the principals) required one month.

The use of the Delphi Technique may be conducted in a relatively short period

of time. Most studies that have used the Delphi Technique have been conducted in a

45-60 day period, although a few studies took as long as eight months. The real-time

Delphi Technique, that is also called a “Delphi Conference,” collects data via

technology, and can speed-up the process (Rosenbaum, 1991). However, the

researcher spent a lot of time sending thousands of questionnaires to participants by

mail because many teachers are not able to type Chinese characters well.

Data were compiled while being received, using the survey instruments as the

basis for data organization. Data were keyed in with SPSS software and SPSS was

used for the statistical calculation and analysis of the results.

Data Analysis

The basic approach to data analysis for this study was the Delphi Technique,

used for rating and prioritizing problem behaviors and ranking strategies. It was

108


necessary to know the respondent’s age, gender, level of education, and years of

teaching, all of which might influence the results, so the second Delphi survey

instrument contained questions that obtained this information. These characteristics

were taken into consideration, and their potential significance is discussed in the

findings.

The researcher is experienced in classroom management, and this facilitated

the correct interpretation of the responses from participants. She has been a teacher

for 10 years (see Appendix I) and her classes often have won school contests. Her

successful experiences in using a variety of strategies to address classroom

management strengthened her ability to interpret the strategies that participants

provided in the second questionnaire. For example, a teacher who had been awarded

Teacher of the Year stated, “I often observe students during the break to see their

conditions.. . . When a student is given up by a teacher, I will talk with him/her first,

and then will ask his/her close classmates about his/her condition, or I will ask

him/her to write down any troubles he now has” (“Interviews of Teacher of the Year,”

2004,1 1). The researcher interpreted the former statement as a “prevention” strategy

and the latter as a “exploring causes of behavior problems” strategy.

109


The data analysis process is as follows.

1. The researcher summed the scores of each problem behavior according to the

integers five, four, three, two, or one, that participants chose on the 5-point

Likert scale. The sum of all the scores of each problem behavior was divided

by the number of answers, based on how many participants responded to a

particular problem behavior. Through this, the mean of each problem behavior

was obtained. This process determined the most frequent problem behaviors.

2. The second round of surveys focused on strategies participants used to cope

with the five most frequent problem behaviors. The number of problem

behaviors on the second questionnaire was determined by the natural

breakpoint in data, using that point to select priority problem behaviors.

Because the mean scores of the problem behaviors of “not doing homework,

turning in incomplete homework, delaying turning in homework, or not

bringing homework” is 4.14, “using obscene or vulgar language” is 4.07,

“bullying” is 4.04, “not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever” is

4.01, and “being absent-minded during class” is 3.86 (see Table 4.6), these first

five frequent problems behaviors were elected from the first questionnaire to

110


design the second questionnaire.

3. The researcher tabulated the suggested strategies that respondents provided in

the second questionnaire so that they could be organized and categorized. For

example, strategies based on the responses of calling parents, holding

teacher-parent meetings, sending a note to parents, contacting parents, and

visiting parents, were placed in a category entitled “constructing parental

partnerships.” In this phase of the study, strategies that were frequently given

by the respondents for each problem behavior were compiled and ranked by

frequency of response.

4. In the third and final round of Delphi Technique surveying, the researcher listed

the most frequent problem behaviors and their identified strategies. The

respondents then ranked and prioritized the strategies in decreasing order for

each problem behavior.

5. Finally, the researcher analyzed the results of the third survey and prepared a

final list of the most effective strategies that were used by the expert junior high

school homeroom teachers to cope with the five most frequent discipline

problem behaviors identified by the respondents in the first round.

I l l


SPSS was used for descriptive analysis, reliability analysis, correlation analysis,

and t-test analysis. The results are discussed in Chapter Four and are summarized in

Chapter Five.

Summary

Research questions were developed after the literature review and based on

findings from that review. The literature review also suggested the efficacy of a

three-round Delphi Technique. Questionnaires were designed according to what had been

found in the literature review and in the process of Delphi Technique survey. This study

selected respondents by sending 718 letters with the criteria for principals to recommend

expert homeroom teachers. It used SPSS to do statistical calculations and analysis.

In summary, this study included 718 letters to principals, 1,109 first questionnaires,

1,109 informed consent forms, 1,109 copies of recommendation form that had names of

expert teachers that principals had written down, 628 second questionnaires, 399 third

questionnaires, 399 “explanation of strategies of the third questionnaires”, and 2,854

self-addressed stamped envelope. They were sent by the researcher and took four months

by mail. A report of the results, from the final dissertation, are sent to the 350 participants

and 380 principals after it is approved.

112


The study was able to determine the five most frequent problem behaviors of junior

high school students in Taiwan and the effective classroom management strategies used to

cope with each of these five behavior problems. The findings are presented in Chapter

Four and discussed again in Chapter Five.

113


CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

As stated in Chapter One, junior high school students exhibit problem behaviors

that disrupt classrooms, limit cognitive gains, and annoy many teachers in Taiwan. The

literature reviewed, as illustrated in Chapter Two, does not provide sufficient classroom

management strategies and fails to link strategies with specific problem behaviors. The

purposes of this study were to find out effective classroom management strategies:

1. to assist teachers in improving student behaviors;

2. to help teachers to help students achieve effective learning; and

3. to help teachers prevent future acts of student violence.

In the effort to provide guidance for teachers seeking assistance with classroom

management, two research questions were deveoped:

114


1. What are the most frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students

in Taiwan? and

2. What classroom management strategies do expert junior high school

homeroom teachers in Taiwan use to cope with these frequent problem

behaviors?

This study at first explored the frequent problem behaviors of junior high school

students by means of the first questionnaire. Next, it collected effective classroom

management strategies from participants through a second questionnaire. Finally, this

study found out effective classroom management strategies for addressing specific

problem behaviors by means of the third questionnaire. The two research questions

were answered by information gathered through three questionnaires.

This chapter fully describes all data and the procedures of statistical calculation of

data are presented. It also describes, analyzes, and interprets results sequentially from

pilot test, to the first questionnaire, to the second questionnaire, and finally to the third

questionnaire. Results are explained and discussed in depth. The chapter concludes

with a summary.

115


Organization of Data Analysis

In Taiwan, there are seven cities and 18 counties, with a total of 719 junior high

schools, shown by city and county in Table 4.1. One school located at Changhua

County was excluded from this study because it is a special education school for mentally

retarded students whose IQ is below 80.

Table 4.1 Names of Cities and Counties in Taiwan and Number of Junior High Schools

Names of Cities and Counties in Taiwan Number of Junior High SchoolsKeelung City 13Taipei City 62Hsinchu City 10Taichung City 25Chiayi City 8Tainan City 19Kaohsiung City 35Taipei County 62Taoyuan County 48Hsinchu County 27Miaoli County 29Taichung County 41Nantou County 30Changhua County 39Yunlin County 30Chiayi County 25Tainan County 42Kaohsiung County 45Pingtung County 36Yilan County 24Hualien County 23Taitung County 21Kinmen County 5Lienchiang County 5Penghu County 14Total 718

116


In the letter to principals seeking their recommendation of three expert teachers

from their schools, some principals conveyed that they have many expert teachers and

they could recommend more than three. Other principals asked the researcher whether

they could recommend fewer than three expert teachers. In part, this is related to the

size of the schools. Some schools have hundreds of teachers; other schools have fewer

than 10 teachers, especially those that are located in the mountains and in rural

communities. In addition, some of the schools with many teachers, may lack expert

teachers. Because there are three grades in each junior high school in Taiwan, three was

chosen as the optimal number of expert teachers for all schools. To ensure equitability

between schools, each principal could recommend at most three expert teachers. If

principals recommended less than three expert teachers, the response was treated as if

some participants withdrew from this study. In total, 380 principals replied ( 53%) and

they recommended 1109 experts teachers.

Table 4.2 Response Rate of Letter to the Principal

Names of Cities and Counties

Number of Replies of Principals

Response Rate Number of Expert Teachers Recommended

Keelung City 2 15% 6Taipei City 30 48% 85Hsinchu City 3 30% 9Taichung City 14 56% 42Chiayi City 4 50% 12

117


Tainan City 10 53% 30Kaohsiung City 27 77% 81Taipei County 27 44% 78Taoyuan County 23 48% 69Hsinchu County 17 63% 49Miaoli County 16 55% 45Taichung County 21 51% 63Nantou County 15 50% 45Changhua County 21 54% 62Yunlin County 14 47% 42Chiayi County 13 52% 39Tainan County 27 64% 77Kaohsiung County 29 64% 82Pingtung County 22 61% 66Yilan County 10 42% 28Hualien County 13 57% 37Taitung County 10 48% 28Kinmen County 4 80% 11Lienchiang County 1 20% 2Penghu County 7 50% 21Total 380 53% 1109

All expert teachers in this study had four similar characteristics:

1. they are certified full-time teachers,

2. they pass the evaluation of their principal’s professional judgment,

3. they have at least three years of teaching experience, and

4. their classes have frequently won the student behavior contests, (see

Appendix B)

These criteria were decided based on the literature review. Because the professional

judgment of the principal is more subjective and outcomes of school student behavior

contests are more objective, the criteria include both to achieve balance.

118


With the names and addresses of the teachers from the principals, 1,109 informed

consent forms were sent to invite expert teachers to participate. The first questionnaire

was enclosed with these packets. Of those approached, 628 expert teachers replied, a

response rate of 57%. Then 628 second questionnaires were sent to the same

participants who replied to the first questionnaires. Again, not all teachers responded,

but 399 participants replied, a response rate of 64%. Finally, 399 third questionnaires

were sent out and solicited 350 participant replies, a response rate of 87%. In summary,

the response rate of three questionnaires was 31% (see Table 4.3 for details).

Table 4.3 Response Rates of First, Second and Third Questionnaires

Names of Cities and Counties

# Replies (1stQuestionnaire)

Response Rate (1st Questionn aire)

# Replies (2ndQuestionnaire)

Response Rate (2nd Questionn aire)

# Replies (3rdQuestionnaire)

Response Rate (3rd Questionn aire)

Keelung City 4 67% 1 25% 1 100%Taipei City 49 58% 35 71% 31 89%Hsinchu City 3 33% 1 33% 0 0%Taichung City 18 43% 14 78% 10 71%Chiayi City 7 58% 5 71% 3 60%Tainan City 22 73% 14 64% 14 100%Kaohsiung City 51 63% 32 63% 27 84%Taipei County 49 63% 35 71% 27 77%Taoyuan County 38 55% 25 66% 25 100%Hsinchu County 33 67% 24 73% 18 75%Miaoli County 27 60% 17 63% 16 88%Taichung County 30 46% 21 72% 19 90%Nantou County 27 60% 12 44% 11 92%Changhua County 32 52% 16 50% 13 81%Yunlin County 22 52% 14 64% 15 107%

119


Chiayi County 26 67% 15 58% 18 120%Tainan County 42 55% 29 69% 26 90%KaohsiungCounty

42 51% 24 57% 22 92%

Pingtung County 43 65% 29 67% 24 83%Yilan County 13 46% 7 54% 6 86%Hualien County 19 51% 12 63% 8 67%Taitung County 13 46% 5 38% 6 120%Kinmen County 7 64% 7 100% 5 71%LienchiangCounty

1 50% 0 0% 0

Penghu County 10 48% 5 50% 5 100%Total 628 57% 399 64% 350 87%

In the following table, of the 350 participants who replied to the third

questionnaires, 249 of them were females and 78 were males. The sex of 23 participants

was unknown. The age of 230 participants ranged from 24 to 44 and age of 98

participants ranged from 45 to 65. The age of 22 participants was unknown. The level

of education of 243 participants was college, while 83 had attended graduate school. 24

were unknown. The years of teaching experience of the 239 participants ranged from 3

to 20; 89 ranged from 21 to 40; and 22 were unknown.

Table 4.4 Frequencies of Sex, Age, Level of Education, and Years of Teaching Experience

of Participants

SEX

Frequency Percent Valid PercentCumulative

PercentValid female 249 71.1 76.1 76.1

male 78 22.3 23.9 100.0Total 327 93.4 100.0

Missinq System 23 6.6Total------------ ______350- m n n

120


AGE


PercentValid 24-44 230 65.7 70.1 70.1

45-65 98 28.0 29.9 100.0Total 328 93.7 100.0

Missing System 22 6.3Total— ..... rn n n

EDUCATIO


PercentValid college 243 69.4 74.5 74.5

graduate 83 23.7 25.5 100.0Total 326 93.1 100.0

Missing System 24 6.9T n ta l ______350- rn n n

EXPERIEN


PercentValid 3-20 239 68.3 72.9 72.9

21-40 89 25.4 27.1 100.0Total 328 93.7 100.0

Missing System 22 6.3Total ... rn n n

Before sending out the three questionnaires, there was a pilot test that included 41

participants and a survey instrument that included 28 problem behaviors. Pilot test

participants were not expert teachers and were friends of the researcher. It was a sample

of convenience, but served to confirm that a number of the problem behaviors selected

from the literature were of valid concern to teachers in Taiwan. Chapter Two discusses

many problem behaviors that were found in both the U.S. and Taiwanese literature, but

they were organized into 28 problem behaviors for being put into the pilot test survey

121


instrument (see Appendix F). After the pilot test, some problem behaviors were

removed from the pilot test survey instrument and some were added. Therefore, the first

questionnaire included 29 problem behaviors (see Appendix C).

Description and Analysis of Results

The researcher keyed in the data and used SPSS software to perform statistical

calculations. After summing the scores of each problem behavior on the pilot test

survey instrument according to the integers five, four, three, two, or one that the

participants chose, the researcher compared the mean of each problem behavior.

The mean of “bringing weapons to school,” “drug abuse,” “alcohol abuse,” and

“listening to Walkman during class” was very low, so these four were removed. “Using

cellular during class” was not removed, because the researcher was not sure that it was

not frequent problem behaviors. Numbers noted with an asterisk (*) represent the top

five problems as established by the pilot test (see Table 4.5).

Table 4.5 Mean of Problem Behaviors in Pilot Test.

code Problem Behaviors Mean Rank of Mean

1 Bringing weapons to school 1.86 272 Fighting 3.69 123 Bullying 4.11 64 Extortion 3.03 215 Theft 3.51 17

122


6 Vandalism 4.20 3*7 Being late 4.31 1*8 Truancy 3.57 169 Smoking 2.91 2210 Drug abuse 1.94 2611 Alcohol abuse 2.14 2512 Not keeping clean 3.97 913 Refusing to obey teachers’ requests 4.09 714 Talking back 3.91 1015 Cheating on exam 3.91 1016 Not staying seated 3.66 1317 Taping pencils or objects 3.37 2018 Reading what is not being taught 3.60 1519 Eating or chewing gum during class 3.51 1720 Sleeping during class 3.49 1921 Listening to Walkman during class 1.74 2822 Using cellular during class 2.43 2423 Writing and passing slips 3.66 1324 Making noise or not keeping quiet 4.03 825 Not bringing textbooks or homework 4.20 3*26 Turning in incomplete homework 4.26 2*27 Not wearing uniform 4.20 3*28 Leaving classroom without permission 2.80 23

“Using obscene or vulgar language,” “telling lies or deception,” “being

absent-minded during class,” “not sitting up straight,” and “loafing on campus during

lunchtime, siesta time, or cleaning time,” were added because many pilot test participants

mentioned them in the open-ended question. Finally, four problem behaviors were

removed from the first questionnaire and five new problem behaviors, which were

written by participants in the pilot test survey instrument, were added in the first

questionnaire.

After the pilot test, there were 29 problem behaviors in the first questionnaire, to

123


which 628 participants replied. In SPSS, “exclude cases listwise” was selected. That

is to say, if a questionnaire had missing values, data from that questionnaire were

eliminated from analyses. Therefore, the analysis number was 589. After the

researcher summed the scores of each problem behavior according to the integers five,

four, three, two, or one that participants chose, the mean of each problem behavior was

compared to determine the rank of mean of each problem behaviors. Numbers noted

with an asterisk (*) represent the top five problems as established by the first

questionnaire.

Table 4.6 Mean of Problem Behaviors in the First Questionnaire.

Code Problem behavior Mean Rank1 Fighting 3.33 162 Bullying 4.04 3*3 Extortion 2.71 274 Theft 3.00 215 Vandalism 3.64 86 Being late 3.80 67 Truancy 2.90 248 Leaving classroom without permission 2.32 289 Smoking 3.25 1810 Using obscene or vulgar language 4.07 2*11 Not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever 4.01 q*12 Refusing to obey teachers’ requests 3.48 1513 Talking back 3.32 1714 Cheating on exam 3.09 1915 Not staying seated 2.78 2616 Taping pencils or objects 2.95 2317 Reading what is not being taught 3.06 2018 Eating or chewing gum during class 3.00 2219 Sleeping during class 3.50 14


20 Telling lies or deception 3.61 1121 Using cellular during class 1.71 2922 Writing and passing slips 3.62 1023 Being absent-minded during class 3.86 5*24 Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in,

or not bringing homework4.14 1*

25 Making noise or not keeping quiet 3.64 926 Not bringing textbooks or stationery 3.58 1227 Not wearing uniform 3.50 1328 Not sitting up straight 3.65 729 Loafing on campus during lunchtime, siesta time, or

cleaning period2.83 25

By ranking the mean of every problem behavior, the first five frequent problem

behaviors were found. However, the correlation analysis was needed to confirm the rank.

Table 4.7 was the output of correlation analysis of 29 problem behaviors with SPSS. It

showed that postive (0 < r < 1) correlation existed between any two of the 29 problem

behaviors and coorelation was significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) between any two

problem behaviors. Therefore, the rank of frequent problem behaviors could be

determined. “Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing

homework” was the first frequent problem behavior of junior high school students.

“Using obscene or vulgar language” was the second; “bullying” was the third; “not

cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever” was the fourth; and “being

absent-minded during class” was the fifth frequent problem behavior.125


Table 4.7 Output of Correlation Analysis of the First Questionnaires

Spearman’s rho PB1 PB2 PB3 PB4 PB5 PB6 PB7 PB8 PB9 PB10 PB11PB1 Correlation Cofficient

Sig. (2-tailed)1.000

PB2Correlation Cofficient Sig. (2-tailed)

.514**

.0001.000


.680**

.000.406**.000**

1.000


543**.000

.409**

.000.663**.000

1.000


.389**

.000.390**.000

.425**

.000.524**.000

1.000


.330**

.000.363**.000

.323**

.000.361**.000

.429**

.0001.000


.508**

.000.305**.000

.560**

.000472**.000

.415**

.000.572**.000

1.000


.374**

.000.215**.000

.395**

.000.392**.000

.324**

.000.322**.000

.516**

.0001.000


.503**

.000.332**.000

.514**

.000.454**.000

.409**

.000.351**.000

.536**

.000.334**.000

1.000

PBlOCorrelation Cofficient Sig. (2-tailed)

.305**

.000.400**.000

.275**

.000.300**.000

.425**

.000.417**.000

347**.000

.259**

.000419**.000

1.000

PB11 Correlation Cofficient Sig. (2-tailed)

.253**

.000.435**.000

.228**

.000.322**.000

.424**

.000.416**.000

.295**

.000.231**.000

.323**

.000.508**.000

1.000


.301**

.000.323**.000

.298**

.000.350**.000

.416**

.000417**.000

.400**

.000374**.000

.308**

.000.209**.000

.526**

.000PB13Correlation Cofficient

Sig. (2-tailed).387**.000

.357**

.000439**.000

.373**

.000.376**.000

.396**

.000.508**.000

.477**

.000.351**.000

.414**

.000.383**.000


.424**

.000.369**.000

.458**

.000.485**.000

.403**

.000.411**.000

.421**

.000.335**.000

.369**

.000.364**.000

.383**

.000PBlSCorrelation Cofficient

Sig. (2-tailed).306**.000

.213**

.000.324**.000

.360**

.000.281**.000

.361**

.000.398**.000

.607**

.000.286**.000

.305**

.000.334**.000


.234**

.000.227**.000

.257**

.000.269**.000

.266**

.000.269**.000

.226**

.000.370**.000

.175**

.000.336**.000

.336**


Sig. (2-tailed)272**.000

.230**

.000.320**.000

.372**

.000.363**.000

.358**

.000369**.000

441**.000

.261**

.000.286**.000

.363**


Sig. (2-tailed).256**.000

.301**

.000.285**.000

.321**

.000.341**.000

.327**

.000.353**.000

.436**

.000.294**.000

.338**

.000.430**.000


.271**

.000.312**.000

.320**

.000.289**.000

.335**

.000417**.000

.418**

.000.361**.000

.354**

.000.375**.000

.412**


Sig. (2-tailed).362**.000

.358**

.000.355**.000

.441**

.000.404**.000

.383**

.000.351**.000

.327**

.000.364**.000

.403**

.000.441**.000


.330**

.000.166**.000

.435**

.000.412**.000

.287**

.000.251**.000

.420**

.000.532**.000

.324**

.000.186**.000

.178**


Sig. (2-tailed).240**.000

.322**

.000.266**.000

.297**

.000.307**.000

297**.000

.281**

.000.259**.000

.253**

.000.303**.000

.398**


Sig. (2-tailed).178**.000

349**.000

.220**

.000.260**.000

.324**

.000.355**.000

.278**

.000.226**.000

.236**

.000.432**.000

.492**


Sig. (2-tailed)219**.000

.316**

.000.190**.000

.216**

.000.304**.000

.451**

.000.286**.000

.153**

.000.290**.000

.398**

.000.508**.000


.273**

.000.338**.000

.296**

.000.300**.000

.401**

.000397**.000

371**.000

.299**

.000.266**.000

.367**

.000.470**.000


249**.000

.240**

.000.263**.000

.323**

.000329**.000

.403**

.000.354**.000

.236**

.000.281**.000

.352**

.000.463**.000


.271**

.000299**.000

.309**

.000.326**.000

.328**

.000.385**.000

.385**

.000.267**.000

299**.000

.325**

.000.421**.000


124**.000

.186**

.000.137**.000

.166**

.000.276**.000

339**.000

229**.000

.233**

.000.208**.000

.350**

.000.432**.000


.273**

.000.184**.000

331**.000

.316**

.000.351**.000

291**.000

.358**

.000.385**.000

.306**

.000.285**.000

.367**

.000126


Spearman’s rho PB12 PB13 PB14 PB15 PB16 PB17 PB18 PB19 PB20 PB21 PB22PB12Correlation Cofficient



.602**

.0001.000


.403**

.000409**.000

1.000

PB 15Correlation Cofficient Sig. (2-tailed)

.434**

.000.489**.000

.433**

.0001.000


.317**

.000.361**.000

.380**

.000484**.000

1.000


.397**

.000444**.000

.468**

.000.518**.000

.490**

.0001.000


399**.000

.458**

.000.371**.000

.534**

.000.495**.000

.529**

.0001.000


.406**

.000.406**.000

.377**

.000.473**.000

.331**

.000.480**.000

.542**

.0001.000


.426**

.000.429**.000

.529**

.000.406**.000

382**.000

42i**.000

.395**

.000442**.000

1.000


.247**

.000.370**.000

424**.000

.405**

.000.356**.000

.406**

.000437**.000

3H**.000

339**.000

1.000


.288**

.000.302**.000

.396**

.000.331**.000

.392**

.000.444**.000

.508**

.000.435**.000

.204**

.000.330**.000

1.000


.366**

.000.354**.000

.387**

.000.358**.000

.405**

.000372**.000

431**.000

.468**

.000.259**.000

.223**

.000.543**.000


.462**

.000.343**.000

.390**

.000318**.000

.326**

.000.310**.000

.376**

.000.446**.000

.223**

.000.172**.000

.383**


Sig. (2-tailed).530**.000

.469**

.000.430**.000

.454**

.000.355**.000

.385**

.000.435**.000

.482**

.000244**.000

299**.000

419**.000


424**.000

394**.000

443**.000

.388**

.000355**.000

.404**

.000.421**.000

.495**

.000.230**.000

.257**

.000.403**.000


432**.000

.363**

.000451**.000

.327**

.000.311**.000

.348**

.000.429**.000

.505**

.000.379**.000

.320**

.000.402**.000


.398**

.000359**.000

.307**

.000.340**.000

399**.000

.367**

.000383**.000

404**.000

331**.000

.206**

.000.369**.000


.366**

.000.391**.000

.381**

.000.420**.000

.339**

.000.379**.000

.406**

.000.337**.000

.369**

.000399**.000

329**.000

Spearman’s rho PB23 PB24 PB25 PB26 PB27 PB28 PB29PB23Correlation Cofficient



497**.000

1.000


.459**

.000.578**.000

1.000


.485**

.000599**.000

579**.000

1.000


457**.000

449**.000

.515**

.000.481**.000

1.000


463**.000

428**.000

402**.000

.463**

.000454**.000

1.000 a. Listwise N = 589


329**.000

325**.000

433**.000

381**.000

449**.000

421**.000

1.000 **Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).

A reliability analysis was also made. Table 4.8 shows the output of reliability

analysis of the first questionnaire and shows an Alpha > 0.9, so it was determined that the

reliability was excellent.

127


Table 4.8 Output of Reliability Analysis of the First Questionnaire

****** Method 2 (covariance matrix) will be used for this analysis ******

R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S - S C A L E ( A L P H A )

N of Cases = 589.0

N ofStatistics for Scale

Item Means

Item Variances

Mean96.0781

Variance363.7422

Mean Minimum 3.3130 1.7165

Mean Minimum 1.0571 .8055

Std Dev Variables 19.0720 29

Maximum Range Max/Min Variance4.1358 2.4194 2.4095 .3036

Maximum Range Max/Min Variance1.3764 .5708 1.7087 .0214

Inter-itemCorrelations Mean

.3902Minimum

.1493

R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S

Item-total Statistics

Scale Scale

Maximum.6815

Range.5322

Max/Min4.5647

S C A L E ( A L P H A )

Corrected

Variance.0082

Mean Variance Item- Squared Alphaif Item if Item Total Multiple if ItemDeleted Deleted Correlation Correlation Deleted

PB1 92.7606 340.6076 .5548 .5754 .9472PB2 92.0424 343.9693 .5543 .4951 .9472PB3 93.3718 340.8734 .5793 .6515 .9469PB4 93.0917 338.9610 .5957 .5860 .9468PB5 92.4652 337.9941 .6312 .4988 .9464PB6 92.2920 337.9656 .6030 .4922 .9467PB7 93.1969 336.6006 .6317 .6027 .9464PB8 93.7674 342.3183 .5592 .5380 .9471PB9 92.8319 338.9394 .5423 .4645 .9475PB10 92.0204 340.7377 .6169 .4995 .9466PB11 92.0662 340.0143 .6435 .5489 .9464PB12 92.5993 340.0841 .6466 .5463 .9463PB13 92.7827 337.3915 .6738 .5543 .9460PB14 92.9864 337.3229 .6593 .5153 .9462PB15 93.3141 338.4063 .6190 .5616 .9466PB16 93.1426 339.7619 .5415 .4433 .9474PB17 93.0390 340.2111 .6247 .4977 .9465PB18 93.0934 336.8943 .6402 .5372 .9463PB19 92.5942 337.0511 .6644 .5426 .9461PB20 92.4839 338.9168 .6631 .4970 .9462PB21 94.3616 346.3299 .4971 .4450 .9477PB22 92.4771 341.6445 .5900 .4732 .9468

128


PB23 92.2241 342.0449 .6129 .5329 .9467PB24 91.9423 341.4899 .6259 .5909 .9465PB25 92.4567 336.5649 .6835 .5902 .9459PB26 92.5127 338.9952 .6351 .5521 .9464PB27 92.5789 338.5843 .6416 .5127 .9463PB28 92.4380 341.6683 .5360 .4362 .9474PB29 93.2530 339.3526 .5635 .4049 .9472

Reliability Coefficients 29 items

Alpha = .9484 Standardized item alpha = .9489

To sum up, first four frequent problem behaviors had a mean that was over four,

so they were strongly frequent and the last seven problem behaviors had a mean that was

below 3, so they were less frequent. The correlation is significant and the reliability is

excellent. Therefore, the researcher chose and put the first five frequent problem in the

second questionnaire.

In the following table, the left column contained problem behaviors that were

listed according to their ranks in the pilot test. The right column contained problem

beahviros that were listed according to their ranks in the first questionnaire. This kind of

arrangement showed the similarity and differences between the result of the pilot test and

the result of the first questionnaire.

Problem behaviors relating to “cleaning,” “bullying,” and “homework” were

regarded as frequent problem behaviors both in the pilot test and in the first questionnaire.

Therefore, they were surely frequent problem behaviors. “Using obscene or vulgar

language” and “being absent-minded during class” were provided by pilot test

129


participants and after they were added in the first questionnaire they were evaluated as

frequent problem behaviors too by first questionnaire participants. Therefore, it could be

known that 41 pilot test participants provided correct information.

“Not doing or turning in incomplete or delaying turning in or not bringing

homework,” whose rank was one in the first questionnaire, was a combination of “turning

in incomplete homework,” whose rank was two in pilot test with “not bringing textbook

or homework,” whose rank was four in pilot test.

The rank of “bullying” changed from six in pilot test to three in the first

questionnaire. “Not keeping clean” and “not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash

wherever” were similar. Rank of the former was nine and the latter was four.

The rank of “being late” changed from one in pilot test to six in the first

questionnaire. The rank of “vandalism” changed from three in the pilot test to eight in the

first questionnaire. The rank of “making noise or not keeping quiet” changed from four in

the pilot test to nine in the first questionnaire. To sum up, those that were regarded as

frequent problem behaviors in the pilot test were also regarded as frequent problem

behaviors in the first questionnaire.

There were 41 participants in the pilot test and 628 participants in the first

130


questionnaire. However, the result of the pilot test was quite similar to the result of the

first questionnaire. In the following table, it revealed that problem behaviors that were

listed at the upper section in the pilot test column also were listed at the upper section in

the first questionnaire column. “Extortion,” “leaving classroom without permission,”

and “using cellular during class”were listed at the bottom in both the pilot test and the

first questionnaire.

Table 4.9 A Comparison of Results between the Pilot Test and the First Questionnaire.

COde

Problem behaviors in pilot test rank

Problem behaviors in 1st questionnaire

COde

7 Being late 1 Not writing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework

24

26 Turning in incomplete homework 2 Using obscene or vulgar language 106 Vandalism 3 Bullying 225 Not bringing textbooks or homework 4 Not cleaning classrooms or throwing

trash wherever11

27 Not wearing uniform 5 Being absent-minded during class 233 Bullying 6 Being late 613 Refusing to obey teachers’ requests 7 Not sitting up straight 2824 Making noise or not keeping quiet 8 Vandalism 512 Not keeping clean 9 Making noise or not keeping quiet 2514 Talking back 10 Writing and passing slips 2215 Cheating on exam 11 Telling lies or deception 202 Fighting 12 Not bringing textbooks or stationery 2623 Writing and passing slips 13 Not wearing uniform 2716 Not staying seated 14 Sleeping during class 1918 Reading what is not being taught 15 Refusing to obey teachers’ requests 128 Truancy 16 Fighting 15 Theft 17 Talking back 1319 Eating or chewing gum in class 18 Smoking 920 Sleeping during class 19 Cheating on exam 1417 Taping pencils or objects 20 Reading what is not being taught 174 Extortion 21 Theft 4

131


9 Smoking 22 Eating or chewing gum during class 1828 Leaving classroom without permission 23 Taping pencils or objects 1622 Using cellular during class 24 Truancy 711 Alcohol abuse 25 Loafing on campus during

lunchtimes, siesta time, or cleaning period

29

10 Drug abuse 26 Not staying seated 151 Bringing weapons to school 27 Extortion 321 Listening to Walkman during class 28 Leaving classroom without

permission8

29 Using cellular during class 21

Because the result of the first questionnaire showed that “not doing, turning in

incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework,” “using obscene or vulgar

language,” “bullying,” “not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever,” and “being

absent-minded during class”were first five frequent problem behaviors, they were listed

on the second questionnaire for participants to write down effective strategies they had

used to decrease each of these five problem behaviors.

The 399 participants listed many effective strategies on the second questionnaire.

Many of those strategies can be gathered into the same category. For example, for

addressing “not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing

homework,” one participant wrote “conveying my expectation of homework in the first

class,” another participant wrote “reminding students to do homework in the contact

books,” the other participant wrote “teaching students how to do homework in advance.”

They were gathered into the category entitled “preventing problems.” Participants also


wrote down strategies, such as “having interview with students for looking into cause,”

“finding reasons why the student does not do homework,” and “asking students the

reason.” In fact, these different words coming from different participants had the same

meaning, so the researcher gathered them into a category entitled “looking into causes.”

The way the researcher categorized those strategies that participants provided was

explained and the explanation was sent to participants (see Appendix J). From the

explanation, each participant could read strategies he/she wrote and could see the

category where the researcher had included the strategies.

The explanation of the way the researcher categorized strategies that was sent to

participants was called “Explanation of Every Strategy of the Third Questionnaire” (see

Appendix J). On it, the different words participants used to describe the same strategy

were listed after the name of category of strategy they belonged to. This helped

participants better understand what the name of category of strategy was about and

enabled them to answer the third questionnaire more easily.

After the strategies that participants had provided were organized into several

categories by the researcher, there were 17 categories of strategies identified for


133


homework.” For addressing “using obscene or vulgar language,” there were 16

strategies; for addressing “bullying,” there were 17; for addressing “not cleaning

classrooms or throwing trash wherever,” there were 18; and for addressing “being

absent-minded during class,” there were 14. These categories of strategies were listed

on the thrid questionnaire (see Appendix E) for participants to select to determine which

were more effective.

As stated above, there were 17 strategies for addressing “not doing or turning in

incomplete or delaying turning in or not bringing homework” and they were listed in the

third questionnaire. After being answered by participants and statistically calculated by

the researcher, the mean of each strategy was calculated as shown in the following table.

The top five rankings are marked with an asterisk (*).

From the mean, it was determined that the five most effective strategies for


homework” were “supervising and instructing personally,” “being thoroughly persistent,”

“handling problems instantly,” “issuing rewards and punishment,” and “establishing rules

or setting limits.” Because the questionnaire used a 3-point Likert scale, the mean of

each strategy showed efficacy. No matter the rank of a strategy, the closer the mean was

134


to three, the more effective the strategy was.

Table 4.10 Mean of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not doing, turning in incomplete,

delaying turning in, or not bringing homework.”

Code Strategy Mean Rank1 preventing problems 2.15 62 looking into causes 1.99 103 establishing rules or setting limits 2.37 5*4 issuing rewards and punishment 2.38 4*5 keeping records 1.66 166 exhorting and guiding 1.70 157 teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 1.77 138 assisting students in developing a sense of self 1.50 179 having the aid of other staff 1.86 1210 constructing parent partnerships 2.10 711 utilizing peer influence 2.02 912 being a good model 1.75 1413 using teacher power 1.87 1114 supervising and instructing personally 2.64 1*15 building good relationships 2.05 816 handling problems instantly 2.57 3*17 being thoroughly persistent 2.64 1*

Table 4.11 was the SPSS output of correlation analysis of these 17 strategies. It

shows that there was either positive correlation or negative correlation between every two

of the 17 strategies. However, some of the correlations were not significant, whether at

the 0.01 level or at the 0.05 level. Therefore, it could be concluded that “supervising

and instructing personally,” “being thoroughly persistent,” “handling problems instantly,”

“issuing rewards and punishment,” and “establishing rules or setting limits” were five

most effective strategies for addressing “not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying

135


turning in, or not bringing homework,” but the rank could not be determined.

Table 4.11 Output of Correlation Analysis of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not

doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework”

Correlatifins3TR1STR2STR3STR4STR5STR6STR7STR8STR9STR1( TR1 ;t r i:>t r i:>TRU5TR1!5TR1I5TR1

Speari STI Correlatii Sia. (2-ta

.000 .335*non

.307*non

.037501

.090103

.148*007

.238*non

.199*nnn

.090104

.066?35

.153*005

.253*nnn

.009867

.022695

.212*nnn

.162*non

.136*014

STI Correlate Sia. (2-ta

.335*nnn

.000 .172*no?

.056311

.118*033

.285*non

.328*nnn

.325*nnn

.055319

.036 51 n

.169*nn?

.279*nnn

.130*019

.042451

.331*nnn

.128*n?i

.022686

STI Correlate Sia. f2-ta

.307*nnn

.172*on?

.000 .406*nnn

.261*nnn

.145"nnn

.22 7* nnn

.160*nn4

.186*nm

.227*nnn

.167*nn?

.204*nnn

.189*nm

.215*nnn

.072191

.229*non

.345*nnn

STI Correlate Sia. C2-ta

.037501

.056311

.406*nnn

.000 .239*nnn

.036518

.039486

.007906

.107053

.137*nm

.177*nm

.07418?

.213*nnn

.101068

.001984

.110*046

.152*nnn


.090m a

.118*033

.261*nnn

.239*nnn

.000 .327*non

.225*nnn

.174*nn?

.158*nn4

.151*006

.182*nm

.191*nnn

.166*003

.075173

.165*nn3

.136*013

.186*nm

STI Correlatii Sia. (2-ta

.148*nn7

.285*non

.145*nnn

.036518

.327*nnn

.000 .445*nnn

.391*nnn

.205*nnn

.134*n m

.189*nm

.283’nnn

.026641

.001983

.324*nnn

.114*038

.035531


.238*non

.328*non

.227*nnn

.039486

.225*nnn

.445*nnn

.000 .553*nnn

.165*003

.109*048

.228*nnn

.419*nnn

.090104

.074184

.373*nnn

.308*nnn

.142*m n

STI Correlatii Sia. f2-ta

.199’nnn

.325’nnn

.160*004

.007906

.174*nn?

.391*nnn

.553*nnn

.000 .276*non

.173*nn?

.317*nnn

.431’nnn

.011840

.034538

.428*nnn

.288*non

.184*nm


.090104

.055319

.186*nm

.107053

.158*nn4

.205*nnn

.165*nn3

.276*nnn

.000 ,285Jnnn

.319*nnn

.160*nn4

.238*non

.127*n?i

.182*nm

.200*nnn

.140* 011


.066235

.036510

.227*nnn

.137*013

.151*006

.134*015

.109*048

.173*nn?

.285*nnn

.000 .175*nm

.029606

.124*n?5

.221’nnn

.01874?

.241*nnn

.196*nnn


.153*005

.169*no?

.167*nn?

.177*nm

.182*nm

.189*nm

.228*non

.317*nnn

.319*nnn

.175*nm

.000 .336*nnn

.08313?

.0563 in

.229*nnn

.228*nnn

.131*n m


.253*non

.279*non

.204*nnn

.07418?

.191*nnn

.283*nnn

.419*nnn

.431*nnn

.160*nn4

.029606

.336*nnn

.000 .184*nm

.010857

.426’nnn

.255*nnn

.081145


.009867

.130*nm

.189*nm

.213*non

.166*nn3

.026641

.090104

.011840

.238*nnn

.124*n?5

.08313?

.184*nm

.000 .138*01?

.025646

.256*nnn

.258*non


.022695

.042451

.215*nnn

.101068

.075173

.001983

.074184

.034538

.127*n?i

.221*nnn

.056310

.010857

.138*m ?

.000 .089108

.277*nnn

.288*non


.212*nnn

.331*nnn

.072191

.001984

.165*nn3

.324*non

.373*non

.428*nnn

.182*nm

.01874?

.229*nnn

.426*nnn

.025646

.089108

.000 .252*nnn

.141’n n


.162*nnn

.128*n?i

.229*nnn

.110*046

.136*013

.114’038

.308*nnn

.288*non

.200*nnn

.241*non

.228*nnn

.255*non

.256*nnn

.277*non

.252*non

.000 .448’nnn

STI Correlatii Sir. O-ta

.136*M A

.022686

.345*nnn

.152*nnn

.186*nm,

.0355.31

.142*nm

.184*nm

.140*m i

.196*nnn

.131*nift

.081-L15.

.258*non

.288*nnn

.141*

.an.448*nnn

.000

••Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).•Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).^Jstwise N = 328

The analysis number was 328 because 22 subjects did not answer some questions

on the third questionnaire. Questionnaires which had missing values were treated by

136


“exclude cases listwise.” The following table showed that Alpha > 0.7, so reliability

was acceptable.

Table 4.12 Output of Reliability Analysis of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not doing,

turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework.”

****** Method 2 (covariance matrix) will be used for this analysis ******R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S - S C A L E ( A L P H A )

N of Cases = 328.0

N of StatisticsFor Mean Variance Std Dev VariablesScale 35.0122 28.4158 5.3306 17

Item Means Mean Minimum Maximum Range Max/Min Variance2.0595 1.5030 2.6402 1.1372 1.7566 .1251

Item Variances Mean Minimum Maximum Range Max/Min Variance.4306 .3044 .5348 .2304 1.7567 .0054

Inter-itemCorrelations Mean Minimum Maximum Range Max/Min Variance.1813 -.1313 .5717 .7030 -4.3544 .0144

Item-total StatisticsScale Scale CorrectedMean Variance Item- Squared Alphaif Item if Item Total Multiple if ItemDeleted Deleted Correlation Correlation Deleted

STR1 32.8659 25.8841 .3082 .2163 .7833STR2 33.0244 25.7792 .3138 .2958 .7830STR3 32.6433 25.4779 .4434 .3679 .7743STR4 32.6372 26.7334 .2009 .2306 .7901STR5 33.3506 25.2987 .3912 .2287 .7773STR6 33.3171 25.2325 .4323 .3296 .7745STR7 33.2439 24.3195 .5348 .4447 .7663STR8 33.5091 24.7094 .5180 .4763 .7683STR9 33.1494 25.2712 .3861 .2448 .7777STR10 32.9146 25.7970 .2805 .1717 .7861STR11 32.9939 25.0825 .4130 .2387 .7756STR12 33.2622 24.4999 .4842 .3735 .7700STR13 33.1402 26.2372 .2350 .2346 .7890STR14 32.3750 26.8161 .2106 .1603 .7888STR15 32.9573 24.8177 .4336 .3348 .7740STR16 32.4390 25.5070 .4653 .3319 .7733STR17 32.3720 26.0936 .3579 .3311 .7799


137


Reliability Coefficients 17 itemsAlpha = .7888____________ Standardized item alpha - .7901

The output of independent-samples t-test in Table 4.13 showed there was no

significant differece between sex, age, level of education, or years of teaching experience.

Significant values,> 0.05, so F values did not achieve the significant level and the t values

in “equal varianced assumed values” must be checked. All values in the Sig. (2-tailed)

column were larger than 0.05, and zero was included between “Lower values” and

“Upper values” in 95% Confidence Interval of the Difference, assuring there were no

significant differences in choosing or using classroom management strategies between

females and males, or between participants whose age ranged from 24 to 44 and whose

age ranged from 45 to 65. Similarly, no significant difference existed between two

different groups that had different levels of education or had different years of teaching

experience.

138


Table 4.13 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Not

doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework”

Output of Independent-samples t-Test of Groups of Different Sex

Independent Samples Testne's Test for Eqi

of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df g. (2-taile an Differer3td. Erro )ifferena

Confidence Inte of the DifferenceLower Upper

STR1 Equal variances Eaual variances

4.943 .027 -1.938-1.863

30610.969

.054

.065-.17-.17

.08909?

-.346 - 355

.003011

STRf Equal variances Equal variances

.084 .772 -1.429 -1 439

306 18 874

.154153

-.13- 13

.092091

-.312-.31?

.049

.049STRf Equal variances

Equal variances2.504 .115 .385

.405306

77 874.700686

.03

.03.078.074

-.123 - 116

.183176

STR^ Equal variances Equal variances

3.755 .054 -.408-380

306 06 505

.684704

-.03-03

.084090

-.199-71?

.131


Equal variances.057 .812 .789

802306

70 696.431474

.0707

.092090

-.108 - 106

.252


Equal variances7.602 .006 -.728

-.796306

37.048.467.477

-.06-06

.086078

-.231 - 717

.106093

STR7 Equal variances Equal variances

1.687 .195 -.643 - 661

306 77 891

.521510

-.06-.06

.093

.090-.243-.739

.123


Equal variances.101 .751 -.998

-1 019306

71 555.319310

-.09-.09

.087

.085-.257-754

.084

.08?STRf Equal variances


384306

79 463.71870?

.0303

.094

.089-.151 - 14?

.220

.710STR1 Equal variances

Equal variances.091 .764 -1.092

-1.133306

74.808.276.759

-.11-.11

.098095

-.301-795

.086



.434306

74.869.676.665

.04

.04.094090

-.145 - 140

.224718


.284 .594 -.939-.904

30611.17?

.349

.368-.09-09

.097100

-.281 - 789

.099108


.358 .550 -.407-.393

30611.875

.684

.695-.04-.04

.094098

-.224-73?

.147


Equal variances.292 .589 -.277

-282306

70 947.782779

-.02-0?

.077076

-.174-.17?

.131179


.778 .378 -1.509-1.515

30618.33?

.13213?

-.15-.15

.096096

-.335-.336

.044045


4.972 .026 -1.605-1.656

30673.710

.110

.100-.12-.1?

.075

.07?-.267 - 764

.027073

STR1 Equal variances Fnual variances

10.462 .001 1.109967

30697 A R R

.268339

.0808

.074085

-.063-087

.227751


Output o f Independent-samples t-Test of Groups o f Different Ages

Independent Samples Teste's Test for Ec of Variances t-test for Equality 0 : Means

F Sig. t df j. (2 -tailean Differetd. Errc

Confidence Ini f the Differenc

ifferenc Lower UpperSTR Equal variance

Eaual variance.015 .904 .620

.608307

18.344.536.544

.05

.05.084.086

-.114-.118

.218

.2 2 2STR Equal variance

Equal variance.009 .925 -.103

-.103307

i4.085.918.918

-.0 1-.0 1

.087

.087-.180-.181

.162163

STR Equal variance Equal variance

2.267 .133 .973.996

30751.925

.331

.321.07.07

.074

.072-.073-.070

.217

.214STR Equal variance

Equal variance.491 .484 1.082

1.084307

U.847.280.280

.09

.09.079079

-.070-.070

.240


Equal variance2.710 .1 0 1 -.571

-.593307

57.628.569.554

-.05-.05

.086083

-.219-.213

.1 2 1


Equal variance.013 .911 .999

1 .0 2 0307

51 179.319.309

.08

.08.081079

-.078-.076

.239


Equal variance1.739 .188 .390

409307

r0.054.697.683

.0303

.088

.084-.138-.131

.207



.6 6 6307

50.894.536.506

.05

.05.082076

- .1 1 0-099

.2 1 1



1.899307

52.504.065.059

.16

.16.088086

- .0 1 0-.007

.337


Equal variance.107 .744 .041

.041307

56.401.967.967

.0 0

.0 0.093.092

-.179-.178

.186



1.135307

50.911.267.258

.1 0

.1 0.089087

-.076-.073

.273



.050307

55.355.959.960

.0 0

.0 0.091.094

-.175-.181

.184



-.931307

54.547.353.353

-.08-.08

.089

.089-.258-.258

.092


Equal variance1.041 .308 -.480

-.495307

55.076.632621

-.03-03

.073

.071-.178-.174

.109



-.754307

53.592.450.452

-.07-.07

.091091

-.248-.249

.1 1 0



.938307

54.375.332.350

.07

.07.071073

-.071-.076

.208


Fnual variancp1.174 .279 1.246

1 ?56307

;R R R 7.214

__ 2 1 1 -.09na

.070n fiQ

-.050 . n«m

.2249 9 R


Output o f Independent-samples T-test o f Groups of Different Levels o f Education

Independent Samples Teste's Test for Ec of Variances t-test for Equality o Means


Confide f the Di

>nce Int fferenc

ifferenc Lower UpperSTR Eaual variance

Eaual variance.990 .321 -.075

-.073304

>8.305.940.942

-.0 1-.0 1

.087

.090-.177-.184

.164


Eaual variance3.406 .066 .852

.811304

>5.130.395419

.08

.08.090.094

- .1 0 0- .1 1 0

.253



- 687304

14.130.489.493

-.05-.05

.076

.077- .2 0 2-.204

.097



-.503304

15.337.628.616

-.04-.04

.081

.078-.199-.194

.121


Eaual variance4.558 .034 -.645

- 601304

?0.826.519.549

-.06-.06

.089

.096-.233-.247

.118



.791304

>8.939.415.430

.07

.07.083.085

-.095- .1 0 1

.230

.236STR Eaual variance

Eaual variance.149 .700 -1.208

-1 188304

12 078.228237

-.11-.1 1

.090

.091-.285-.289

.068



-.510304

57.962.613611

-.04-04

.084

.084-.208-.208

.123



.725304

13.843.465.470

.07

.07.092.093

-.113-.116

.248



344304

10 727.725.731

.03

.03.096.098

-.154-.160

.2 2 2



- 575304

>5.787.547566

-.06-.06

.091

.096-.235-.244

.125



537304

15 313.604.592

.05

.05.094.091

-.136-.131

.234



-.437304

19.204.6 6 6663

-.04 - 04

.092091

- .2 2 1-219

.141140

STR Equal variance Eaual variance

9.374 .0 0 2 -1.459-1.628

30459.726

.146

.105-.1 1 - 11

.075

.067-.256-.242

.038023


5.420 .021 -1.068-1.016

304 >4 823

.286

.312- .1 0- .1 0

.094

.099-.285-.295

.084



.403304

56.925.6 8 8.6 8 8

.03

.03.072.072

-.113-.113

.171


Fnual variance3.424 .065 -1.402

-1 3Q3304

14 546.162166

- .1 0 - 1 0

.072079

-.241.9 4 3

.040049


Output of Independent-samples t-Test of Groups of Different Years of Teaching Experience

Independent Samples Testie's Test for Eq of Variances t-test for Equality o1 Means

F Sig. t df I (2 -tailean Differeitd. Erro ifferenc

Confidence Int if the DifferentLower Upper

STR Eaual variance Eaual variance

2.657 .104 -.713 - 685

306 ?4 182

.476495

-.06-06

.087090

-.233-.241

.109117

STR: Eaual variance Eaual variance

.830 .363 -.288-.297

30640.451

.774

.767-.03-03

.090087

-.203-.198

.151



.826306

36.044.415410

.0606

.076075

-.088-087

.2 1 2

.211STR' Eaual variance


502306

[33.181.617.617

.04

.04.081081

-.119 - 1 2 0

.2012 0 2


4.051 .045 -.789-.832

30616.583

.430

.407-.07-.07

.089

.085-.246-.237

.105097


.243 .623 .089.088

306 >9 049

.929930

.01

.01.084.085

-.157 - 161

.172


Eaual variance.024 .877 1.330

1 372306

10 702.185172

.1 212

.090088

-.058 - 053

.298294


12.926 .0 0 0 1.841 2 1 0 2

306f3.634

.067037

.1515

.084074

-.0 1 1009

.320300


.209 .648 1.148 1 201

30614.345

.252

.232.11.11

.092

.088-.075-.068

.285



-1.304306

35 301.198195

- .1 2- .1 2

.095094

-.310-309

.064064


1.713 .192 .0 0 2003

306 1.3 940

.998998

.0 00 0

.092088

-.180 - 173

.181174


.346 .557 1.324 1 323

306 32 824

.186188

.1 212

.094094

-.060-.062

.309



-.986306

39 908.338.326

-.09 - 09

.092089

-.269 - 265

.093088


2.562 .1 1 0 -.939-.974

306 12 164

.349332

-.07-07

.075072

-.218-.214

.077073


.0 1 0 .920 -.309-310

306 3.3 373

.758757

-.03-03

.094094

-.214-.215

.156157


2 .1 2 0 .146 .494469

306 >2 024

.622

.640.04.04

.072076

-.107 - 115

.178

.186STR Eaual variance_____Fnual varianr.fi

.940 .333 1.0501 055

306*3 95A

.2959cu

.0808

.072072

-.066.0 6 6

.217217

There are 16 strategies on the third questionnaire for addressing the second

frequent problem behavior— “using obscene or vulgar language.” SPSS was used again142


for mean, reliability, correlation, and t-test. The following table shows that the five

most effective strategies for address “using obscene or vulgar language” were: (a)

“handling problems instantly,” (b) “being thoroughly persistent,” (c) “issuing rewards

and punishment,” (d) “establishing rules or setting limits,” and (e) “utilizing peer

influence.” Because it was a 3-point Likert scale, the mean of each strategy also could

show how strong its effectiveness was. Asterisks (*) are used to mark the top five

ranking strategies.

Table 4.14 Mean of 16 Strategies for Addressing “Using obscene or vulgar language.”

Code Strategy Mean Rank18 preventing problems 1.87 1119 looking into causes 1.74 1520 establishing rules or setting limits 2.22 4*21 issuing rewards and punishment 2.28 3*22 keeping records 1.65 1623 exhorting and guiding 1.84 1224 teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 1.90 825 assisting students in developing a sense of self 1.75 1426 having the aid of other staff 1.76 1327 constructing parent partnerships 1.89 928 utilizing peer influence 2.05 5*29 being a good model 1.98 630 building good relationships 1.98 631 handling problems instantly 2.58 1*32 being thoroughly persistent 2.52 2*33 weakening by extinction 1.89 9

The following table shows that there was either positive correlation or negative

correlation between any two of 16 strategies, but correlation was not significant for all 16

strategies, at either the 0.01 level or at the 0.05 level. Therefore, the five most effective143


strategies for addressing “using obscene or vulgar language” could be determined but the

rank—which was the first, which was the second, etc., could not be determined.

Table 4.15 Output of Correlation Analysis of 16 Strategies for Addressing “using obscene

or vulgar language.”

CorrelationsTRU TRt TR2i TR2 TR2 TR2 TR2 TR2 TR2 TR2 TR2 TR2 TR3 TR3 TR3 TR3

Spear ST Correlat Sio. (2-t

000 431*nnn

335*non

201*non

.295*nnn

.201*nnn

269*nnn

.224*nnn

.122*0?6

.121*n?7

.221*nnn

276*nnn

.255*nnn

230*000

.240*nnn

.211*nnn

ST Correlat Sio. (2-t

431'non

000 346*000

066?31

.226*nnn

.297*nnn

305*nnn

.269*nnn

.188*nm

.222*nnn

.246*nnn

.246’nnn

.311*nnn

125*0?3

.138*m ?

.209*nnn


335*nnn

.346*nnn

.000 .514*nnn

.316*nnn

.282*nnn

.239*nnn

.139*n n

.226*nnn

.205*nnn

.334*nnn

.243*nnn

.118*no?

.310*non

.302*nnn

.156*nn4


201*nnn

.066231

.514*non

.000 .320’nnn

.162*nnn

.096nnn

002967

.113*n4n

.309*nnn

.250*nnn

.097077

.022non

.328*nnn

.360*nnn

.029595


295*nnn

.226*nnn

.316*nnn

.320*nnn

.000 .272*nnn

.252*nnn

.217*000

.263*nnn

.374*non

.244*nnn

.251*nnn

.235*nnn

.229*nnn

.176’nm

.024658

ST Correlat Sia. (2-t

201*nnn

.297*nnn

.282*nnn

r162*003

.272*nnn

.000 .564*nnn

.419*nnn

.296*nnn

.260*nnn

.337*nnn

,300*nnn

.305*nnn

.187*nm

.150*nnn

.083130


269*nnn

.305*nnn

.239*nnn

,096ORn

.252*nnn

.564*nnn

,000 .506*nnn

278*non

.217*nnn

.375*nnn

.413*nnn

.306*nnn

.176*nm

.193*nnn

.142*nnn


224*nnn

.269*nnn

.139*011

002967

.217;nnn

.419*nnn

.506'nnn

.000 .288*nnn

.219*nnn

.375*nnn

,399*nnn

.338*nnn

.101066

.08014R

.197*nnn


.122*n?6

.188'nm

.226*nnn

.113'040

.263'nnn

.296*nnn

.278'nnn

.288*nnn

.000 .365*nnn

.382*nnn

.198'000

.219*nnn

.172*nn?

.165*nnn

.192*nnn


.121'n?7

.222'

.000.205'nnn

.309'000

.374'nnn

.260*

.000,217'nnn

.219*nnn

.365'nnn

.000 .325*nnn

.206'nnn

.124*n?4

.252'nnn

.145'nnR

.111*043


221'nnn

.246'nnn

.334'nnn

.250'non

.244'nnn

.337'non

.375'nnn

.375'nnn

.382'nnn

.325'nnn

.000 .420'nnn

.348*nnn

.328'nnn

.255'nnn

.209*nnn


.276'nnn

.246'nnn

.243'nnn

.097077

.251'nnn

.300'nnn

.413'nnn

.399'nnn

.198'nnn

.206'nnn

.420'nnn

.000 .599'nnn

.302'nnn

.271'nnn

.210'nnn


255'nnn

.311'nnn

.118'03?

.022690

.235'nnn

.305'nnn

.306'nnn

.338'nnn

.219'nnn

.124'n?4

.348'nnn

.599'nnn

.000 .296'nnn

.288'nnn

.244*nnn


.230*nnn

.125*n?3

.310*non

.328*nnn

.229*nnn

.187*nm

.176*nm

.101066

.172'no?

.252'nnn

.328'nnn

.302'nnn

.296'nnn

.000 .559'.0 0 0

.168’nn?


.240*nnn

.138*01?

.302*nnn

.360*nnn

.176*nm

.150*006

.193*nnn

.08014R

.165'nnn

.145'nnR

.255'nnn

.271*nnn

.288'nnn

.559'nnn

.000 .174*nm

ST Correlat ...............Sin.,(2,-1

.211*

.nnn.209*nnn

.156*nna

.029

.525l.024£50.

.0831 2 0 .

.142*nno.

.197'nnn

.192*nnn

.111*rua.

.209*nnn

.210*nnn

.244*nnn

.168*nn9

.174*nn-i

.000

♦Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).♦Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed), ddstwise N = 332

144


Number of cases used for SPSS reliability analysis was 332. Data of 18 subjects

were completely removed from SPSS calculations because 18 participants did not answer

all 16 questions. They missed some questions without choosing the integers—one, two,

three, four, or five. Number of items was 16, which meant that there were 16 variables or

strategies for statistical calculation. The output of reliability analysis showed that Alpha

> 0.8, so the reliability was good.

Table 4.16 Output of Reliability Analysis of 16 Strategies for Addressing “using obscene

or vulgar language.”



N o f Cases = 332.0

N ofStatistics for Mean Variance Std Dev VariablesScale 31.9127 35.1313 5.9272 16

Item Means Mean Minimum Maximum Range Max/Min Variance1.9945 1.6536 2.5783 .9247 1.5592 .0744


Inter-itemCorrelations Mean Minimum Maximum Range Max/Min Variance

.2543 -.0029 .5996 .6026 -203.9517 .0121


Scale Scale CorrectedMean Variance Item- Squared Alphaif Item if Item Total Multiple if ItemDeleted Deleted Correlation Correlation Deleted

STR18 30.0392 31.2462 .4436 .3050 .8363STR19 30.1687 31.4216 .4607 .3480 .8354STR20 29.6928 31.1380 .4899 .4252 .8338

145


STR21 29.6325 32.0760 .3309 .4032 .8424STR22 30.2590 31.4251 .4603 .2958 .8354STR23 30.0693 31.1342 .5109 .4048 .8329STR24 30.0120 30.7974 .5425 .4662 .8311STR25 30.1657 30.9483 .4731 .3877 .8347STR26 30.1566 31.4014 .4320 .2783 .8369STR27 30.0241 31.1475 .4166 .3159 .8381STR28 29.8614 30.0049 .5789 .3771 .8284STR29 29.9277 29.8920 .5472 .4748 .8302STR30 29.9337 30.7388 .4902 .4582 .8337STR31 29.3343 31.7398 .4737 .4107 .8351STR32 29.3946 31.7079 .4493 .4108 .8361STR33 30.0181 32.3501 .2863 .1470 .8450




The result of independent-samples t-test in the following table showed that there

was no significant difference between two groups of different sex, age, level of education,

or year of experience. Female participants and male participants made no difference in

choosing and using effective strategies for addressing “using obscene or vulgar

language.” Participants whose age ranged from 24 to 44 and whose age ranged from 45

to 65 evaluated 16 strategies similarly. Participants whose level of education was

college and whose level of education was graduate school evaluated 16 strategies

similarly. Participants whose years of teaching experience ranged from 3 to 20 and

whose year of teaching perience ranged from 21 to 40 evaluated 16 strategies similarly.


Table 4.17 Output of Indepent-samples T-test of 16 Strategies for Addressing “Using

Vulgar or Obscene Language”

Output of Independent-samples t-Test of Groups of Different Sex

Independent Samples Testne's Test for Eqi


F Sig. t df g. (2-taile an Differer>td. Erro liffereno

Confidence lnt< of the DifferenceLower Upper

STR' Equal variances Eaual variances

.202 .653 -2.076 -1 <168

309 10 194

.039

.052-.19-.19

.092097

-.373-384

-.010002

STR' Equal variances Eaual variances

.049 .826 -.064-.064

30920.322

.949949

-.01-.01

.086

.086-.175-.176

.164


Eaual variances.228 .633 .290

.282309

14.501.772.778

.03

.03.088091

-.148-.154

.199

.205STRi Equal variances

Eaual variances1.015 .314 1.277

1.204309

09.734.203231

.12

.12.093099

-.064-077

.303


Eaual variances.311 .578 -.712

-686309

12 956.477.494

-.06-.06

.086089

-.230-.238

.108


Eaual variances.000 .983 -1.525

-1 440309

10 949.128150

-.13-.13

.085

.090-.298-.308

.038



-1.298309

13.696.181.197

-.12-.12

.088

.091-.290-297

.055

.062STR; Eaual variances


-2 141309

07 353.022035

-.22-22

.094

.101-.400-.416

-.032-.016

STR2 Eaual variances Eaual variances

2.334 .128 .307.328

30933.666

.759

.743.03.03

.091

.086-.152 - 141

.208197

STRi Eaual variances Eaual variances

.116 .733 -1.031-1.016

30916.803

.303

.312-.10 - 10

.099100

-.296-300

.092

.097STRi Eaual variances


.126309

16 498.898.900

.01

.01.097.099

-.179-.183

.203

.208STRi Eaual variances

Eaual variances1.087 .298 -1.612

-1.677309

27 368.108096

-.17-.17

.104100

-.374-.367

.037

.030STR; Eaual variances


-1.883309

18.120.059.062

-.18-.18

.096097

-.371-.374

.007009

STR; Eaual variances Eaual variances

8.999 .003 -1.959 -2 092

30933390

.051

.038-.15-.15

.077

.072-.303-294

.001-.008

STR; Eaual variances Eaual variances

.042 .837 -.826-.811

309 16 212

.409

.419-.07-.07

.081083

-.226 - 230

.092097

STR; Equal variances J= anal .variances

1.485 .224 .477461

309 13 625

.634646

.0404

.093097

-.139 - 147

.228 __ 236.


Output o f Independent-samples t-Test o f Groups o f Different Ages

Independent Samples Test

e's Test for Ec of Variances t-test for Eguality of Means

F Sig. t df . (2 -tailetn Differetd. Errc

Confide f the Di

■nee In fferenc

fferenc Lower UpperSTR Eaual varianc<

Eaual variance1.676 .196 1.270

1.255310

0.761.205.2 1 1

.1111

.087

.088-.060-.063

.280



1.629310

2.170.1 1 1.105

.13

.13.080.079

-.030-.027

.286

.284STR Eaual varianc<


1.304310

3.898.192.194

.11

.11.082.083

-.054-.055

.270



1.662310

>9.873.093.098

.15

.15

f*- cc

CO CC

o c -.024

-.028.317.321


3.113 .079 -.836-865

310 ’7 828

■<t cc

O CC

■<t cc

-.07-.07

.080

.077-.225- .2 2 0

.091



.412310

>7.266.674.681

.03

.03

O C

\CO

cc o

c -.123-.128

.191



376310

'5 017.714707

.03

.03.082.080

-.131-.127

.191



.619310

>4.436.536.537

.05

.05.088.088

-.119- .1 2 0

.228


Eaual variance.0 0 1 .981 .331

333310

>6 908.741740

.03

.03.085.085

-.139-.139

.196



383310

t5 454.694.702

.04

.04.092.095

-.145-.151

.218



.595310

>2.752.550.553

.05

.05.091.091

-.124-.126

.233



-.313310

15.674.748.755

-.03-.03

.098

.1 0 1-.224-.231

.161


Eaual variance2.406 .1 2 2 ■1.645

■1.589310

13.554.1 0 1.114

-.15-.15

.090

.093-.324-.331

.029


Eaual variance3.268 .0 0 0 1.524

1.384310

16.662.129.169

.1111

.072

.080-.032-.047

.252



1.405310

13.899.147.162

.1111

.075

.078-.039-.045

.258

.264STR Eaual variance _____Fnual variance

.562 .454 2.6772 770

310■7 748

.008006

.239-}

.086n«3

.061066

.400396


Output o f Independent-samples T-test of Groups of Different Levels o f Education


e's Test for Ec of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df . (2 -tailean Differetd. Errc ifferenc

Confide f the Di

:nce In fferenc

Lower UpperSTR Equal varianc<


.347308

1.084.714.729

.03

.03.091.096

-.145 -156

.2 1 2



-.554308

'2.052.561.581

-.05-.05

.085

.089-.216-.225

.117


Eaual variance1.233 .268 -1.013

-.995308

'8707.312.321

-.09-.09

.087

.088-.259-.263

.083


Eaual varianc<.352 .554 1.146

1 141308

11.560.253.256

- .1 0- .1 0

.091

.092-.284-.286

.075



-.693308

11.521.487489

-.06-0 6

.084

.084-.224-226

.107109


.667 .415 .343.335

308'7.520

.732738

.03

.03.083.085

-.136-.140

.193

.198STR Equal varianc<


1.194308

12.216.233.235

.1 0

.1 0.085.085

-.066-.067

.270



1.056308

55.254.297.293

.1 0

.1 0.092.091

-.085-.084

.278



.265308

51.794.791792

.0 2

.0 2.090.090

-.152-.154

.2 0 0

.2 0 1

STR Equal variance Eaual varianc<

.030 .862 -.233-.230

308'9.772

.816818

- .0 2- .0 2

.096

.097- .2 1 2-.215

.167



1 183308

53.644.240239

.1111

.095095

-.075-.075

.299299


.874 .351 1.3811.446

3084.033

.168

.150.1414

.1 0 2

.098-.060-.052

.342



.043308

'8.426.965.966

.0 0

.0 0.094.096

-.181-.185

.189



.745308

54.055.460.458

.0606

.076

.076-.093-.093

.206



.384308

14.761.704.702

.03

.03.079.079

-.126-.125

.186

.186STR Equal variance -------Fnual variance

.0 0 0 .991 -.664-659

308 '8 520

.507518

-.06 ___ =_Q£_

.092093

-.241. 945

.119194




F Sig. t df j. (2 -taik an Differetd. Errc

Confidence Ini f the Differenc



.641310

1.276.511.522

.06

.06.090.092

-.117-.123

.236



.970310

1 370.340334

.08

.08.084082

-.085-.083

.244



1.427310

2.869.147.156

.13

.13.086.088

-.044-.048

.294



1 009310

11.493.302.315

.0909

.09009.3

-.084-090

.271277


5.893 .016 -.793-847

310>5.586

.428398

-.07-07

.083

.078-.229- .2 2 0

.098



-.061310

12.760.950.951

- .0 1-.0 1

.083

.084-.168-.172

.158



827310

13 003.419.410

.07

.07.085.083

-.098-.095

.235



1 6 6 8310

18 413.098098

.15

.15.091.091

-.028-.028

.331331


1.263 .262 -.180 - 186

31015.378

.857853

- .0 2- .0 2

.088

.086-.190-.185

.158



-.166310

10 297.8648 6 8

- .0 2- .0 2

.096

.099-.205- .2 1 2

.172


Eaual variance.238 .626 - .2 0 1

-.205310

11.738.841.838

- .0 2- .0 2

.094

.093-.204- .2 0 2

.166


Eaual variance2.543 .1 1 2 .408

394310

>9.189.684694

.0404

.1 0 1105

-.158 - 167

.241249


.0 0 2 .963 -1.133 -1 134

310 17 59.3

.258259

-.1 1 - 11

.09309.3

-.289-290

.078079


8.433 .004 1.7151.573

3109.379

.087118

.13

.13.075.082

-.019-.033

.276



1.203310

>9.898.215231

.1 0

.1 0.078.081

-.057-.063

.252


Ennal variance1.904 .169 2 .6 8 8

9 798310

L1 038.008

__ QflZ-.249 4

.089088

.064066

.417416

There are 17 strategies for addressing the third frequent problem behavior

“bullying.” They were also listed in the third questionnaire for participants to evaluate150


their effectiveness by selecting the integers one, two, three, four, and five. After replies

were received, data were keyed with SPSS for statistical calculation. The following

table listed the mean of each strategy. It was found that (a) “handling problems

instantly,” (b) “fostering classroom climate,” (c) “being thoroughly persistent,” (d)

“utilizing peer influence,” and (e) “looking into causes” were the five most effective

strategies for addressing “bullying.” Asterisks (*) mark the top five ranked strategies.

Because it is a 3-point Likert scale, the mean of each strategy could show how effective

each strategy was.

Table 4.18 Mean of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Bullying.”

Code Strategy Mean Rank34 fostering classroom climate 2.47 2*35 preventing problems 2.11 736 looking into causes 2.17 5*37 establishing rules 1.89 1238 issuing rewards and punishment 1.85 1639 keeping records 1.61 1740 exhorting and guiding 1.99 941 teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 2.02 842 assisting students in developing a sense of self 1.87 1443 having the aid of other staff 1.86 1544 constructing parent partnerships 1.93 1145 utilizing peer influence 2.33 4*46 being a good model 2.12 647 using teacher power 1.88 1348 handling problems instantly 2.51 1*49 being thoroughly persistent 2.46 3*50 arranging seats 1.94 10

Analysis number was 293. Data obtained from 57 participants were completely

151


excluded from the SPSS procedure. Table 4.19 shows that there was either a positive

correlation (0 < r < 1) or a negative correlation (0 < r < 1) between each two strategies,

but many of them were not significant. Therefore, the rank of these 17 strategies could

not be determined.


Table 4.19 Output of Correlation Analysis of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Bullying”

CorrelationsTR3 TR3 TR3 TR3 TR3 TR3 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR4 TR5

Speat ST Correlat Sia. (2-t

000 437'000

236'000

077188

038520

.172'003

.232'000

.324'000

.285'000

046431

.018763

.366'000

.375'000

074208

127’029

.185'001

142'015


437'(100

000 369'000

202'001

.094108

.132'023

.144'013

209'000

.175'003

.008887

033577

.106071

.188'001

050392

068246

136'020

.103078


236'nno

369'000

.000 316'000

.051388

.136'020

.236'000

240'000

.308'000

.170'003

.036543

140'016

262'000

.074210

137'019

156'007

.163’005


077188

202'001

.316'000

000 .581'000

356'000

.165'005

102081

.083155

282'000

380'000

.063280

.147'012

301'000

203'000

244'000

188'001


038520

094106

051386

.581'000

.000 .460'000

.172'003

.055346

.072220

.251'000

.439'000

015796

029626

.349'000

197'001

207'000

.136'020


172'003

.132'023

136'020

.356'000

460'000

000 .272’000

199'001

092116

.302'000

.338'000

164'005

.223'000

.304'000

.177'002

.238'000

181'002


232'000

.144'013

.236'000

165'005

172'003

.272'000

.000 569'000

.403'000

.279'000

.183'002

.277'000

.325'000

.215'000

.222'000

139'017

128'028


324'000

209'000

.240'000

102081

.055346

.199'001

.569'000

,000 .477'000

201'001

069236

320'000

.300'000

.143'014

.154'008

.107067

080172


285'000

.175'003

.308'000

083155

072220

.092116

.403'000

.477'000

.000 303'000

008887

319'000

.378'000

028631

013821

023692

183'002


046431

.008667

.170'003

.282'000

.251'000

.302'000

,279'000

201'001

.303'000

000 381'000

.323'000

.160'006

275'000

.092115

.079178

283'000


.018763

.033577

.036543

380'000

.439'000

.338'000

.183'002

.069236

.008887

381'000

000 198'001

056338

.349'000

251*000

.244'000

089131


366'000

.106071

.140'016

.063280

.015796

.164'005

.277'000

.320'000

.319'000

323'000

.198'001

000 .352'000

.155'008

.069239

.135'020

,159'006


.375'000

.188'001

.262'000

.147'012

.029626

.223'000

.325'000

.300'000

.378'000

.160'006

.056338

352'000

.000 .266'000

212'000

279'000

.173'003


,074206

.050392

.074210

.301'000

.349'000

.304'000

.215'000

.143'014

.028631

.275'000

.349'000

.155'008

.266'000

.000 .239'000

.325'000

.246'000


,127'029

.068246

.137'019

.203'000

.197'001

.177'002

.222'000

.154'008

.013821

.092115

.251'000

.069239

.212'000

.239'000

.000 .608'000

.143’014


185'001

.136'020

.156'007

.244'000

.207'000

.238'000

.139'017

.107067

.023692

.079178

.244'000

.135'020

.279'000

325'000

608'000

.000 .204’000

ST Correlat Sin (9-t

142'H15

.103078

.163'005

.188'nni.

.136'020.

.181'002

.128'028

.080-1Z2-

.183'002

.283'non

.089131

.159'006

.173'003

.246'nno.

.143'1114

.204'nnn

.000

♦Correlation is significant at the ‘Correlation is significant at the ^.istwise N = 293

.01 level (2-tailed). 05 level (2-tailed).

Table 4.20 showed that Alpha > 0.8, so the reliability was good. Table 4.19

showed that there was no significant difference between two groups of different sex, age,

level of education, or years of teaching experience.

153


Table 4.20 Output of Reliability Analysis of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Bullying”



N o f Cases = 293.0


Item Means Mean Minimum Maximum Range Max/Min Variance2.0598 1.6075 2.5119 .9044 1.5626 .0654



.2027 -.0703 .5919 .6622 -8.4244 .0161



STR34 32.5427 29.2148 .3643 .3573 .8020STR35 32.9044 29.2854 .2930 .2946 .8067STR36 32.8430 29.0164 .3712 .2919 .8016STR37 33.1297 27.8324 .4806 .4721 .7944STR38 33.1638 28.4799 .3763 .4973 .8016STR39 33.4096 28.4824 .4821 .3239 .7953STR40 33.0307 28.5436 .4955 .4198 .7949STR41 32.9966 28.5856 .4342 .4379 .7979STR42 33.1433 28.7328 .3556 .4120 .8029STR43 33.1536 28.4113 .4364 .3607 .7976STR44 33.0887 28.3757 .3824 .3579 .8012STR45 32.6894 28.7628 .3964 .3195 .8001STR46 32.8976 27.8936 .4568 .3460 .7960STR47 33.1399 28.0523 .4333 .3011 .7977STR48 32.5051 29.2029 .3569 .3758 .8025STR49 32.5597 28.6788 .4088 .4235 .7994STR50 33.0751 28.6587 .3264 .1693 .8054





The following table (Talbe 4.21) shows that there was not a significant difference

between the two groups of different sex, age, level of education, and years of teaching

experience. They evaluated strategies for addressing “bullying” similarly.

Table 4.21 Output of Indepent-samples T-test of 17 Strategies for Addressing “Bullying”

Output of Indepent-samples T-test of Groups of Different SexIndependent Samples Test

sne's Test for Equ; of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df g. (2-tailecpan Differen3td. Error lifferencc

4 Confidence Intel of the DifferenceLower Upper

STR3 Equal variances as .313 .576 .867 273 .387 .07 .085 -.094 .241Eaual variances nc .887 97.679 .377 .07 .083 -.091 .238

STR3 Equal variances as 1.693 .194 1.428 273 .154 .14 .099 -.053 .336Eaual variances nc 1.432 94.782 .156 14 .099 -.055 .338

STR3 Equal variances as 1.238 .267 .971 273 .332 .09 .091 -.090 .266Eaual variances nc 979 95 670 .330 09 .090 -090 .266

STR3 Equal variances as 2.038 .155 -.923 273 .357 -.09 .102 -.295 .107Eaual variances nc -947 98 002 346 -09 099 -292 103

STR3 Equal variances as .119 .730 -.501 273 .616 -.05 .105 -.260 .154Eaual variances nc -.499 93.951 619 -.05 .106 -.262 .157

STR3 Equal variances as 1.173 .280 .282 273 .778 .02 .085 -.143 .192Eaual variances nc .270 88.883 .788 .02 .089 -.153 .201

STR4 Equal variances as .201 .654 .456 273 .649 .04 .083 -.126 .202Eaual variances nc 450 92 795 654 04 .084 - 130 206


STR4 Equal variances as .307 .580 2.370 273 .018 .24 .101 .041 .439Eaual variances nc 2.490 101.619 .014 .24 .096 .049 .430

STR4 Equal variances as 1.957 .163 .855 273 .394 .08 .096 -.107 .270Eaual variances nc 822 89.725 .413 08 .099 - 116 .279

STR4 Equal variances as 1.894 .170 .661 273 .509 .07 .107 -.140 .282Eaual variances nc .713 106.025 477 .07 .099 -.126 .268


STR4 Equal variances as .766 .382 .693 273 .489 .07 .105 -.134 .280Eaual variances nc 700 95 868 485 07 104 - 134 279

STR4 Equal variances as 1.488 .224 .117 273 .907 .01 .106 -.196 .221Eaual variances nc 123 101 837 902 01 101 - 187 212

STR4 Equal variances as .992 .320 .078 273 .938 .01 .090 -.169 .183Eaual variances nc .082 102.547 .935 .01 .085 - 161 .175

STR4 Equal variances as .376 .540 .111 273 .912 .01 .094 -.175 .196Eaual variances nc .114 98.342 910 01 092 - 172 193

STR5 Equal variances as .351 .554 -1.199 273 .232 -.13 .110 -.348 .085F n u a l v a rian ce s nr -1 221 9 7 0 8 6 2 2 5 - 13 108 - 3 4 6 ___082-


Output o f Indepent-samples T-test o f Groups of Different Ages

Independent Samples Teste's Test for Eq of Variances -test for Eguality o Means

F Sig. t df ). (2 -tailean Differeitd. Erro

Confidence Int f the Difference



.619274

16.091.519.537

.05

.05.076.079

- .1 0 0-.108

.198


Eaual variance1.650 .2 0 0 -.366

-.356274

S1.271.715.722

-.03-.03

.089091

-.207 - 213

.142148


.005 .943 .422.418

27457.624

.673

.677.03.03

.081082

-.126 - 128

.194



-1.128274

54 918.252.261

- .1 0- .1 0

.091

.093-.285-.288

.075



-.813274

53.520.419417

-.08-08

.094094

-.261-.261

.109109


.276 .600 -.399-403

27454.406

.690

.6 8 8-.03-.03

.077

.076-.182-.181

.1 2 0

.1 2 0STR Eaual variance


.159274

52.425.874.874

.01

.01.074.074

-.135-.135

.158



1.268274

50.995.206.207

.1 0.1 0

.081

.082-.057-.058

.264


Eaual variance.079 .778 .8 8 6

.908274

m 909.376365

.0808

.091089

-.099 - 095

.261257


1.964 .162 .013.014

274^7.912

.990

.989.0 0.0 0

.085

.082-.167-.161

.169



-.475274

58 671.633.636

-.05-.05

.096097

-.235-.237

.143



2.050274

51.060.041.042

.17

.17.083.083

.007

.006.334.335


.530 .467 .322325

27455.379

.748

.746.03.03

.094

.093-.155-.153

.215



-1.767274

f3.551.088.079

-.16-.16

.094

.091-.346-.341

.024



-.409274

59.762.689.683

-.03-.03

.080

.078-.189-.186

.1251 2 2


.0 0 2 .965 .023.023

274 51.325

.982

.982.0 00 0

.084

.084-.164-.165

.168168

STR Eaual variance Fnual variance

.518 .472 1.774,1-773-

274SO 0 R 7

.077 .._,07.Z_

.17 _____12-

.098naa

-.019—.019,

.367a R 7


Output o f Indepent-samples t-Test o f Groups o f Different Levels o f Education



Confidence Int f the Differenc

ifferenc Lower UpperSTR Equal variance


-.358272

3.851.720.721

-.03-.03

.082

.082-.190-.191

.131


Eaual variance1.582 .2 1 0 -.218

- 930272

>6.205.828.818

- .0 2- .0 2

.096091

-.209- .2 0 0

.167158


3.408 .066 .372397

272>8.943

.710

.692.03.03

.087

.082-.139-.129

.204



908272

15.412.340.366

.09

.09.098.104

- .1 0 0-.1 1 1

.288



-.126272

0.944.898.900

-.0 1-.0 1

.1 0 1

.103-.213-.218

.187192


.028 .8 6 8 .286.289

2726.090

.775

.773.0 2.0 2

.082

.082-.138-.138

.186



-.183272

2.744.854.856

-.01-.0 1

.079

.080-.170-.173

.141



099272

19.328.914922

.01

.01.087.096

-.162-.180

.181



.835272

18.866.390.406

.0808

.098101

-.108-.116

.277



2.119272

4.928.035.036

.1919

.091

.091.013.0 1 2

.371



-1 29.3272

18.993.184.199

-.14-.14

.1 0 2

.105-.337-.345

.065



.070272

17.756.942.944

.0101

.090

.093-.170-.178

.184



.814272

f>8 215.445417

.08

.08.101.095

- .1 2 1- .1 1 0

.275



292272

19.191.764771

.03

.03.1 0 2.105

-.170-.177

.231238


.0 0 0 .990 -1.330-1.267

27215.949

.185

.208-.11-.1 1

.085

.089-.279-.289

.054



-1.155272

14.811.250.251

- .1 0- .1 0

.089

.089-.277-.278

.072


Fnual variancp.221 .638 .141

143272

I7 509.8 8 88 8 8

.0101

.106105

-.194- 192

.2242 2 2



Independent Samples Testle's Test for Eq of Variances t-test for Equality ol Means

F Sig. t df 3. (2 -tailean Differei>td. Erro ifferenc

Confidence Int )f the DifferenceLower Upper

STR: Equal variance: Eaual variance:

3.304 .070 .604572

274 28 821

.546

.569.0505

.078082

-.106 - 115

.199209


.524 .470 -.331-.326

27419.220

.741

.745-.03-.03

.091

.092-.209- .2 1 2

.149

.152STR: Equal variance:

Eaual variance:.0 0 2 .960 -.025

-.025274

14.137.980980

.0 0

.00.083083

-.165 -166

.161


Eaual variance:1.116 .292 -1.610

-1 598274

11.786.10911 2

-.15 -15

.093094

-.333 - 335

.033


Eaual variance:1.637 .2 0 2 -.452

-.463274

51.608.651644

-.04-.04

.096

.094-.233-.229

.146


Eaual variance:.004 .952 -.078

-078274

13.657.938.938

-.01- 0 1

.078078

-.160 -161

.148149

STR Equal variance: Eaual variance:

.064 .800 -.534-.530

27411.641

.593

.597-.04-04

.076076

-.190 -192

.109111


.1 2 2 .727 .245.246

27415.043

.806

.806.0 2.0 2

.083

.083-.143-.143

.184

.184STR Equal variance:

Eaual variance:.664 .416 .268

.276274

53.243.789783

.0303

.093

.091-.159 -154

.209



204274

51 527.843.839

.0 2

.02.087.085

-.154 -151

.189



-.435274

18 345.658.664

-.04-.04

.098

.1 0 0-.236-.240

.149


Eaual variance:3.165 .076 1.620

1.649274

19.532.106.101

.14

.14.085083

-.030-.027

.305



.186274

10.857.851.853

.0 2

.0 2.096.097

-.171-.174

.207

.2 1 0STR Equal variances

Eaual variances2 .0 2 0 .156 -1.476

-1 485274

15.889.141140

-.14 -14

.096096

-.332-331

.047

.047STR Equal variance;


078274

12.559.938938

.01

.01.082.082

-.154 -156

.167168

STR Equal variances Eaual variance:

1.672 .197 -.193 -184

274 11 468

.847854

- .0 2- 0 2

.086090

-.186 -195

.153

.161STR: Equal variances _____ Fnual variance;

4.145 .043 1.790 1 738

274 15 437

.075084

.18 _____18-

.1 0 0103

-.018.0 2 5

.377.384

There are 18 strategies for addressing “not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash

wherever.” The following table (Table 4.22) shows that by ranking the mean of each158


strategy, it was found that (a) “supervising and instructing personally,” (b) “handling

problems instantly,” (c) “being thoroughly persistent,” (d) “issuing rewards and

punishment,” and (e) “establishing rules or setting limits” were the five most effective

strategies for addressing “not cleaning classrooms or throw trash wherever.” Asterisks

(*) mark the top five ranked strategies. Because it is a 3-Likert scale, the mean of each

strategy could show the efficacy of each strategy.

Table 4.22 Mean of Strategies for Addressing “Not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash

wherever.”

Code Strategy Mean Rank51 preventing problems 2.17 752 looking into causes 1.88 1353 establishing rules or setting limits 2.41 5*54 issuing rewards and punishment 2.54 4*55 keeping records 1.85 1656 exhorting and guiding 1.87 1457 teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 1.97 1158 assisting students in developing a sense of self 1.74 1759 having the aid of other staff 1.86 1560 constructing parent partnerships 1.60 1861 governing by class leaders 2.13 862 utilizing peer influence 2.20 663 being a good model 2.13 864 using teacher power 1.93 1265 supervising and instructing personally 2.77 1*66 building good relationships 2.13 867 handling problems instantly 2.66 2*68 being thoroughly persistent 2.62 3*

Table 4.23 shows that there was either a positive correlation or a negative

correlation between each two strategies of 18 strategies, but many of them are not

159


significantly correlated either at the .01 level or the .05 level. Therefore, the five most

effective strategies could not be ranked. Neither could the other 13 strategies.

160


Table 4.23 Output of Correlation Analysis of 18 Strategies for Addressing“not cleaning

classrooms or throw trash wherever”

CorrelatfbnsTR5 TR5 TR5 TR5|TR5 TR5 TR5 TR5 TR5 TR6 TR6 TR6 TR6 TR6 TR6 TR6 TR6 TR6

Spea ST Correia Sio. 12-

000 389*nnn

304*nnn

249*nnn

167*nn?

239*nnn

357*nnn

273*nnn

124*n?3

0851??

239*nno

295*nnn

335*nnn

060?73

049377

172*nn?

186*nm

182*nm

ST Correia Sia. 12-

389*non

000 368*nnn

181*nm

256*nnn

331*nnn

331*nnn

322*non

228*nnn

207*nnn

172*nn?

188*nm

319*000

132*016

096OR?

304*nnn

216*nnn

185*nm

ST Correia Sio. 12-

304*nnn

368*nnn

000 526*nnn

410*nnn

256*nnn

251*nnn

208*non

260*nnn

115*036

254*nnn

310*nnn

287*non

233*nnn

231*nnn

151*nnn

289*nnn

312*nnn

ST Correia Sio. 12-

249*nnn

181*nm

526*nnn

000 370*nnn

156*nn4

129*m n

137*013

00 c

CD C

CM

C

139*n n

263*nnn

260*nnn

152*nn5

201*nnn

199*nnn

099071

212*nnn

259*nnn

ST Correia Sio. 12-

167*nn?

256*nnn

410*nnn

370*nnn

ooo 386*nnn

280*nnn

303’nnn

348*non

218*nnn

290*nnn

191*nnn

322*nnn

*00 c

in

c

CM c

163*003

171*nn?

176*nm

167*nn?

ST Correia Sia. 12-

239*nnn

331*nnn

256*nnn

156*nn4

386*nnn

ooo 584*nnn

391*nnn

167*nn?

140*n n

275*nnn

206’nnn

CO c

00

c

00 c

200*nnn

143*009

365*nnn

250*nnn

232*nnn

ST Correia Sia. 12-

357*nnn

331*nnn

251*nnn

129’n m

280*nnn

584*nnn

ooo 468*nnn

229*nnn

098075

260’nnn

249*nnn

449*nnn

115*036

158*nn4

397*nnn

219*nnn

203*nnn

ST Correia Sio. 12-

273*nnn

322'nnn

208*nnn

137*m 3

303*nnn

391*nnn

468*nnn

ooo 312*nnn

258*nnn

308*nnn

321*nnn

375*nnn

129*m n

0276?3

292*nnn

165’nn?

099071

ST Correia Sia. 12-i

124*n?3

228'nnn

260*nnn

268*nnn

348*nnn

167'nn?

229*nnn

312*nnn

ooo 299*nnn

303*nnn

316*nnn

211*nnn

257*nnn

162’nnn

164*003

132*016

078157

ST Correia Sia. 12-

08517?

207'nnn

115*n36

139*n n

218*nnn

140'n n

098075

258'non

299*nnn

ooo 175*nm

128'm n

154*no5

180*nm

101non

158*nn4

141*m n

067??fi

ST Correia Sia. 12-1

239'nnn

172'nn?

254'nnn

263*nnn

290'nnn

275'nnn

260'nnn

308'nnn

303*nnn

175'nm

ooo CO c

CO

c

in c

298*nnn

194'nnn

114'n37

222*nnn

157’nn4

114’036

ST Correia Sia. 12-1

295'nnn

188*nm

310'nnn

260*nnn

191'nnn

206'nnn

249'nnn

321'nnn

316'nnn

128'm n

566'nnn

000 301'nnn

100n69

069?11

277'nnn

133*m n

148’007

ST Correia Sia. 12-

335*nnn

319*nnn

287'nnn

152'nnn

322'nnn

386'nnn

449'nnn

375'nnn

211'nnn

154'nnn

298'nnn

301'non

ooo 201'nnn

194'non

398'nnn

256*nnn

242*nnn

ST Correia Sia. 12-

060?73

132*nm

233'nnn

201'nnn

258'nnn

200'nnn

115'036

129'019

257'nnn

180*nm

194'nnn

100069

201'nnn

ooo 286'nnn

185'nm

202'nnn

231*nnn

ST Correia Sia. 12-

049377

096 231'nnn

199'nnn

163'nn,3

143*nnn

158*004

027R?3

162'nn3

101066

114'037

069?11

194'nnn

286'nnn

ooo 230'nnn

459'nnn

347’nnn

ST Correia Sia. 12-

172*nn?

304*nnn

151'nnn

099n7i

171'nn?

365*nnn

397*nnn

292*nnn

164'nnn

158*nn4

222'non

277'nnn

398'nnn

185'nm

230'nnn

ooo 256'nnn

202’nnn

ST Correia Sia. 12-

186*nm

216nnn

289*nnn

212*nnn

176*nm

250*nnn

219*nnn

165*nn?

132'016

141*m n

157'004

133*m 5

256*nnn

202*nnn

459'nnn

256'nnn

ooo 570*nnn

ST Correia I Sin 1?-

182*QHL

185nm

312*ooo.

259*OOO.

167*002.

232*OOO.

203*0 02

099071

078157

067??6

114'038

148*nn7

242*nnn

231*nnn

347*nnn

202*nnn

570'nnn

ooo♦Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed).‘Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed).-(.istwise N = 333

Data from 333 participants were keyed in with SPSS for statistical calculation; 17

161


participants had missing values, so all data from them were eliminated from analysis. In

table 4.24, Alpha is bigger than 0.8, so it could be concluded that the reliability was good.

Table 4.24 Output of Reliability Analysis of 18 Strategies for Addressing “not cleaning

classrooms or throwing trash wherever”



N of Cases = 333.0





.2374 -.0571 .5867 6438 -10.2704 .0110



STR51 36.2883 34.1094 .3931 .3153 .8424STR52 36.5736 33.2995 .4819 .3357 .8382STR53 36.0450 33.3444 .5243 .4282 .8364STR54 35.9129 34.3569 .4148 .3443 .8414STR55 36.6066 32.9803 .5011 .3660 .8372STR56 36.5856 33.3338 .5393 .4534 .8358STR57 36.4895 33.1061 .5348 .4797 .8357STR58 36.7147 32.9334 .5010 .3648 .8372STR59 36.6006 33.6081 .4425 .2882 .8401STR60 36.8589 34.3987 .3174 .1570 .8464STR61 36.3273 33.0702 .4764 .3889 .8385STR62 36.2583 33.1620 .4654 .4243 .8390STR63 36.3243 32.6114 .5469 .3649 .8348STR64 36.5285 34.0752 .3310 .2276 .8463STR65 35.6817 35.5189 .3286 .3015 .8448

162


STR66 36.3303 33.6134 .4463 .3023 .8399STR67 35.7958 34.6991 .4283 .4251 .8411STR68 35.8378 34.7086 .3738 .3660 .8430



Alpha = .8475 Standardized item alpha = 8486

Participants whose years of teaching experience was 3-20 also believed that

“utilizing peer influence” and “being a good model” were more effective than

participants whose years of teaching experience was 21 -40. The mean of “utilizing peer

influence” was 2.21 for participants whose years of teaching experience was 3-20 and

was 1.89 for participants whose years of teaching experience were 21-40. The mean of

“being a good model” was 2.24 for participants whose years of teaching experience was

3-20 and was 2.05 for participants whose years of teaching experience was 21-40.

163


Table 4.25 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 18 Strategies for Addressing “not

cleaning classrooms or throw trash wherever”

Output of Independent-samples T-test of Groups of Different Sex

Independent Samples Testine's Test for Equ


F Sig. t df g. (2-tailei;an DifferenStd. Error difference

'o Confidence Inte of the DifferenceLower Upper

STR5 Equal variances a Eaual variances n

.042 .838 -.076-077

310 120 969

.939

.939-.01-.01

.085

.085-.175-.174

.162

.161STR5 Equal variances a

Equal variances n3.504 .062 -1.971

-2 002310

122 322.050047

-.18 -18

.090088

-.353 - 352

.000-002

STR5 Equal variances a Ecual variances n

.866 .353 -.727-.758

310 127 830

.468450

-.06-06

.082079

-.222-.216

.102


Eaual variances n.766 .382 -.357

-.336310

109.288.722.738

-.03-.03

.076081

-.177-.188

.123

.134STRS Equal variances a


-296310

122.216.771.768

-.03-03

.094092

-.212-210

.157156

STR5 Eaual variances a Eaual variances n

4.262 .040 -1.170 -1 222

310128.101

.243

.224-.10-.10

.082078

-.257-.251

.065



-.603310

120.797.550.548

-.05-.05

.086085

-.220-.220

.117117


.008 .931 -1.708 -1 645

310112.913

.089103

-.16 - 16

.094098

-.347 - 355

.0250.3.3


1.512 .220 1.180 1 298

310I40.852

.239

.196.11.11

.089

.081-.070-.055

.280


Eaual variances n3.041 .082 -1.870

-1.740310

107.649.062.085

-.17-.17

.093100

-.357-.372

.009024


2.380 .124 -.506-546

310 135 344

.613586

-.05-05

.093087

-.231-218

.136


Eaual variances n2.441 .119 .288

302310

128 830.774.763

.03

.03.094.089

-.157-.150

.211


Eaual variances n3.343 .068 -2.016

-1 972310

115431.045051

-.19 - 19

.092094

-.368 - .37.3

-.004001


.380 .538 -2.520 -2 569

310 123 009

.012011

-.24-24

.097095

-.436-433

-.054 - 056


2.873 .091 -.877-911

310126.878

.381364

-.05-05

.059

.057-.169 - 165

.065


Eaual variances n.024 .877 -1.206

-1.244310

125.495.229.216

-.11-.11

.088

.085-.279-.275

.067063


4.487 .035 -.954-1.016

310132.334

.341

.312-.06-.06

.067

.063-.195-.188

.068


F n n a l v a r ia n c e s n.486 .486 -.871

-846310

113 081.384400

-.06-O R

.07407R

-.210 - 2 1 R

.081n 8 7


Output o f Independent-samples T-test o f Groups o f Different Ages

Group Statistics

AGE N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error MeanSTR51 24-44 224 2 .2 2 .636 .043

45-65 89 2.04 .638 .068STR52 24-44 224 1.89 .684 .046

45-65 89 1.84 .655 .069STR53 24-44 224 2.42 .623 .042

45-65 89 2.43 .601 .064STR54 24-44 224 2.60 .559 .037

45-65 89 2.44 .583 .062STR55 24-44 224 1.85 .711 .048

45-65 89 1.87 .677 .072STR56 24-44 224 1.91 .629 .042

45-65 89 1.76 .565 .060STR57 24-44 224 2 .0 1 .646 .043

45-65 89 1.87 .625 .066STR58 24-44 224 1.78 .724 .048

45-65 89 1.69 .667 .071STR59 24-44 224 1.91 .673 .045

45-65 89 1.79 648 .069STR60 24-44 224 1.59 .697 .047

45-65 89 1.61 701 .074STR61 24-44 224 2 .2 0 .707 .047

45-65 89 1.94 .646 .068STR62 24-44 224 2.25 .702 .047

45-65 89 2.06 .680 .072STR63 24-44 224 2.13 .676 .045

45-65 89 2 .1 1 .745 .079STR64 24-44 224 1.89 .709 .047

45-65 89 2.04 .782 083STR65 24-44 224 2.78 .435 .029

45-65 89 2.79 .464 .049STR6 6 24-44 224 2.16 .648 .043

45-65 89 2.09 .685 .073STR67 24-44 224 2.67 .488 .033

45-65 89 2.63 530 .056STR6 8 24-44 224 2.65 .549 .037

45-fiR _________ 89l_ 9 55 _________ 564 nan


Independent Samples Testie's Test for Eq of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df 3. (2 -tailean Differeitd. Erro ifferenc

Confidence Int >f the DifferentLower Upper

STR Equal variance! Eaual variance;

3.610 .058 2.1782.176

31181.350

.030031

.1717

.080

.080.017.016

.331

.332STR: Equal variance!


550311

88 127.590583

.05

.05.085.083

- .121 - 118

.2 1 22 1 0


.287 .592 -.095-.096

31187.185

.925923

-.01-.01

.077

.076-.159-.158

.145



2.278311

55 783.021024

.1616

.071072

.025

.0 2 2.304.307


.932 .335 -.193-.197

311 89 185

.847844

-.0 2- 0 2

.088086

-.190-.187

.156153


.101 .751 1.9142.006

31179.021

.056046

.15

.15.077073

-.004.0 0 2

.297

.291STR; Equal variance


1 875311

86 609.065.063

.15

.15.080.079

- .0 1 0-.008

.306

.304STR: Equal variance


1.067311

74.454.304288

.0909

.089

.086-.083-078

.266261

STR; Equal variance Eaual variance

.286 .593 1.4351.458

31187.492

.152147

.1 212

.083082

-.044-.042

.284


Eaual variance.001 .977 - .2 0 0

-.199311

80.844.842842

- .0 2- 0 2

.087

.088-.190-.191

.155



3037311

75.890.004003

.25

.25.086.083

.082

.088.423.417

STR' Equal variance Eaual variance

5.424 .0 2 0 2 .2 2 22.253

31186.543

.027

.026.19.19

.087

.086.0 2 2.024

.365364


1.829 .177 .247237

3114-8.715

.805813

.0 20 2

.087091

-.150-.158

.193



-1.639311

48.668.088.103

-.16-.16

.092095

-.337-.345

.024032


.0 0 0 .993 -.095-092

311 82 974

.925

.927-.01-.01

.056

.057-.115 - 118

.104108

STR' Equal variance Eaual variance

.016 .901 .804785

311 83 961

.422

.434.0707

.082085

-.096 - 101

.22923.3


2.245 .135 .716.690

311 80 538

.475

.491.04.04

.063065

-.079-084

.168173

STRi Equal variance _____Fnnal variannp

2.004 .158 1.396-L37Q

31187 748

.164170

.1 010

.069070

-.040.0 4 2

.233235


Output of Independent-samples T-test o f Groups o f Different Levels o f Education


F Sig. t df 3. (2 -tailean Differer>td. Erro ifferenc

Confidence Int )f the DifferentLower Upper

STR: Equal variance! Eaual variance!

.323 .570 .683.655

30928.205

.495513

.06

.06.083.087

-.107-.115

.221

.228STR: Equal variance!


-.811309

35 157.413.419

-.07-.07

.088

.089-.246-.248

.101


Eaual variance:.2 1 2 .645 -1.161

-1 143309

33 6 8 ?.246.255

-.09-.09

.08108?

-.252-.255

.065

.068STR: Equal variance;

Eaual variance;.644 .423 -.796

-.801309

39.153.427425

-.06-.06

.074

.074-.204-.204

.087


Eaual variance;1.169 .281 1.052

1.038309

34.331.293301

.1 010

.09009?

-.083-086

.273


Eaual variance:8.600 .004 .521

474309

18 134.603637

.0404

.079087

-.115 -131

.197214

STR: Equal variance: Eaual variance;

8.068 .005 .086077

30915.556

.931938

.01

.01.083.093

-.157-.177

.17119?


10.684 .001 1.502 1.385

30920.475

.134169

.1414

.092

.1 0 0-.043-.059

.319


Eaual variance:2.138 .145 .667

.644309

?9 558.505.521

.06

.06.087.090

-.113- .1 2 0

.230?37

STRi Equal variance: Eaual variance:

.115 .735 .622.613

30934.052

.534

.541.0606

.090091

-.121 - 125

.233?37


.083 .773 .932.902

30930.153

.352368

.08

.08.091.094

-.094-.101

.264

.270STRi Equal variance:


.814309

37.342.416417

.07

.07.09209?

-.106 - 107

.255256


.237 .627 .565564

309 37 4?4

.573573

.05

.05.090.090

-.127 -128

.229



-37?309

33 430.705.710

-.04-.04

.095

.097-.224-.228

.151156


4.752 .030 -1 .0 2 0-1.119

309 35 111

.308?65

-.06 - 06

.058053

-.172-.162

.055


Eaual variance:.0 0 0 .992 -1.420

-1.481309

18 675.156141

- .1 2 - 12

.08508?

-.289-283

.047040

STRi Equal variances Eaual variances

.360 .549 .707720

309 12 353

.480

.472.05.05

.065064

-.082-080

.174

.172STRi Equal variances _____Fm ial v a r i a n t

16.729 .0 0 0 -1.964 -? ??5

30977 188

.0500?7

-.14- 1A

.072063

-.281 - ?65

.0 0 0 . n-iR


Output of Independent-samples T-test of Groups of Different Years of Teaching Experience

Group Statistics

EXPERIEN N Mean Std. Deviation Std. Error MeanSTR51 3-20 232 2.19 .646 .042

21-40 81 2 .1 0 .625 .069STR52 3-20 232 1.87 .690 .045

21-40 81 1 .8 8 640 .071STR53 3-20 232 2.42 .633 .042

21-40 81 2 42 589 .065STR54 3-20 232 2.59 .559 .037

21-40 81 2.47 .593 .066STR55 3-20 232 1.85 .714 .047

21-40 81 1 .8 6 .6 6 6 .074STR56 3-20 232 1.91 .624 .041

21-40 81 1.78 .570 .063STR57 3-20 232 2 .0 0 .655 .043

21-40 81 1 .8 8 .600 .067STR58 3-20 232 1.80 .719 .047

21-40 81 1.63 .660 .073STR59 3-20 232 1.91 .687 .045

21-40 81 1.75 603 067STR60 3-20 232 1.57 .6 8 6 .045

21-40 81 1.67 .725 .081STR61 3-20 232 2 .2 1 .690 .045

21-40 81 1.89 .671 .075STR62 3-20 232 2.24 .704 .046

21-40 81 2 05 687 076STR63 3-20 232 2.14 .676 .044

21-40 81 2 .1 0 .752 084STR64 3-20 232 1.92 .717 .047

21-40 81 1.98 .774 .086STR65 3-20 232 2.78 .445 .029

21-40 81 2 79 .439 049STR6 6 3-20 232 2.14 .659 .043

21-40 81 2 1 2 .659 .073STR67 3-20 232 2 .6 6 .491 .032

21-40 81 2.65 .528 .059STR6 8 3-20 232 2.63 .560 .037

21-40 81 2 80 540 060



F Sig. t df 1. (2 -tailean Differei>td. Erro ifferenc

Confidence Int )f the DifferentLower Upper


2.232 .136 1.1521.171

31143.874

.250

.244.1 0.1 0

.083

.081-.067-.066

.258256

STR: Equal variance: Eaual variance

1.359 .245 -.067-.069

311 49 671

.947945

-.01 - 01

.087084

-.178 - 172

.166


Eaual variance1.037 .309 - .021

-.021311

49.107.984.983

.0 0

.0 0.080.077

-.160-.155

.156151


1.727 .190 1.596 1.551

31132.901

.111123

.1 212

.073075

-.027-032

.261266

STR; Eaual variance Eaual variance

1.503 .221 -.166 - 172

311 18 721

.8 6 8864

- .0 2 - 0 2

.091088

-.193-.188

.163

.158STR; Eaual variance


1 689311

31.705.107093

.13

.13.079.075

-.028- .0 2 2

.282276

STR: Equal variance Eaual variance

.039 .843 1.5451.611

31151.356

.123

.109.1313

.083079

-.035-029

.291

.284STR; Eaual variance


1 923311

51.002.066.056

.1717

.091087

-.011-.005

.347340


.080 .778 1.818 1 937

31157.846

.070

.055.1616

.086081

-.013-.003

.326

.316STRi Equal variance


-1 0 1 2311

33 408.299313

-.09-.09

.090092

-.270 - 276

.083089

STR' Eaual variance Eaual variance

1.845 .175 3.595 3 646

31143.301

.0 0 0

.0 0 0.3232

.088

.087.144.146

.492

.490STRi Equal variance


2 151311

12690.034.033

.19

.19.090.089

.014

.016.370368

STRi Eaual variance Eaual variance

1.755 .186 .436.414

31128.026

.663680

.04

.04.090095

-.138-.148

.216226


.790 .375 -.560-.539

311 30 951

.576

.590-.05-.05

.094098

-.239-.247

.133

.141STRi Eaual variance

Eaual variance.1 1 0 .740 -.174

- 175311

11 396.862861

-.01-.01

.057

.057-.123- .1 2 2

.103103


.053 .818 .221221

31139.668

.825826

.0 20 2

.085085

-.149-.149

.186187

STRi Equal variance Eaual variance

.436 .510 .146.141

31131.488

.884

.8 8 8.01.01

.065

.067-.118-.123

.137142

STRi Equal variance Fnnal variance

.0 0 0 .991 .2809 8 5

3111 4 1 6 5

.7807 7 R

.0 2 ________0 2 -

.0720 7 0

-.121. . . 1 1 9

.161-15C L

There wer 14 strategies for addressing “being absent-minded during class.” The

following table shows that the five most effective strategies for addressing “being169


absent-minded during class” were (a) “enhancing motive and interests,” (b) “handling

problems instantly,” (c) “oral or physical proximity,” (d) “changing activities,” and (e)

“building good relationships.” There were 14 strategies for addressing “being

absent-minded during class.” The following table shows Because it was a 3-point Likert

scale, the mean of each strategy could show how effective each strategy was. Asterisks

(*) mark the top five ranked strategies.

Table 4.26 Mean of 14 Strategies for Addressing “Being Absent-Minded During Class.”

Code Strategy Mean Rank69 enhancing motive and interests 2.67 1*70 preventing problems 1.92 971 looking into causes 1.97 772 establishing rules 1.87 1073 issuing rewards and punishment 1.96 874 keeping records 1.50 1475 exhorting and guiding 1.76 1276 changing activities 2.42 4*77 oral or physical proximity 2.45 3*78 constructing parent partnerships 1.64 1379 utilizing peer influence 1.82 1180 building good relationships 2.20 5*81 handling problems instantly 2.52 2*82 arranging seats 2.09 6

The following table (Table 4.27) shows a positive correlation between any two

strategies of 14 strategies and the correlation was significant at either 0.01 level (2-tailed)

or 0.05 level (2-tailed). Therefore, the five most effective strategies could be ranked. It

was assured that “enhancing motive and interests” was the first effective strategy for

170


addressing “being absent-minded during class;” “handling problems instantly” was the

second; “oral or physical proximity” was the third; “changing activities” was the fourth;

and “building good relationships” was the fifth. Ranks of the other nine strategies for

addressing “being absent-minded during class” were assured too because their means

were significantly correlated.

Table 4.27 Output of Correlation Analysis of 14 Strategies for Addressing “Being

Absent-minded During Class”

Correlatidns

orCDa:i—er\ 3TR7C3TR713TR723TR733TR743TR7E3TR7E3TR773TR7E3TR7E3TR8C3TR813TR82Spearn STF Correlatior

Sio. f2-tail1.000 .425*

nnn.309*non

.296*nnn

.135*m2

.223*nnn

.130*016

.322*000

.274*nnn

.154*nn4

.248*nnn

.213*000

.203*000

.126*0?0

STF Correlatior Sia. f2-tail

.425*non

1.000 .476*000

.216*non

.283*nnn

.273*nnn

.199*nnn

.143*nna

.222*nnn

.210*000

.279*000

.160*003

.194*nnn

.204*nnn


.309*non

.476*nnn

1.000 .313*nnn

.211*nnn

.293*nnn

.266*nnn

.121*0?5

.166*

.0 0 ?.256*nnn

.311*nnn

.283*nnn

.147*nnn

.197*000

STF Correlatior Sia. (2-tail

.296*non

.216*nnn

.313*000

1.000 .506*nnn

.440*nnn

.288*nnn

.220*nnn

.234*nnn

.221*nnn

.257*000

.247*000

.235*000

.253*000

STF Correlatioi Sia. f2-tail

.135*m ?

.283*nnn

.211*000

.506*non

1.000 .425*.0 0 0

.258*nnn

.137*n n

.238*nnn

.280*000

.238*000

.184*001

.203*000

.237*non


.223*non

.273*non

.293*000

.440*non

.425*

.0 0 01.000 .384*

nnn.209*nnn

.207*nnn

.348*000

.245*000

.275*000

.181*nm

.208*nnn


.130*(116

.199*nnn

.266*000

.288*non

.258*non

.384*

.0 0 01.000 .133*

ni4.258*nnn

.389*000

.288*000

.349*000

.212*000

.220*nnn


.322*non

.143*nna

.121*025

.220*nnn

.137*o n

.209*non

.133*ni4

1.000 .342*nnn

.165*nn?

.208*nnn

.270*000

.230*000

.182*001

STF Correlatioi Sia. (2-tail

.274*nnn

.222*nnn

.166*00?

.234*non

.238*non

.207*nnn

.258*000

.342*000

1.000 .236*000

.195*nnn

.230*nnn

.407*nnn

.321*nnn


.154*004

.210*non

.256*000

.221*non

.280*000

.348*000

.389*000

.165*00?

.236*000

1.000 .366*000

.250*nnn

.220*nnn

.309*nnn


.248*000

.279*nnn

.311*000

.257*non

.238*

.000.245*.000

.288*nnn

.208*nnn

.195*nnn

.366*nnn

1.000 .358*000

.209*000

.255*nnn


.213*000

.160*nna

.283*000

.247*nnn

.184*noi

.275*

.nnn.349*nnn

.270*nnn

.230*nnn

.250*nnn

.358*nnn

1.000 .222*000

.228*000


.203*nnn

.194*nnn

.147*nnfi

.235*nnn

.203*nnn

.181*nm

.212*nnn

.230*non

.407*nnn

.220*nnn

.209*nnn

.222*nnn

1.000 .266*nnn

STF Correlatior __________Sin (?-taili

.126*„n?n

.204*nnn

.197*nnn

.253*nnn

.237*nnn

.208*nnn

.220*nnn

.182*nm

.321*nnn

.309*nnn

.255*nnn

.228*non

.266* „ 000 ,

1.000

^Correlation is significant at the .01 level (2-tailed). •Correlation is significant at the .05 level (2-tailed). aListwise N = 343


Data from 343 participants were keyed in with SPSS and data from 7 participants

who had missing values on the questionnaire were completely excluded from SPSS

statistical calculation. In the following table, Alpha > 0.8 so the reliability was good.

Table 4.28 Output of Reliability Analysis of 14 Strategies for Addressing “Being

Absent-minded During Class”

****** Method 2 (covariance matrix) will be used for this analysis ******R E L I A B I L I T Y A N A L Y S I S - S C A L E ( A L P H A )

N of Cases = 343.0N ofStatistics for Mean Variance Std Dev VariablesScale 28.7959 25.0576 5.0058 14




.2529 .1188 .5099 .3911 4.2929 .0064



STR69 26.1224 22.7510 .4134 .2993 .8170STR70 26.8717 21.6443 .4553 .3622 .8140STR71 26.8309 21.7082 .4685 .3301 .8130STR72 26.9300 21.3401 .5274 .4005 .8087STR73 26.8367 21.3008 .4730 .3632 .8129STR74 27.2945 21.5943 .5387 .3709 .8084STR75 27.0379 21.9079 .4824 .3000 .8122STR76 26.3761 22.8143 .3392 .1967 .8214STR77 26.3411 22.1552 .4599 .2953 .8138STR78 27.1516 21.6612 .4705 .2757 .8129STR79 26.9796 21.6165 .4764 .2662 .8124STR80 26.6006 21.9540 .4373 .2527 .8152STR81 26.2711 22.4438 .3998 .2229 .8176STR82 26.7026 21.6598 .4173 .2157 .8173

172




The following table shows there was no significant difference between two groups

of different sex, age, level of education, and years of teaching experience. Sex, age,

levels of education, and years of teaching experience had no impact on choosing, using,

or evaluating strategies for addressing “being absent-minded during class.”

Table 4.29 Output of Independent-samples T-test of 14 Strategies for Addressing “Being

Absent-minded during Class”

Output of Independent-samples T-test of Sex


vene's Test for Equal of Variances t-test for Eauallty of Means

Std. Error5% Confidence Interv

of the DifferenceF Sig. t df >ig. (2-tailed lean Differenc Difference Lower Upper

STR6E Eaual variances assu 12.928 .000 -1.672 320 .095 -.11 .066 -.239 .019Eaual variances not a -1 8 75 153 0 8 4 063 - 1 1 0 58 - 9 9 5 0 0 6

STR7C Eaual variances assu .209 .648 -.557 320 .578 -.05 .091 -.231 .129Enual variances not a - 5 3 9 118 916 5Q1 - 0 5 0 94 - 9 3 8 136

STR71 Eaual variances assu .353 .553 -.707 320 .480 -.06 .088 -.234 .110Enual variances not a - 6 8 9 118 950 4 9 6 - 0 6 091 - 9 4 9 118

STR72 Eaual variances assu .360 .549 1.625 320 .105 .14 .088 -.030 .317Eaual variances not a 1 667 199 4 4 3 0 99 14 0 8 6 - 0 9 7 314

STR72 Eaual variances assu .318 .573 1.038 320 .300 .10 .098 -.091 .296Eaual variances not a 1 0 4 0 195 919 3 00 10 098 - 0 9 9 9 9 7

STR74 Eaual variances assu .657 .418 -.365 320 .715 -.03 .081 -.188 .129Eaual variances not a -3 8 1 13.3 6.31 7 04 - 0 3 0 7 7 - 189 123

STR7E Eaual variances assu .051 .822 .965 320 .335 .08 .082 -.082 .240Eaual variances not a 1 004 133 179 3 17 08 0 7 9 - 0 7 7 9 3 5

STR76 Eaual variances assu .126 .723 .797 320 .426 .06 .077 -.090 .213Eaual variances not a 777 170 000 4 3 9 06 0 79 - 0 9 5 9 18

STR77 Eaual variances assu 3.868 .050 1.384 320 .167 .11 .077 -.045 .257Fnual variances not a 1 980 111 561 9 03 11 0 83 - 0 5 8 971

STR7E Eaual variances assu .304 .582 -.557 320 .578 -.05 .088 -.223 .124Eaual variances not a -5 4 1 1 19 .552 5 90 - 05 091 - 9 9 9 131

STR7S Eaual variances assu .308 .579 .253 320 .800 .02 .089 -.153 .198Enual variances not a 960 130 916 7 9 5 09 0 8 7 - 149 194

STR8C Eaual variances assu .124 .725 -1.100 320 .272 -.09 .085 -.260 .074Eaual variances not a -1 155 1.3.5 3 19 9 50 - 0 9 081 - 9 5 3 0 67

STR81 Eaual variances assu 3.568 .060 1.014 320 .311 .08 .079 -.075 .236Eaual variances not a 948 113 155 3 45 08 08.6 - 0 8 7 2 4 8

STR8S Eaual variances assu .731 .393 1.989 320 .048 .19 .096 .002 .380F n u a l v a r ia n c e s n o t a 1 8QB ..116 455 n s n 1 0 i n i - 0 0 8 3 90

173


Output o f Independent-samples T-test o f Ages

Independent Samples Tests's Test for E of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df . (2-tail n Differetd. Errt fferenc

Confide the Di

snce Ir Terem

Lower UpperSTF Equal varian

Eaual varian'2.451 .118 .952

.928321

4.341.342.355

.06

.06.061.063

CM CC

CD cc

o c

i’ i

.179183

STF Equal varian Eaual varian

.949 .331 .456448

321 6 591

.649

.655.04.04

.086

.087-.129-.133

.207211

STF Equal varian' Eaual varian'

.102 .749 .460.459

321 2 978

.646

.647.04.04

.082

.082-.123-.124

.199199


5.021 .026 -.898-.935

321 9 900

.370

.351-.07-.07

.082079

-.236-.230

.088082

STF Equal varian Eaual varian'

5.939 .009 .035.038

321 9 769

.972970

.0000

.092

.086-.177-.167

.184173

STF Equal varian Eaual varian'

.588 .444 -.403-.416

321 5 111

.687

.678-.03-.03

.075

.073-.178-.174

.117113

STF Equal varian' Eaual varian

.029 .865 .845.866

321 2 777

.399

.388.06.06

.076

.075-.086-.083

.215212


5.621 .018 .868.919

321 |7 144

.386

.359.06.06

.072

.068-.079-.072

.204196


.118 .732 .345.341

321 ft.852

.730

.733.0202

.072

.073-.116-.119

.166

.168STF Equal varian

Eaual varian.362 .548 -.480

-.469321

5.514.632.639

-.04-0 4

.082084

-.201-.206

.123


Eaual varian.151 .698 .872

.897321

4 323.384.371

.0707

.083

.081-.091-.087

.236232


.016 .900 .418.415

321 0 414

.676679

.03

.03.079.080

-.123-.125

.189



-.022321

1 229.982982

.00

.00.074072

-.147-.144

.144

.141STF Equal varian _____ F n u al variam

1.961 .162 .073 ..075.

3215J528

.9429 4 0

.01 01.

.0900 8 7

-.171 - 166

.1841 7 9


Output o f Independent-samples T-test o f Levels o f Education

Independent Samples Testi's Test for E of Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df . (2-tail n Differetd. Errt fferent

Confidence Ir the DifferentLower Upper

STF Equal variant Eaual variant

.359 .549 -.060-.063

3191.527

.952

.950.00.00

.065

.061-.131-.125

.123

.118STF Equal variant

Eaual variant.466 .495 .129

.126319

3.024.897.900

.01

.01.090.092

-.165-.170

.188103


.036 .850 -.436-43?

319 fi 188

.663

.666-.04-.04

.086

.087-.208-210

.132135


.882 .348 -.256-.262

3193.793

.798

.794-.02-.02

.087

.085-.193 - 190

.149145


.426 .514 -.564-.567

3199.143

.573

.572-.05-.05

.096

.096-.243-.243

.135


Eaual variant3.462 .064 1.336

1.407319

1.512.182.162

.11

.11.079.075

-.050-.043

.260


Eaual variant.089 .766 .633

.637319

9.101.527.525

.05

.05.080.080

-.107 - 107

.208208


.898 .344 1.0251.069

3198.855

.306

.287-.08-.08

.075072

-.226-220

.071066


.471 .493 .624.637

3192.918

.533

.525.05.05

.075074

-.101-009

.19510.3


.220 .639 -.197-.200

3190.632

.844

.842-.02-.02

.086

.085-.186-.185

.152


Eaual variant.045 .833 1.015

1.032319

1.959.311.304

.09

.09.087.086

-.083-.081

.260


Eaual variant.167 .683 1.113

1.129319

1.347.267.261

-.09-.09

.083

.082-.256-.254

.071


Eaual variant.160 .689 -.237

-.239319

0.536.813.811

-.02-.02

.078077

-.171 - 170

.134

.133STF Equal variant ___ F n u a l varian t

4.438 .036 1.117 1 071

319 R 543

.265986

-.11-11

.095OQQ

-.293 - 30?..

.081OQO


Output o f Independent-samples T-test o f Years of Teaching Experience

Independent Samples Testfs Test for E pf Variances t-test for Equality of Means

F Sig. t df . (2-tail n Differed. Err< fferent

Confidence Ir the DifferemLower Upper


r.058 .008 1.4341.338

321 1 368

.153

.183.09.09

.063

.068-.034-.043

.215



447321

5 855.654.655

.04

.04.088.088

-.134 -135

.213914


.124 .725 1.0531.068

321 9 009

.293987

.09

.09.085083

-.077-.076

.256964


5.057 .025 .039043

321 3 160

.969

.966.00.00

.085

.079-.164-.152

.171159


3.400 .002 -.196-.212

321 4 580

.845

.832-.02-.02

.094

.087-.204 -190

.167



-.723321

5 138.481.471

-.05-.05

.077

.076

1"- "3

O C

CNJ

C\i*

i

.098



714321

2 19?.482.476

.06

.06.079.078

-.100-098

.211


Eaual varian1.852 .028 .928

.985321

R 3?3.354.326

.07

.07.074.070

-.077-.069

.215



.317321

7 577.751.752

.02

.02.074.074

-.122 - 1?3

.169



-735321

3 481.446.464

-.06-.06

.085088

-.232-,?39

.102109


.641 .424 .510.530

321 3 305

.610

.597.04.04

.086089

-.125 -119

.212



.874321

9 5?8.367.384

.0707

.082085

-.087-.093

.235241


1.449 .230 -.585-.608

321 3 291

.559

.544-.04-.04

.076073

-.194-.189

.105100

STF Equal varian ____ Enual varian

2.544 .112 .6678 8 8

3213 3 7 0

.5064 9 4

.06nR

.093001

-.121- 1 1 7

.2462 4 1

In the following table, strategies for addressing the same problem behaviors are

arranged in descending order according to the mean. For example, the left column176


contains strategies for addressing the first frequent problem behavior “not writing or

turning in incomplete or delaying turning in or not bringing homework” and strategies

with higher means are placed before strategies with lower means. This shows:

1. when first five effective strategies for addressing each problem behavior were

compared, it was found that “handling problems instantly” appeared five

times, “thorough persistence” appeared four times, and “issuing rewards and

punishment” and “establishing rules or setting limits” three times;

2. when the first eight effective strategies for addressing each problem behavior

were compared, it was found that “preventing problems” and “being a good

model” appeared three times;

3. “keeping records” and “developing a sense of self’ appeared at the bottom of

every column four times.

Therefore, it could be concluded that those that appeared several times must be effective

strategies for many problem behaviors. Especially, “handling problems instantly” must be

extremely effective. On the contrary, “keeping records” and “developing a sense of self’

appeared at the bottom four times, so they are nearly not effective for all problem

behaviors.


Table 4.30. A Comparison of Results of the Third Questionnaire

Strategies for the 1st frequent problem behavior

Strategies for the 2nd frequent problem behavior

Strategies for the 3rd frequent problem behavior

Strategies for the 4th frequent problem behavior

Strategies for the 5th frequent problem behavior

supervising andinstructingpersonally

handlingproblemsinstantly


supervising andinstructingpersonally

enhancing motive and interests

thoroughpersistence

thoroughpersistence

fosteringclassroomclimate




issuing rewards and punishment

thoroughpersistence

thoroughpersistence

oral or andphysicalproximity


establishing rules or setting limits

utilizing peer influence


changingactivities



looking into causes


building good relationships

preventingproblems

being a good model

being a good model


arranging seats

constructingparentpartnerships


preventingproblems

preventingproblems

looking into causes


teaching new (appropriate) behaviors


being a good model



weakening by extinction

exhorting and guiding

governing by class leaders

preventingproblems

looking into causes


arranging seats building good relationships

establishingrules

using teacher power

preventingproblems




having the aid of other staff


establishingrules

using teacher power







being a good model

developing a sense of self


looking into causes

keeping records


looking into causes

using teacher power

keeping records

178


keeping records keeping records having the aid of other staff



keeping records developing a sense of selfconstructingparentpartnerships

The following table contains answers to the open-ended questions on the first

questionnaire. It could be infered that “love” is a frequent problem behavior, too,

because many teachers mentioned it. Taiwanese junior high school students are

forbidden to fall in love, but many students do and it causes problems for teachers as

mentioned by participants. Problem behaviors participants mentioned, including “love,”

may be used for further research.

Table 4.31 Answers to the Open-ended Questions in the First Questionnaire

1 “Students don’t care about anything. They only fool around and they don’t study

at all. They don’t read the textbook in the class and they are used to be receiving a

demerit.”

2 “Students have boyfriends/girlfriends and they like to reveal a little underwear.”

3 “Students copy others’ homework.”

4 “Students find excuses for their mistakes.”

5 “Students touch others’ bodies or genitals.”

6 “When leaving their seats, they don’t pull chairs near desks.”

179


7 “Students act differently in front of teachers and parents, so parents may mistake

that teachers are bad to criticize their kids.”

8 “After class or after school, students gather together as gangs.”

9 “Students quarrel violently.”

10 “Students have sexual relationships. “Students bring toys to school.”

11 “Students change their grades to cheat on parents.”

12 “Students run away from homes and indulge in surfing Internet for too many

hours.”

13 “Students play practical jokes.”

14 “Students write nothing at all on the question sheet and disrespect teachers.”

15 “Students use crude remarks behind teachers.”

16 “Students ask others to do many things for them and take no responsibility at all.”

17 “Students ransack others’ satchels.”

18 “Students like to criticize teachers and classmates.”

19 “Students try to disturb teachers, making teachers be unable to teach during class.”

20 “Students fool around during siesta time.”

21 “Students commit suicide. Students mock at others.”

22 “Students can’t communicate with parents.”

23 “Students look deficient in energy.”

24 “Students leave textbooks and homework at school.”

25 “Students ride motorcycles without a driving license.”

26 “Students draw many pictures on textbooks. They are selfish. They are very

180


lazy.”

27 “When teachers blame mistakes on students, they are very rude. Students find

excuses to leave classrooms during class. They play books and pens as if playing

toys.”

28 “Students kiss boyfriends/girlfriends at school.”

29 “Students never engage in any learning activities in school.”

30 “Students verbally challenge others to see who is stronger and it often causes

violence.”

31 “Students run in the classroom.”

32 “Students run at the corridor instead of on the playground.”

33 “Students are homosexual.”

34 “Students are quick to lose temper.”

35 “Students are dirty.”

36 “Students don’t admit their mistakes and try to escape from being punished.

Students don’t respect class leaders.”

37 “Students bring pornography to school.”

38 “Students intimidate others.”

39 “Students dye their hair.”

40 “Students borrow money and don’t return.”

41 “Students eat too many snacks.”

42 “Students bring comic strip books to school. Students spit. Students tattoo.”

43 “Students like name-calling and don’t use polite words such as, please, thanks, or

181


sorry.”

44 “Students ask others to write homework for them.”

45 “Students become crazy fans.”

46 “Students don’t turn off the light or water when necessary. Students don’t do

recycling tasks. Students eat certain dishes only.”

The following table contains answers to the open-ended question in the third

questionnaire. Most of these responses expressed only thanks and praise, so they were

not data that could be used for further research. However, no disagreement was found,

so the researcher did not design the fourth questionnaire.

Some teachers expected results that determined under which specific situation an

effective strategy can decrease a problem behavior. For example, “establishing rules or

setting limits” was effective for addressing “not doing or turning in incomplete or

delaying turning in or not bringing homework,” but when the situation varied, the

efficacy of “establishing rules or setting limits” might vary.

Table 4.32 Answers to the Open-ended Question in the Third Questionnaire

1 “I learn other teachers’ strategies from you. Thank you.”

2 “In the third questionnaire, there are some strategies I haven’t used, so I don’t

know if they’re effective.”

3 “The condition varies a lot, so in one case it is effective; in the other case, it may

182


not be so effective.”

4 “I have no suggestions.”

5 “The best strategies of classroom management are earnestness and love.”

6 “Your way of categorizing is wonderful. I even learned something from you.

The penalty some teachers provide is not good. It may hurt students.”

7 “The same strategy may have different effect on different students.”

8 “Can you share strategies for addressing other problem behaviors? Thank other

teachers for sharing strategies with me.”

9 “Some questions are not quite clear. The participant may misunderstand.”

10 “You are doing a good job. It helps teachers and students a lot.”

11 “What does ‘effective’ mean? Making rules, issuing rewards and punishments,

and keeping records are similar strategies.”

12 “You categorize strategies well. It’s clear to me.”

13 “You’d better explain the purpose of this questionnaire. It helps me answer those

questions.”

14 “Teachers’ personality and school culture background influence the effectiveness

of every strategy.”

15 “I learn a little from this survey. Thank you.”

16 “Some students attack teachers when they are punished or blamed. Do you have

advice for me?”

17 “It’s good that you let us share strategies by your explanation of strategies.”

18 “My school is located on the mountain, so most students are raised by single

183


father, single mother, or even single grandmother who is too old to teach the kid.

They behave terribly. The government never cares about these kids.”

19 “Parents are the most important key for the effectiveness of these strategies you

mention.”

20 “Your research can help teachers and students.”

21 “Thank you for sharing the results with us.”

22 “Strategies will change because students change everyday.”

23 “Sometimes it’s more effective when I combine some strategies together, so it’s

not easy to tell you which one is more effective.”

24 “I think some strategies are not effective at all.”

25 “It’s not easy to distinguish very effective, effective, and slightly effective.”

26 “The process of the survey is clear. It’s good to read all teachers’ strategies and I

feel respectable. I learn something from other teachers. In the beginning, I felt

bothered to answer three questionnaires, but now I feel very happy that I

participate in it.”

27 “I am happy to have this chance to share strategies with other teachers.”

28 “Thank you for categorizing those strategies.”

29 “Changing students’ misbehaviors take a lot of time, so I didn’t choose very

effective.”

30 “It’s good research. It’s meaningful for education.”

31 “We need to use different strategies on different students, so it’s not easy to judge

the effectiveness of any one strategy.”


32 “My present class is more difficult to teach because they are taught by different

teachers in their first and second year. Do you have good advice?”

33 “Your explanation of strategies is complicated. You need to organize it.”

34 “You’d better add ‘extremely effective’ and ‘not effective’.”

35 “You are working hard on this survey. It’s helpful for me.”

36 “Teachers should allow students to make mistakes. Teachers should not punish

students because of anger. Both must calm down first. Teachers should forgive

students who often misbehave. Communication is the successful key. Giving

students understanding and more cares are important.”

37 “It’s my pleasure to participate in this survey. You are a considerate researcher.”

38 “I agree that all those strategies are effective, but it’s impossible for problem

students to discipline themselves.”

39 “There is a problem in your research. Different students need different strategies,

so it’s hard to judge the effectiveness of each strategy.”

40 “I really think some strategies are not effective at all.”

41 “These strategies are effective but different students need different strategies.”

42 “I have been a teacher for 14 years. After your survey, I find I still need to

improve. You do a good job.”

43 “We need to use different strategies on different students.”

44 “You need to separate ‘issuing rewards’ from ‘issuing punishment’.”

Explanation of Results

Descriptive statistics showed the mean, standard error, kurtosis, and skewness.

185


The mean could be compared, so those problem behaviors were frequent and which were

not so frequent could be inferred. Which strategies were effective and which were not

so effective could be inferred as well by comparing means of each strategy and analyzing

the correlation. When standard error value is small, stability is greater and the sampling

error is smaller (George & Mallery, 2003). The standard error values for variables in

this research are between +2 and -2, so they are not large. “A kurtosis value near zero

indicates a shape close to normal” (George & Mallery, 2003, p. 98). In this research, the

kurtosis values for variables were not zero, so Spearman was selected while the

correlation was analyzed. The skewness values for variables in this research are

between +2 and -2 and are acceptable.

The correlation in this research was either positive (0 < r < 1) or negative (-1 > r >

0). “A positive (but not perfect) correlation indicates that as the values of one variable

increases, the value of the other variable also tends to increase” (George & Mallery, 2003,

p. 124). A negative correlation indicates that when one increases the other decreases.

There was not a correlation of 0 (r = 0) in this research, so any two problem behaviors or

any two strategies were related. “A significance less than .05

(p < .05) means that there is less than a 5% chance that this relationship occurred by

186


chance” (George & Mallery, 2003, p. 126). SPSS can automatically place an asterisk or

two asterisks after correlations that attain 0.05 or 0.01 level of significance. Some

relations in this research were not significant because p > 0.05 and it resulted in the

failure to rank problem behaviors and strategies. Only 29 problem behaviors in the first

questionnaire and 14 strategies (from strategy 69 to strategy 82) in the third questionnaire

could be ranked according to the mean. Some participants did not answer all questions

in the questionnaire. The research chose not to use their answers. Although they

answered some questions in the questionnaire, all of their answers were eliminated from

the correlation analysis.

The reliability of the data was tested using Chronbach’s alpha, which is designed

as a measure of internal consistency; that is, do all items within the instrument measure

the same things?” (George & Mallery, 2003, p. 223). According to George and Mallery

(2003), alpha > 0.9 means excellent; alpha > 0.8 means good; alpha > 0.7 means

acceptable; alpha > 0.06 means questionable; alpha > 0.05 means poor; alpha < 0.05

means unacceptable (George & Mallery, 2003). The alpha of the pilot test survey

instrument was not meaningful because the number of participants was only 41.

However, the reliability of the first questionnaire was excellent (Alpha > 0.9) and the

187


reliability of the third questionnaire was good (Alpha > 0.8). The reliability of the

survey instrument in this research was good.

The independent-samples t-test compares the means of two different samples that

share some variable of interest in common, but do not overlap between membership

(George & Mallery, 2003). This study used an independent-samples t-test to find out:

1. if there were a difference between male participants and female participants

on selecting the integers one, two, and three in the 3-point Likert scale

questionnaire,

2. if there were a difference bwtween participants whose age ranged from 24 to

44 and participants whose age ranged from 45 to 65 on selecting the integers

one, two, and three in the 3-point Likert scale questionnaire,

3. if there were a difference between college education level participants and

graduate school education level participants on selecting the integers one, two,

and three in the 3-point Likert scale questionnaire, and

4. if there were a difference between 3-21 years of teaching experience

participants and 22-40 years of teaching experience participants on selecting

the integers one, two, and three in the 3-point Likert scale questionnaire.

188


In several outputs of independent-samples t-test, most Levene’s tests for Equality

of Variances, indicate that variances did not differ significantly from each other because p

> 0.05 and under this condition, equal-variance t-test was used. Most values in the Sig.

(2-tailed) column were larger than 0.05 and zero often was included between the lower

value and upper value in “95% Confidence Interval of the Difference” column, so it was

found that there was no difference between sex, age, level of education, and years of

teaching experience on choosing, using, or evaluating classroom management strategies.

There were only two significant differences. Age and years of teaching experience had

an impact on strategy 61 and strategy 62.

The second questionnaire used open-ended questions instead of the Likert scale

questions to get effective strategies because the literature might not provide enough

information for the researcher to design a Likert scale questionnaire. For example,

“supervising and instructing personally” was not found in the U.S. literature review. It

showed that spending time with students was the successful key for Taiwanese junior

high school teachers.

A new finding of this research was “using obscene or vulgar language.” It was

not found in the U.S. literature review. Marzano (2003) had mentioned obscene

189


language and gestures. Sexual harassment was found in the U.S. literature, too.

However, there was no “using obscene or vulgar language.” Even the Taiwanese

literature review did not mention it. “Loafing on campus during lunchtime, siesta time,

or cleaning period” was also a new finding by this research.

This result also revealed the belief of Taiwanese teachers, that is to say, teachers

must act as the model for students. Moreover, it was found that Taiwanese junior high

school students, especially problem students, seldom developed a sense of self. It

seemed that it was difficult for junior high school teachers to ask students to discipline

themselves.

Summary

Both research questions were answered. Research question one, “What are the

most frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students in Taiwan?” can be

answered as: The first five frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students in

Taiwan are

1. not doing or turning in incomplete or delaying turning in or not bringing

homework,

2. using obscene or vulgar language,

190


3. bullying,

4. not cleaning the classroom or throwing trash wherever, and

5. being absent-minded during class.

Research question two is “What classroom management strategies do expert

junior high school homeroom teachers in Taiwan use to cope with these frequent problem

behaviors?” The answers to research question two are as follows:

1. “Being thoroughly persistent,” “supervising and instructing personally,”

“handling problems instantly,” “issuing rewards and punishment,” and

“establishing rules or setting limits” are the five most effective strategies for

addressing “not doing or turning in incomplete or delaying turning in or not

bringing homework.”

2. “Handling problems instantly,” “being thoroughly persistent,” “issuing

rewards and punishment,” “establishing rules or setting limits,” and “utilizing

peer influence” are the five most effective strategies for addressing “using

obscene or vulgar language.”

3. “Handling problems instantly,” “fostering classroom climate,” “being

thoroughly persistent,” “utilizing peer influence,” and “looking into causes”

191


are the five most effective strategies for addressing “bullying.”

4. “Supervising and instructing personally,” “handling problems instantly,”

“being thoroughly persistent,” “issuing rewards and punishment,” and


addressing “not cleaning the classroom or throwing trash wherever.”

5. “Enhancing motive and interests,” “handling problems instantly,” “oral or and

physical proximity,” “changing activities,” and “building good relationships”

are the five most effective strategies for addressing “being absent-minded

during class.”

The Alpha value of pilot test was higher than 0.9. The Alpha value of the first

questionnaire was higher than 0.9. The Alpha value of the first group of questions (from

question 1 to question 17) on the third questionnaire was higher than 0.7. The Alpha

value of the second group of questions (from question 18 to question 33) on the third

questionnaire was higher than 0.8. The Alpha value of the third group of questions

(from question 34 to 50 question 17) on the third questionnaire was higher than 0.8.

The Alpha value of the fourth group of questions (from question 51 to question 68) on the

third questionnaire was higher than 0.8. The Alpha value of the fifth group of questions

192


(from question 69 to question 82) on the third questionnaire was higher than 0.8. It

indicates that the reliability of the first questionnaire and the third questionnaire was good.

Validity was achieved by having committee members examine three questionnaires.

Because the number of questionnaires received is large—628 first questionnaires, 399

second questionnaires, and 350 third questionnaires, and because responses were received

from all counties, the results of this study may be generalized to all counties in Taiwan.

The research questions were answered, and with the large sample size, the results

are generally applicable to the teachers in Taiwan. Appropriate tables and figures were

consistent with the interpretation of the raw data and supported the findings of the study.

On the first questionnaire and the third questionnaire, participants wrote a great deal in

response to the open-ended questions. The data obtained from open-ended questions were

also listed and roughly analyzed. Interpretive steps were explicitly identified. The

integration of the study results with information from the review of literature was

provided in detail in both Chapter Four and Chapter Five.

The next chapter, Chapter Five, contains discussion, conclusions and implications

for the finding of this study. Contradictory or unexpected findings are discussed and

alternative interpretations are considered. The results and their implications for policy

193


and professional practice are given. Directions for future research are also discussed.

194


CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION

There are five sections in Chapter Five. In “Summary of the Study,” the whole

study is summarized. In “Conclusions,” results are examined, evaluated, and qualified

by the researcher. Inferences are also drawn. Contributions and limitations of the

study are included. In “Recommendation for Further Research,” some suggestions are

made. In “Implication,” what should be done and how it can be done are stated.

Summary of the Study

The researcher, a homeroom teacher in Taiwan, has been frustrated by some of

problem behaviors of students in her class, so she sought strategies from the literature.

After the literature review, a gap was found. No literature provided effective strategies

for addressing specific problem behaviors. Therefore, the researcher conducted this

195


study, in part, to discover effective classroom management strategies for addressing

specific problem behaviors in her own classes.

Two research questions shaped the direction of the study. One dealt with problem

behaviors and the other dealt with classroom management strategies. The researcher

hoped to determine frequent problem behaviors and effective strategies for addressing

them. After the literature review, the researcher chose the three-round Delphi Technique

as the methodology for the study, and selected junior high school homeroom teachers to

be participants.

The survey instrument was designed by means of the literature review. Problem

behaviors were retrieved from the literature and after being organized, 29 problem

behaviors were put in the first questionnaire. Most strategies in the third questionnaire

were retrieved from the literature, too. A few strategies were obtained from the second

questionnaires and were provided by participants. Some literature that discussed

relationships between problem behaviors and strategies were used for confirming the

findings of this research. School student behavior contests and the duty of Taiwanese

homeroom teachers were explained for giving readers a better understanding. After the

literature review, the research was performed. The pilot test survey instrument, the

196


letter to principals, informed consent form, and three questionnaires were sent out

sequentially.

After data were collected, SPSS software was used for data analysis. Data were

statistically calculated for mean, reliability, correlation, and t-test. After results were

found, they were discussed and explained regarding what had been found in literature.

Finally, suggestions were made.

Student problem behaviors that annoy teachers and disrupt classrooms need better

solutions than what the literature provides. This is due, in part, because the literature

does not provide enough information about effective strategies for addressing specific

problem behaviors. That is to say, there was a literature gap. Moreover, from

Taiwanese thesis and dissertation websites maintained by the government, it was found

that no research had surveyed expert junior high school homeroom teachers in Taiwan

(“Dissertation and Thesis,” 2005). Therefore, this research was conducted.

This study used a three-round Delphi Technique to survey expert teachers. The

survey instrument contained both Likert scale questions and open-ended questions.

Many classroom management strategies were collected from the literature and then were

organized and categorized in Chapter Two. The literature helped the researcher interpret

197


the responses in the second questionnaire and those strategies organized in Chapter Two

let readers learn various classroom management strategies. Problem behaviors collected

from the literature also were introduced in Chapter Two and they were used to design the

first questionnaire. The sample of the study was junior high school homeroom teachers

in Taiwan. Every junior high school principal in Taiwan was requested to recommend

three expert teachers to participate in the research.

The results of the research answer the research questions. Results obtained from

the first questionnaire were used to answer research question one and results of the third

questionnaire were used to answer research question two, so the project objectives were

achieved. The influence of sex, age, level of education, and years of experience on

choice of strategies was also explored.

For the first questionnaire, 1109 were sent out and 628 were returned,

representing a response rate of 57%. The mean of each problem behavior noted on the

questionnaire was calculated. Means and correlation analysis were used to determine

the most significant behavior problems encountered by junior high teachers, thus answer

the first research question. It was found that the first five frequent problem behaviors

were ranked as follows:

198


1. “not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing

homework,”

2. “using obscene or vulgar language,”

3. “bullying,”

4. “not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever,” and

5. “being absent-minded during class.”

After examination, it was assured that with this large number of responses, the

results of this study might be generalized to the target population of homeroom teachers

in junior high schools in Taiwan. Reliability and validity were good. In addition, it

was presumed that answers to research question one were correct because the result of

first questionnaire was similar to that of pilot test conducted at the intiation of this study.

To answer the second research question on effective strategies, 399 third

questionnaires were sent and 350 were returned. This represents a response rate of 87%.

The mean of each strategy was obtained by using SPSS. The analysis of means and

correlation analysis was used to help the researcher determine answers to research

question two. The most effective strategies for addressing each five frequent problem

behaviors were:

199


1. “Being thoroughly persistent,” “supervising and instructing personally,”

“handling problems instantly,” “issuing rewards and punishment,” and


addressing “not doing or turning in incomplete or delaying turning in or not

bringing homework.”

2. “Handling problems instantly,” “being thoroughly persistent,” “issuing

rewards and punishment,” “establishing rules or setting limits,” and “utilizing

peer influence” are the five most effective strategies for addressing “using

obscene or vulgar language.”

3. “Handling problems instantly,” “fostering classroom climate,” “being

thoroughly persistent,” “utilizing peer influence,” and “looking into causes”

are the five most effective strategies for addressing “bullying.”

4. “Supervising and instructing personally,” “handling problems instantly,”

“being thoroughly persistent,” “issuing rewards and punishment,” and


addressing “not cleaning the classroom or throwing trash wherever.”

5. “Enhancing motive and interests,” “handling problems instantly,” “oral or and

200


physical proximity,” “changing activities,” and “building good relationships”

are the five most effective strategies for addressing “being absent-minded

during class.”

“Handling problems instantly,” “being thoroughly persistent,” “issuing rewards and

punishment,” and “establishing rules or setting limits” are effective for addressing all five

frequent problem behaviors because “handling problems instantly” appeared five times;

“being thoroughly persistent” appeared four times; and “issuing rewards and

punishment,” and “establishing rules or setting limits” appeared three times among the

top 25 effective strategies for address five frequent problem behaviors.

The participation rate in the first round was 57%, in the second round 64%, and in

the third round 87%. Thus, the overall participation rate of this study was 31 %.

Besides, four variables - sex, age, level of education, and years of experience did not

have a significant impact on the result, so the results could be generalized.

Interpretation

Some results of this study are similar to what were found in the literature review.

For example,

1. Marzano (2003) had pointed out that obscene language and gestures were a

201


school-wide problem behavior. This study proved that it was true.

2. Chen, et al. (2001) found that Chinese youth, 13-15 years, seldom used

alcohol or drugs. It was proved by this study.

3. The U.S. school systems tend to use referral, but the Taiwanese junior high

school uses “the aid of other staff’ that includes principals, deans, counselors,

etc.

4. Taiwanese teachers also use firm response that Algozzine & Kay (2002) had

mentioned, and handling problems immediately as Froyen (1993) had

mentioned, but they do not emphasize consistency, that Algozzine and Kay

(2002), Harlan (1996), Kohn (1996), and “Strategies for classroom

management” (2003) had mentioned.

5. Lee (2002) found that “not paying attention” is the most significant problem

in the classroom. The result also showed “being absent-minded during

class” is a frequent problem behavior.

6. Cheng and Wong (1996) believed that teachers must be role models. This

belief reflected on the result of the third questionnaire.

7. Garrick and Laurel (2003) stated that using antecedents, behaviors, and

202


consequences strategy (ABC) can assist students with attention deficit. The

result of this study also showed that “looking into causes” was the seventh

effective strategy for addressing “being absent-minded in class” problem

behavior.

8. Soodak (2003) had used facilitating parent involvement, fostering friendship,

and setting rules to cope with problem behaviors, such as speaking offensively

to adults, and threatening and hitting classmates. This study showed that

expert junior high school teachers in Taiwan also do so.

However, the result opposite to what had been found in the literature review

was that although Cancio, et al. (2004) found that teaching students to manage their own

behaviors and parent participation are effective strategies for homework completion, the

result of this study showed that “developing a sense of self’ was not effective at all and

“constructing parent partnerships” was the seventh most effective strategy for addressing

“homework” problem behavior. This contrast needs further studies.

Limitations

Because the researcher did not graduate from Nation Taiwan Normal University, it

was more difficult for her to get assistance from principals and superintendents. Without

203


being pushed by principals and superintendents, participants were free to join or drop out.

Therefore, the response rate to all three rounds of questionnaires, that is 31%, was not

high. However, according to the requirement of Lynn University Institution Review

Board, participants had to be free to refuse to participate or to drop out of the research

project.

There are many ways of evaluating teachers. This study combined the

professional judgment of principals and school student behavior contests to evaluate

teachers. Comparing with others, this study noticed both subjective and objective

aspects. However, since no single assessment tool that measures effective teachers can

convince everyone. Developing a national tool for assessing teachers in the future is

necessary.

There are many student behavior problems. This study only included those

problem behaviors that could be observed, measured, and counted, and that occurred in

school. Covert behaviors such as attitudes, values, and feelings, and behaviors that

occur after school were not included in this study. The number of behaviors addressed

needed to be limited to ensure participants would respond to questionnaires. With

hundreds of problem behaviors to chose from, the researcher chose a limited number to

204


address in the course of this project.

This research surveyed expert teachers but not all teachers. The frequent

problem behaviors this study found were only problem behaviors that expert teachers had

seen in their schools. The result can be generalized only under this condition.

However, results of pilot test are similar to that of the first questionnaire, so the reliability

and validity are good. That is to say, if non-expert teachers participate, the rank of

frequent problem behaviors may be similar.

Practical Implications

Many participants conveyed their expectations for more specific classroom

management strategies. From responses to the questionnaires, it was evident that some

teachers expected more specific answers, that is, under what condition do effective

strategies work better. Teachers believe there are still many factors that influence the

choice of strategies. Therefore, one of the implications of this study, in trying to best

serve the needs of classroom teachers, is to expand the research and choose a specific

problem study. If research focuses on one specific problem behavior and chooses one

county, the answer should be more specific. For example, a researcher can use

questionnaires to survey the effect of “issuing rewards” on “not doing homework” and

205


asking participants to write down the condition when this strategy works best. After

three or four rounds, the specific condition for “issuing rewards” to work best on “not

doing homework” can be found. Other experimental methods may be used to prove the

findings obtained from questionnaires. Further, a research study that looks for what

kind of reward is most effective may be conducted, too. It is easier to get the

superintendent’s support to increase the participation rate when surveying only one

county. Through more research, stronger links between behavior problems and specific

teaching strategies may be found.

Research looking for effective classroom management strategies can be conducted

by other research methods, such as interview, observation, or experimental method.

This research used three-round Delphi Technique, to explore problem behaviors, to

collect strategies, and determine which strategies are most effective to solve a problem.

Many teachers responded that the “Explanation of Every Strategy in the Third

Questionnaire” (see Appendix J) that contained many classroom management strategies

suggested by participants was excellent and gave them much valuable information.

However, other teachers expected the researcher to determine not only more strategies

but to link them directly to problem behaviors.

206


In Taiwan, there is no phone in the classroom, so it was impossible to enhance

response rate by calling teachers. The response rate may be enhanced by contacting

principals (although principals always have secretaries answer the phone for them) or

using the persuasive power of school superintendents.

Answers to the open-ended questions revealed that teachers need more assistance

in coping with problem behaviors. Junior high school teachers have at least 18 classes

every week and they must handle many problem behaviors personally. Taiwanese junior

high schools may want to investigate some of the ways that U.S. schools have addressed

these problems, notably by adding more teachers and enhancing technology that can

assist with problem behaviors.

The recommendation for teachers in using this research depends on the situations

teachers meet. Teachers may need to revise the strategies when school climate, county

culture, or student personality is differs. For example, in some counties, parents have

great power, so building a parent partnership is especially effective; in the other counties,

building good relationships between teachers and students may work better.

In the future, after the words expert teachers wrote on the second questionnaire

are translated and published, teachers in Taiwan and around the world can read the details

207


and use them to assist in meeting the day-to-day problems encountered in a classroom.

Research must also continue in this field because students change and society changes,

too.

Recommendations for Further Research

Suggestions for future research are as follow:

1. The answers to open-ended questions in the first questionnaire and the third

questionnaire can be used for conducting research in the future. Answers to

the open-ended questions revealed many problem behaviors and teachers’

needs, so there are many studies that could address classroom management

strategies.

2. Frequent problem behaviors can be found by asking any teacher. While the

choice of the Delphi Technique for data analysis dictated the use of expert

teachers, different results might have been obtained if all skill levels of

teachers were included in this study.

3. A specific strategy for addressing a specific problem behavior under a

specific condition needs to be determined. This study can be separated into

several small projects when time and funding are available;

208


4. How sex, age, level of education, and years of teaching experience influence

the choice or evaluation of classroom management strategies needs further

survey. Some participants provided incomplete background about

themselves, where overlooking those questions or for for the sake of privacy.

A large sample would be needed to explore this area.

5. One issue that had been raised is that some teachers responded that they

needed more strategies for addressing other problem behaviors. The results

of this study were helpful but for some teachers, the findings presented here

are only a beginning. These teachers hoped to get more concrete

information, because problem behaviors had troubled them in the classroom

and the teachers were eager to see strategies for addressing other problem

behaviors. With sufficient time and funding, such information could be

found and professional development would be enhanced by such research.

Conclusions

One of the primary goals of educational research is to improve both scholarship

and practice. The central premise of this study was that students can learn more

effectively if teachers have effective strategies to decrease problem behaviors. This is an

209


important social issue in Taiwan, where it is believed that students who behave well in

school are more likely to behave well in society. Homeroom teachers have the

responsibility to address this challenge. Additionally, teachers hope students will learn

better so that they can be productive in society.

Theoretical consequences of the result of this study included exploring a lot of

effective strategies. Many of these strategies were not found in the literature review.

The results of the surveys provided more information than the literature provided for

teachers.

A practical consequence of the result was that the results allowed teachers to share

strategies with one another, although for some teachers, the results were not specific

enough. Participant responses in the open-ended question on the third questionnaire

revealed their appreciation for the researcher and their eagerness for more specific

results.

From the responses of participants, it is clear that the work has contributed to the

knowledge base of the profession because participants have praised it. Some of the

contributions of this study include the following:

1. Effective strategies teachers need were revealed;

210


2. What expert homeroom teachers wrote on the second questionnaire can be

used where appropriate in the future;

3. Problem behaviors can be inferred to all counties in Taiwan although the

sample was somewhat limited;

4. It was found that teachers need to supervise and instruct personally and few

Taiwanese junior high school students could self-discipline.

No study found in the literature surveyed the experts regarding effective

classroom management strategies for addressing a specific problem behavior of junior

high school students. There was no literature reviewed that could support the answer of

research question one, because no research has been published in this field. Other

theses and dissertations based on research in Taiwan focused on classroom management

strategy instead of classroom management problems. This study was the first time

Taiwanese junior high school homeroom teachers were surveyed for classroom

management strategies.

Some responses could not be confirmed by the U.S. and Taiwanese literature.

For example, homework is usually a problem area. Some students have difficulty in

studying, so they dislike studying and consequently lose motivation to do their homework.

211


Many of their parents are too busy or are not educated, so they are unable to deal

effectively with this problem. These students cannot get assistance or supervision they

need to turn in outstanding homework.

“Using obscene or vulgar language” is another problem area that the researcher,

who is a vocational school teacher, has faced frequently. It seems, in her experience, to

be a habit of some students to use such language, and while it was not noted in the

literature review, it is a frequent problem behavior.

The researcher has also observed much bullying in vocational schools. Too

often the tall, smart, rich, or handsome student likes to bully the short, stupid, poor, or

ugly one. This is especially evident in vocational schools, because these students care

more about their power in the class. High school students who focus on academics

rather than strength do not exhibit bullying behavior as frequently, because the pressure

of an excellent high school or college allows no time for bullying.

A problem unknown in the U.S. is Taiwanese junior high school students do not

clean the classroom after school because they prefer to play. In Taiwan, when teachers

do not notice, students often play with the broom and erasers. They throw erasers and

use the broom to hit it as if they are playing baseball. Sometimes they climb on the desk

212


to dance or use water to splash each other.

From the U.S. literature and the result of this survey, it is known that when

students are not engaged in the class, they pass messages, sleep, talk, or daydream.

Moreover, according to the observation of researcher, elementary students run around the

classroom or talk loudly, junior high school students are more likely to be absent-minded,

and vocational school students, who too frequently give up on themselves, prefer to sleep.

There are some inferences that can be drawn from the study:

1. The mean of “assisting students in developing a sense of self’ strategy was

small, so it was not very effective. It can be inferred that Taiwanese junior

high school students have not developed self-discipline. They need the teacher

to supervise personally. However, “issuing rewards and punishment” was

effective. Therefore, these students are disciplined by teachers, but not by

themselves;

2. “Using obscene or vulgar language” and “bullying” could be solved by

“utilizing peer influence” but “not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash

wherever” could not, so most students may not like to clean classrooms;

3. “Constructing parent partnerships” was not very effective for addressing “not

213


cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever”, so it can be inferred that

parents were not interested in asking their kids to clean classrooms;

4. “Issuing rewards and punishment” was not effective for addressing

“bullying,” so it can be assumed that demonstrating love is better than

demonstrating violence.

Taiwanese junior high school students’ problem behaviors were not similar to

those found in the U.S. literature. For example,

1. The pilot test questionnaire was based upon the problem behaviors found in

the U.S. literature, so some of the problem behaviors provided in the

open-ended question by participants were new and had not been discussed in

the literature. Problem behaviors, such as, “using obscene or vulgar

language,” “telling lies or deception,” “being absent-minded during class,”

“not sitting up straight,” and “loafing on campus during lunchtime, siesta

time, or cleaning time” were added to the first questionnaire after the pilot

test. They were not retrieved from the literature.

2. “Love problem” appeared several times in the open-ended question on the

first questionnaire. It was also a problem the U.S. literature review had not

214


mentioned.

3. “Supervising and instructing personally” and “exhorting and guiding” were

strategies that also were not seen in the literature. Therefore, this study was

worth because it discovered new information not found in the published

literature.

The results revealed some interesting phenomenon.

1. “Using a cellular phone during class” was not a frequent problem, regardless

of in the pilot test or in the first questionnaire. Recently, from the

newspapers, it is known that many junior high schools are forbidding students

to bring cellphones, so it may explain this result.

2. Violence, such as “fighting” and “extortion” do not frequently occur.

3. The U.S. students need not clean classrooms, but the Taiwanese Ministry of

Education still asks students do it. It is such a frequent problem behavior,

that the Ministry of Education may want to investigate the costs of changing

the practice. It is really a problem that appears to bother both teachers and

students to a significant degree.

4. “Establishing rules or setting limits” and “issuing rewards and punishment”

215


work better than “developing a sense of self.” It can be inferred that

Taiwanese junior high school students are somewhat passive.

5. Teachers must supervise and instruct personally, so the burden placed on the

teachers whose students need such assistance is quite heavy.

The level of detail provided in this study will be sufficient for an appropriately

trained researcher to carry out a replication of the study. Results were displayed in

appropriate tables. Costs and timelines had been considered and were realistic.

Answers for two research questions were sought and found, but deeper research on

answers to one open-ended question in the first questionnaire and one open-ended

question in the third questionnaire will be left for further research.

Because the researcher does not graduate from National Taiwan Normal

University, she did not ask superintendent or principal to support this survey by means of

using political power to force teachers to participate. If the researcher had asked

superintendents and principals to push teachers to participate, the results might have been

different. Results are qualified because 380 principals were very enthusiastic and

hundreds of teachers were devoted to this survey without asking for any reward.

Although the overall response rate was only 31%, the final number of responses obtained

216


(i.e., 350) is much larger than the usual number of responses in the typical Delphi

technique (i.e., 30).

Ethics

There were benefits to the participants and others for better classroom

management in the future. Participants in this study will get copies of a research

summary that contains results of the study after the results are approved. The findings

of the study will be shared with participants in appreciation of their assistance, so that

they can share the results with other teachers.

There were minimal risks in the conduct of this study. All respondents were

given information regarding the conduct of the study and they were informed of their

rights, which included the protection of confidentiality and the options of refusing to

participate or withdrawing without penalty through the use of the Informed Consent Form

(see Appendix H). Participants were not asked to provide names on questionnaires.

Confidentiality of the data was ensured because the research used ID numbers only to

indicate participants. The master code sheet with ID numbers and the names of the

participants remains in a safe location in the sole possession of the researcher, and this

information has not been shared with anyone.

217


The research received approval from the Lynn University IRB (see Appendix K).

As recommended by the IRB and standard researcher practices in higher education,

ownership of the data clearly rests with the researcher. The dissertation and the

presentation of the data reside in the Lynn University library. There were no factors

related to participant coercion, because all participants were volunteers. There were no

power differentials because the researcher was not a principal and did not work in a

junior high school. The researcher is a vocational school teacher who seeks classroom

management strategies and hopes to help all teachers, students, and society.

218


Never gives up on students

Is patient

u s a w t t Is helpful

Maintains self-esteem of students

Cooperates with parents

Offers parent education

imwmnm Communicates more with students and their parents

Seeks support and assistance

Takes part in teacher-parent meetings

Creates cooperative learning

Utilizes peer influence

Elects student of the year

s i i t t s Trains monitors

Transfers problem students to alternative school

Conveys expectations

mmmmijh Keeps records

Uses constructive punishment

Uses reinforcement

Praises merits in public

mill

nfi 1 Matches actions with words

£ * m Dresses professionally

txikm\ Is a role model

wmzmm Advocates lifelong learning

Sfc&BS&W Notices body language

Establishes professional image

Uses eye contact or proximity

g is w m Encourages self-evaluation

Leads students to pursue honor


Emphasizes responsibility

Develops internal control

Designs classroom space

MU®. Is humorous

in & B lf Emphasizes affective education

Shows the consequences

t I S i i i Teaches anti-violence

Teaches basic laws

Teaches conflict resolution

Teaches problem-solving skills

Employs individual goal-setting

Teaches appropriate behaviors

m&MM'r tM, Shapes desired behavior

Never uses corporal punishment

Trains emotional control

Is assertive

m m - m Is consistent

Considers diverse needs and abilities

Assists novice teachers

Focuses on prevention

Offers positive activities

m&mmm Encourages speaking up

m ^ w m % Listens and advises

8 * » £ £ J I* 3 l Knows students’ friends

Attends in-service training

Helps students plan career

Combines instruction, discipline, and guidance

Does not label students


'J '& K tf if rR J l Ignores minor misbehaviors

Is flexible

i f iP f ltS Handles emergent incident immediately

Avoids teacher lounge gossip

Plays many role

Cultivates civic values

mmnam Stresses homeroom teacher responsibilities


Appendix B

A Letter to the Principal

Dear Principal,You are admired and respected by all educators and I am one of them. I am a Ph.D.

student of Educational Leadership at Lynn University. I am conducting a research on effective classroom management strategies for decreasing the frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students. The results are only for the purpose of scholarly research, not for evaluating teachers. The proposal has already been approved by three committee members and 13 IRB members for implementation. I hope to get your permission to include your school’s teachers in this research. I cordially plead with you to recommend three expert homeroom teachers to participate. Your assistance is greatly appreciated and your devotion is regarded with high esteem.

Please recommend three expert homeroom teachers, who can meet the four criteria in the following form, from your school and write their names on the form so that they may be invited to participate. Finally, please return this form in the self-addressed stamped envelope that is enclosed. Again, thank you very much for your assistance.

May you be Auspicious.Best regards,

Meng-Ling Tsou E-mail: [email protected] TEL: 0927637900

A form for recommending expert junior high school homeroom teacher' ------ Teacher’s name and address

Criteria — —He/she is a certified full time teacher * * *He/she passes the evaluation of your professional judgment

* * *

He/she has at least three years of teaching experience

* * *

His/Her classes frequently win the student behavior contest

* * *

222


mailto:[email protected]

Appendix C The First Questionnaire

Do you agree that the following are the most frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students?5 = strongly agree, 4 = agree,3 = neither agree nor disagree,2 =s disagree, 1 = strongly disagree

Problem behaviors Stronglyagree

Agree Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree Stronglydisagree

Fighting 5 4 3 2 1Bullying 5 4 3 2 1Extortion 5 4 3 2 1Theft 5 4 3 2 1Vandalism 5 4 3 2 1Being late 5 4 3 2 1Truancy 5 4 3 2 1Leaving classroom without permission 5 4 3 2 1Smoking 5 4 3 2 1Using obscene or vulgar language 5 4 3 2 1Not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever

5 4 3 2 1

Refusing to obey teachers’ requests 5 4 3 2 1Talking back 5 4 3 2 1Cheating on exam 5 4 3 2 1Not staying seated 5 4 3 2 1Taping pencils or objects 5 4 3 2 1Reading what is not being taught 5 4 3 2 1Eating or chewing gum during class 5 4 3 2 1Sleeping during class 5 4 3 2 1Telling lies or deception 5 4 3 2 1Using cellular during class 5 4 3 2 1Writing and passing slips 5 4 3 2 1Being absent-minded during class 5 4 3 2 1Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework

5 4 3 2 1

Making noise or not keeping quiet 5 4 3 2 1Not bringing textbooks or stationery 5 4 3 2 1Not wearing uniform 5 4 3 2 1Not sitting up straight 5 4 3 2 1

223


Loafing on campus during lunchtime, siesta 5 4 3 2 1time, or cleaning time

If there are frequent problem behaviors that are not listed in the above, please write them down.(Only those that occur in the school, frequently occur, and their frequency can be measured)

224


Appendix D

The Second Questionnaire

Thank you for replying the first questionnaire. Results are as follows: the first five frequent problem behaviors are (1) not doing or turning in incomplete or delaying turning in or not bringing homework, (2) using obscene or vulgar language, (3) bullying, (4) not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever, (5) being absent-minded during class. I sincerely plead you to continue to participate and answer the second questionnaire. Because your precious successful strategies will be categorized and calculated, education needs your participation to build a better future.

Please write down strategies you have used and were found effective for addressing each of the following problem behaviors.Effective strategies I have used for addressing “Not doing, turning in incomplete, delaying turning in, or not bringing homework” are :_______________________________

Effective strategies I have used for addressing “using obscene or vulgar language” are :

Effective strategies I have used for addressing “bullying” are :

225


Effective strategies I have used for addressing “not cleaning classrooms or throwing trash wherever” are :

The effective strategies I have used for addressing “being absent-minded during class” a re :

Please answer the following questions, because they may influence your choice and use of classroom management strategies.Your gender: o female omale_______________________________________________Your age: o 24-44 o 45-65_______________________________________________Your education: o college o graduate school________________________________Years of teaching: o3-20 o 21-40___________________________________________

Ps. This questionnaire provides one or two weeks for thinking. Please send it back before December 15.Ps. You will receive two pens with the third questionnaire. If you don’t receive it before the end of December, please call 0927637900 or email [email protected]

226



Appendix E

The Third Questionnaire

Please rate the effectiveness of the following effective strategies.3 = very effective, 2 = effective, 1 = slightly effective.Problembehaviors

Effective strategies veryeffective

effective

slightlyeffective

1. Not doing, turning

in incom

plete, delaying turning

in, or not bringing hom

ework

Preventing problems 3 2 1Looking into causes 3 2 1Establishing rules or setting limits 3 2 1Issuing rewards and punishment 3 2 1Keeping records 3 2 1Exhorting and guiding 3 2 1Teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 3 2 1Assisting students in developing a sense of self 3 2 1Having the aid of other staff 3 2Constructing parent partnerships 3 2 1Utilizing peer influence 3 2 1Being a good model 3 2 1Using teacher power 3 2 1Supervising and instructing personally 3 2 1Building good relationships 3 2 1Handling problems instantly 3 2 1Being thoroughly persistent 3 2 1


Problembehaviors


effective

slightlyeffective

to Preventing problems 3 2 1

£ Looking into causes 3 2 1

E3 Establishing rules or setting limits 3 2 1CTQo Issuing rewards and punishment 3 2 1oc/3O Keeping records 3 2 1

s Exhorting and guiding 3 2 1o Teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 3 2 1

t Assisting students in developing a sense of self 3 2 1<kT Having the aid of other staff 3 2 1Rk—* Constructing parent partnerships 3 2 1

Oro Utilizing peer influence 3 2 1a Being a good model 3 2 1

(IQ0) Building good relationships 3 2 1

Handling problems instantly 3 2 1

Being thoroughly persistent 3 2 1

Weakening by extinction 3 2 1

Problembehaviors


effective

slightlyeffective

u> Fostering classroom climate 3 2 1cr* Preventing problems 3 2 1c

V Looking into causes 3 2 1Establishing rules 3 2 1Issuing rewards and punishment 3 2 1Keeping records 3 2 1Exhorting and guiding 3 2 1Teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 3 2 1Assisting students in developing a sense of self 3 2 1Having the aid of other staff 3 2 1Constructing parent partnerships 3 2 1Utilizing peer influence 3 2 1Being a good model 3 2 1Using teacher power 3 2 1Handling problems instantly 3 2 1Being thoroughly persistent 3 2 1Arranging seats 3 2 1


Problembehaviors


effective

slightlyeffective

4. not cleaning

classrooms or throwing

trash random

ly

Preventing problems 3 2 1Looking into causes 3 2 1Establishing rules or setting limits 3 2 1Issuing rewards and punishment 3 2 1Keeping records 3 2 1Exhorting and guiding 3 2 1Teaching new (appropriate) behaviors 3 2 1Assisting students in developing a sense of self 3 2 1Having the aid of other staff 3 2 1Constructing parent partnerships 3 2 1Governing by class leaders 3 2 1Utilizing peer influence 3 2 1Being a good model 3 2 1Using teacher power 3 2 1Supervising and instructing personally 3 2 1Building good relationships 3 2 1Handling instantly 3 2 1Thorough persistence 3 2 1

Problembehaviors


effective

slightlyeffective

Enhancing motive and interests 3 2 1Preventing problems 3 2 1

2 . Looking into causes 3 2 1CTQ Establishing rules 3 2 18* Issuing rewards and punishment 3 2 11 Keeping records 3 2 13 Exhorting and guiding 3 2 15a- Changing activities 3 2 1CDa* Oral or physical proximity 3 2 1Cl£ Constructing parent partnerships 3 2 1D.C3 Utilizing peer influence 3 2 1

09a Building good relationships 3 2 1pm Handling problems instantly 3 2 1

Arranging seats 3 2 1

If you have any suggestions, please advise.


Appendix F

Pilot Test Survey Instrument

Do you agree that the following are the most frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students?5 means strongly agree, 4 means agree,3 means neither agree nor disagree,2 means disagree, 1 means strongly disagreeProblem behaviors Strongly

agreeAgree Neither

agree nor disagree

Disagree Stronglydisagree

Bringing weapons to school 5 4 3 2 1Fighting 5 4 3 2 1Bullying 5 4 3 2 1Extortion 5 4 3 2 1Theft 5 4 3 2 1Vandalism 5 4 3 2 1Being late 5 4 3 2 1Truancy 5 4 3 2 1Smoking 5 4 3 2 1Drug abuse 5 4 3 2 1Alcohol abuse 5 4 3 2 1Not keeping clean 5 4 3 2 1Refusing to obey teachers’ requests 5 4 3 2 1Talking back 5 4 3 2 1Cheating on exam 5 4 3 2 1Not staying seated 5 4 3 2 1Taping pencils or objects 5 4 3 2 1Reading what is not being taught 5 4 3 2 1Eating or chewing gum during class 5 4 3 2 1Sleeping during class 5 4 3 2 1Listening to Walkman during class 5 4 3 2 1Using cellular during class 5 4 3 2 1Writing and passing slips 5 4 3 2 1Making noise or not keeping quiet 5 4 3 2 1Not bringing textbooks or homework 5 4 3 2 1Turning in incomplete homework 5 4 3 2 1Not wearing uniform 5 4 3 2 1Leaving classroom without permission 5 4 3 2 1

230


If there are frequent problem behaviors that are not listed in the above, please write them down.(Only those that occur in the school, frequently occur, and their frequency can be measured)

231


Appendix G

Translation Certification

A F F I D A V I T " V

I,L IS A Y U , SWEAR THAT I AM FLUENT WITH BOTH THE C H ifr &£€- AND LANGUAGES AND FURTHER SWEAR THAT TI

ATTACHED TRANSLATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE ORGIN

TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE.

LISA YU TRANSLATO

STATE OF FLORIDA )

COUNTY OF DADE )

SWORN AND SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME THIS

MAY l i 2Q84

icMY COMMISSION EXPRIRES:

ft ffltae ■

AUaaife Scs&ag Cb, &&

232

Reproduced with perrnission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Appendix H

INFORMED CONSENT FORM Lynn University

Ross College of Education and Human Services

Study Number: 2004-18

TitleClassroom Management Strategies for Addressing Behavior Problems from Expert Junior High School Teachers in Taiwan

Method3-round Conventional Delphi

Principal Investigator Meng-Ling Tsou

Introduction/Backgroxmd/PurposeYou are invited to volunteer for this research study because you are recommended

by your principal as an expert homeroom teacher. (Congratulations!) The purpose of this research is to discover effective classroom management strategies for addressing frequent problem behaviors of junior high school students. The expected duration of your total participation is 42 days. The approximate number of participants is at least 900.

ProceduresYou will sequentially receive three questionnaires during 42 days. The first

questionnaire includes several problem behaviors for you to rate their frequency. After you return the census and responses are computed, you will receive a second questionnaire that asks you to write down effective strategies that you have used to decrease the problem behaviors. The third questionnaire will follow that will ask you to rank the effectiveness of strategies that are contributed by all expert homeroom teachers.

You will not interact with other subjects of this research. All questionnaires are sent by mail. Please sign and return this form (for informed consent) within three (3) days, and you will receive the first questionnaire soon after. Please complete it and return it

233


within seven (7) days. When you receive the second questionnaire, please complete it and return it within seven (7) days. You will then receive the third questionnaire. Please complete it and return it within seven (7) days. A stamped envelope will be included in each mailing for the return of your response.

The study will be conducted over a 42 days period, but you may only need a few minutes to fill out each of the questionnaires.

RisksThere are possibly minor risks and there may be a slight inconvenience to you,

because you need to spend a little time filling out the surveys. I am sorry and your participation will be highly appreciated.

BenefitsThere is only a small gift. You will, however, be informed of the results of this

research firstly. There are benefits to society and the field of education. Other non-expert homeroom teachers may use your strategies to improve student behaviors in their classroom.

Voluntary Participation and WithdrawalParticipation in research is voluntary. Refusal to participate will involve no

penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may discontinue participation at any time without penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled.

Confidentiality of records identifying you will be maintained to the extent allowed by laws (Code of Federal Regulations of the U.S. and Civic Law of Taiwan). An identification (ID) number will replace your name on study records. Your name and other facts that might point to you will not appear when this study is presented or its results are published.

Contact PersonsIf you have questions or concerns about your rights as a participant in this

research study, please contact Meng-Ling Tsou (a Ph.D. student in the Educational Leadership program of Lynn University, Boca Raton, Florida, USA, and a teacher of National I-Lan University affiliated Vocational School), who may be reached at 0927637900, or [email protected] or the researcher’s advisor Dr. Frederick Dembowski

234



whom can be reached at 561-237785 or [email protected]

SignatureIf you are willing to volunteer for this research study, please sign below and mail

it back with the return envelop that is enclosed. (Please keep a copy of it yourself.)

Subject Signature Date

Researcher Signature Date

Ps. No matter you are willing to participate or not, it is highly appreciated that you take the time to read this form.

235



Appendix I

A Letter of Employment

NATIONAL ILAN UNIVERSITY 1, Sec. 1, Shen-Nong Road, Yilan City, 260, Taiwan, R.O.C.

TEL: (03)9357400 www.niu.edu.tw

3601, N. Military Trail Boca Raton, FL, 33431 U.S.A.TEL: (561)2377303 www.lvnn.edu

April 26, 2005

A Letter of Employment

To whom it may concern,

It is certified that Meng-Ling (Mindy) Tsou has been employed full-time as an English teacher in Vocational School affiliated with National I-Lan University since 1996.

Best regards,

Michael R.S. Liu PRESIDENT

236


http://www.niu.edu.tw

http://www.lvnn.edu

Appendix J

Explanation of Every Strategy of the Third Questionnaire (This explains the way I categorize and allows teachers to share strategies together.)

2ooh -* •

13(TP

13era ‘ • 3B’oO

apO-ro,

5'QTQ

13eraB‘o3OC "F

or*3.3era3

OPtro3%o

Preventingproblems

Teaching students how to do their homework/conveying my expectation in my first class meeting/getting students into the habit of doing homework/putting reminders in the contact books/orally reminding students of schedules in advance/asking students to remind each other/not giving too much homework/decreasing the difficulty of homework/accompanying students and instructing them how to do homework/training students to have good daily habits/giving out rules in the beginning of the school year/asking students from the first grade/reminding in advance those who often misbehave/instilling correct ideas in students’ minds in a new class/reminding students of penalties in advance/getting students into good habits in the first grade/practicing difficult lessons in the class and leaving the easy lessons for homework/questions of midterm or final exam should come from questions in the students’ homework/...______

Looking into causes

Having interviews with students when looking into causes/finding reasons why the student does not do homework/asking students the reason for not doing homework/looking for reasons/...______

Establishing rules or setting limits

Conveying the rules clearly/giving out punishment according to classroom rules/making the rules/asking for agreement of the classroom rules in advance/making rules in class meetings/establishing game rules clearly in advance/establishing rules together with students /setting the rules of rewards and punishment/deciding the penalties/setting limits/setting a deadline for turning in homework/announcing a deadline/deciding the deadline according to different conditions/not allowing students to make the same mistake more than three times in one semester/

Keepingrecords

Keeping records to see if students are improving/keeping records as proof to parents/doing follow-ups/keeping a record book/writing down the number of mistakes when issuing rewards or punishment/...________________________________________

237


Issuing rewards and punishment

Asking students to do homework during the break or after school/asking students to copy books/reducing the grade/asking students to do homework again/record demerits/spanking/beating the student’s palm with a stick/making students stand as punishment and keeping students kneeling as punishment/asking students to write more homework/reprimanding students/having them do push-ups/having them clean the trash can for one week/rewarding those who are earnest/giving after-school detention/taking away the privilege of taking a break or taking favorite classes/asking students to be on duty for a week/tearing pages off and asking the student to write it again/punishing students by giving a fine/giving earnest students cards in which they can accumulate points/adding a point to good students for each good behavior/canceling students’ benefits/punishing students severely/reducing their grade according to how many days the students delay in turning in their homework/giving students one more chance to change mistakes/punishing according to the number of times the student makes the same mistake/reducing 5 points each time until the score becomes zero/hitting students N times for each mistake/punishing students severely when they make the same mistake again/Asking students to write homework at school and during holidays/...

Exhorting and guiding

Orally exhorting and guiding/admonishing/encouraging students to improve/warmly exhorting and guiding/telling students teachers’ concerns/exhorting and guiding students individually/ interviewing students individually/cultivating students’ attitudes towards keeping promises/emphasizing the importance of “not putting off for tomorrow what you can do today’Vexplaining the purpose of learning/...

Teaching new(appropriate)behaviors

Teaching students to use contact books and to check their satchels before bedtime/...

Assisting students in developing a sense of self

Letting students decide on the deadline of turning in their homework/seeking agreement/asking students to fill in a self-questioning form/...

Referral to other staff

The Academic Office is involved in examining students’ homework regularly/sending the names of offender to the Student Affairs Office/asking the Dean of Student Affairs to assist/asking homeroom teachers to push students/asking students to do their homework before referring them to the Academic Office/...


Constructingparentpartnerships

Informing parents/asking parents to help supervise their children/asking parents to send their kids’ homework to school in person/calling parents/asking parents to be concerned for their kids more/reminding parents of the importance of family education/communicating with parents/asking parents to be concerned for their kids’ homework/asking parents to help remind kids of their homework/asking parents to take notice of situations/asking parents to come to school for discussions/asking parents to check their kids’ homework/letting parents understand the reason why their kids are assigned to after-school detention/asking parents to accompany their kids in doing homework/...

Utilizing peer influence

Assigning teachers’ pets to examine homework/asking group leaders to remind students of their homework/dividing students into several groups/posting good homework on the bulletin board/making students promise to improve in public/asking class leaders to remind students/asking class monitors to handle situations/making up contests of homework/asking teachers’ pets to help other students do their homework/utilizing peers to pile pressure on others/asking students to imitate good homework/asking teachers’ pets to call up students after school in order to remind them of homework/telling students that class funds increase by the fine/assigning several students to take charge of homework in each subject/reducing the grade of a group instead of an individual/

Being a good model

Never delaying at doing anything/grading students’ homework immediately/

Using teacher Owing students into obedience/...powerSupervising and instructing in person

Teaching students individually/accompanying students in doing their homework/watching students while they are asked to do their homework/asking students to do their homework at teachers’ homes on holidays/watching over students until they finish/teaching students how to do homework/sitting beside students to supervise/...

Building good relationships

Moving students with teachers’ love/...

Handlingproblemsinstantly

Rewarding students instantly when they improve/handling it in the meantime/...


Beingthoroughlypersistent

Being firm/pushing students every day/insisting patiently and with love/asking students to obey all the requests of teachers/insisting on getting students’ homework/frequently asking students to turn in homework until it is done/accompanying students in doing their homework until it is done/being assertive/...__________________________________

K>cVIB'00ocrv>Oo>E3OoIt

00n

•Sp00<5

Preventingproblems

Admonishing students to use good words during orientation/explaining the classroom rules clearly in the first day/writing “no obscene and vulgar language” on the board as a warning/noticing students’ words frequently/instructing students frequently/establishing a class library to help students learn words gracefully/asking parents to go to the school when issuing punishment to their child/..._______________________________

Looking into causes

Diagnosing students’ growth environment/knowing sources so that students can leam/knowing the way the students’ family communicates/knowing the students’ friends and how the family teaches them/asking students the purpose and what they really want to express/listening to students’ explanation/directly asking students the reason/knowing the environment of the families and the type of friends of the students/...________________________

Establishing rules or setting limits

Establishing the rules with students/making rules in advance/letting students make the rules themselves/establishing classroom rules/making clear rules /setting the standard in issuing punishment/forgiving students who are not well-bred and asking well-bred students to behave better so that their family would be proud of them/announcing that penalty is heavier in the second offence/asking students to control their mouth by having only movement but no sound/using big stick tactics/...______________

240



Distinguishing rewards from punishment clearly/asking students to write “I don’t use obscene and vulgar language anymore” one hundred times/asking students to shout ”Mom, I am wrong,” in the direction of their homes/asking students to wash their mouths/punishing students by making them copy good words from classic books/punishing students by making them copy classroom rules/asking students to memorize good words from classic books/asking students to memorize discipline rules from classic books/asking students to find good words as a compensation for them saying bad words/prohibiting students to speak for one day/assigning tiring work to students/hitting the student’s palm with sticks/punishing students by making them copy their dirty words a thousand times/asking students to slap their own faces ten times/asking students to jump like a frog several times/spanking/punishing students by fining them/asking students to brush teeth their by consuming toothpaste/asking students to help others as compensation/asking students to memorize poetry and articles/punishing one student to warn another/asking the student to apologize to all his/her classmates/punishing students according to school rules/recording demerits/asking students to act as a Minister of the Etiquette/reducing the conduct grade of students/rewarding those who improve/hanging a board in which the student’s misbehaviors are written on the student’s neck/posting a strip of colorful tape on the student/asking the student to replace bad words with good words/asking student to wear mouth-muffles/prohibiting students to take a break/giving students slight and temporary pains/asking students to memorize classical poetry/asking students to do exercises/asking students to do push-ups/asking students to jump several times/rewarding students who never make the same mistake again/increasing penalties to those who repeatedly make the same mistake/repeating the students’ dirty words sarcastically to make them uncomfortably/replying “xxx, I love you.” to frighten students/...

Keepingrecords

Recording the frequency of occurrences/using a tape recorder during class/keeping records of schedules, places, and events/keeping records/recording number of misbehaviors/letting students elect the one who makes mistakes most frequently/recording whether conditions improve or get worse/...

241



Persuading students in private/interviewing/instructing students to understand principles/analyzingconsequences/communication/tenderly exhorting/telling students that the school is a place for learning to say good words/explaining principles/patiently exhorting/giving individual interviews/telling students that their mistakes may violate the law/asking students to feel how unpleasant others feel/exhorting and guiding in private/communicating to help students understand what is right/instructing students to tell right from wrong/giving moral education/telling students the correct way to get along with each other/using examples on newspapers or articles to demonstrate good manners/instilling correct concepts/teaching students sex education and respect/telling students that only the dirty mouth has vulgar language/telling students that only immature people use obscene language/telling students that people dislike bad language/telling students that it humiliates their parents/using stories or articles to guide students/telling students an educated person should have good manners/telling students that it disrespects themselves and others/it is shameful and irresponsible/explaining how inappropriate words hurt others/changing behaviors by changing the cognition/teaching health education/teaching correct concepts/using examples of political people to teach students correct judgment/explaining the correct concept of sex/guiding by creating better understanding in public/saying that inappropriate language is a kind of violence/...


Asking students to act like an educated person/advocate saying good words/training students to not use inappropriate language to win respect/telling students not to be a vulgar person/teaching students to be a respectful person/asking students to calm down and express their feelings instead of yelling/asking students to think of five good words/teaching students formal and elegant language/teaching students to gain respect by speaking politely/teaching students to respect each other/asking one sex to learn to respect the other sex/teaching students other words to replace vulgar ones/orally correcting students’ mistakes/...______


Letting students discuss what should be done/letting students find their own faults in class meetings/letting students write down their own mistakes/letting students fill in the form that can help evaluate their own behaviors/letting students write down how regretful they are/asking students to write down their feelings/recording their words for them to listen to/asking students to evaluate their own behaviors/...

242


Referral to Asking female students to tell the males about the uncomfortableother staff feeling of hearing obscene language/sending students to the

counselor/informing the Student Affairs Office about students’ names/informing their homeroom teacher regarding situations/asking the counselor to assist/asking Health Education teachers to help/...


Notifying parents/contacting parents immediately/communicating with parents/asking parents to go to school to discuss the problem with their child/telling parents the condition of their child/asking students to call their parents and repeat the obscene or vulgar word/letting parents know/contacting parents/asking parents to assist/visiting parents/asking parents to help restrain their kids/discussing with parents how to handle their child’s problem/...


Asking students to speak up while they hear bad language/providing good students as models/letting students criticize their classmates/asking good students to monitor the class/electing a Student with the Best Manner/asking students to criticize and monitor an offender/asking students not to make friends with the classmates /asking all students to monitor other students/asking students to watch out for one another/electing a Student Who Uses Good Words/dividing students into several groups and holding contests/encouraging students to inform against an offender/discussing problems in classmeetings/blaming problem students by using peer power/... ■

Being a good model

Establishing a positive image/demonstrating the correct way of treating others for students to imitate/telling students that the teacher’s wife never hears any dirty words/...


Moving students with love/forgiving students through understanding/...


Asking students on the spot not to do mistakes again/contacting parents immediately/correcting students’ mistakes in front of them/disciplining students in time/strictly stopping mistakes on the spot/criticizing students with humor/punishing students immediately/...

Beingthoroughlypersistent

Strictly prohibiting students/exhorting and guiding students repeatedly/constantly instilling correct concepts in the minds of students/being firm and stem/teaching students untiringly and changing them continuously/following-up on students/...

Weakening by extinction

Not responding/letting students feel silly/pretending to be deaf/refusing to react to mistakes/pretending to be deaf and dumb/ignoring mistakes sometimes/pretending to not understand students’ words/not paying attention and not responding to them/...

243


3. bullying

Fosteringclassroomclimate

Teaching students to help one another/posting concern cards on the bulletin board/reminding students to take care of one another/using cooperative learning methods/designing activities that increases understanding and love/announcing that the class is like a family and classmates are brothers and sisters/strengthening the freemasonry of students/creating opportunities for students to build good relationships with one another/encouraging students to cooperate and unite/fostering a friendly atmosphere and a happy classroom climate/building a kind and helpful classroom climate/advocating precious relationships/having a happy learning climate/discussing in class meetings/moving students’ attention to focus on studying/changing students in order to increase relationships/...

Preventingproblems

Changing students’ minds in advance/managing students with love to prevent problems/interacting with students with fairness and democracy/observing students’ behaviors (those who are bullied reveal unhappiness)/telling students to love one another during orientation/asking class monitors to watch out for their classmates/making them pay attention to an upcoming consequence/...

Looking into causes

Finding their motives/seeing if students have done anything to cause hatred/understanding personality and the habit of both sides/knowing the reasons and conditions/listening to the reason why the one who bullies hates the one who is bullied/the one who is bullied may be mistaken for one who is betraying friends/...

Establishingrules

Establishing rules in advance/punishing old offenders/...


Encouraging the well-behaved/issuing moderate punishment/only punishing those who fight/using a demerit system/hitting the palm with sticks/issuing appropriate punishment/issuing double punishment to those who bully at the back of teachers/punishing using school rules/punishing students by making them stand during class/punishing students according to school rules/...

Keepingrecords

recording/long-term counseling/keeping records/...



Communicating to solve problems of two sides/instructing students to understand what is right/using moral persuasion/telling students to treat others the way they hope to be treated/using individual counseling/making two sides communicate and become friends/asking the one who is wrong to apologize/group counseling/individual counseling/teaching students to understand others’ feelings/using empathy skills to counsel students/using empathy activities/helping the one who is bullied to rebuild confidence/exhorting and guiding in private/using individual interviews/discussing with both sides present/counseling two sides together/telling students that they should respect each other/instructing students using religion/arousing the students’ kind nature and love for one another/telling students that every one has advantages and disadvantages/warning students of the retributions for sin/telling students that it is shameful to bully/every one is equal and those who hurt others will be hurt/comforting, supporting, and communicating with students/teaching students the law/telling students the importance of cooperation/...


Teaching students how to respect others/asking students to remove prejudice/teaching students to reflect on themselves and treat others friendly/instructing students to make friends with others/teaching students to be merciful/helping students build good relationships gradually/telling students to maintain a distance from each other for the sake of politeness/teaching students how to protect themselves and how to reflect on themselves/designing a plan for them to improve step by step/providing students with the correct methods to solve problems/not hurting others, even if you don’t like them/teaching students to be warm and broad-minded people/telling students to treasure the chance of being together in a class/telling students to respect each others’ lives/teaching students to express unhappy feelings when bullying occurs/letting students do exercises to consume their extra energy/letting students serve others and gain the feedback of appreciation/instructing students to explore others’ advantages/arousing the students’ pity for the weak/telling students to explore the merits of the one who is bullied/...


Asking students to judge their own behaviors/asking students to think why they are bullied/explaining and then asking students to reflect on themselves/asking students to find an article about how to appreciate others and write down their meditation on the subject/making the one who bullies others sit alone in the comer of the classroom/asking students to write down their regrets/...



Solving the problem with another teachers/asking the Student Affairs Office to help handle the situation/sending students to the counseling office/transferring students to other classes/transferring students to special education system when necessary/cooperating with counselors to counsel students/seeking assistance from counselors or doctors/sending students to the Student Affairs Office to receive their demerits/asking the Counseling Office and the Student Affairs Office to assist/asking counselors to counsel students/notifying the Student Affairs Office and the Counseling Office/arranging students to transfer to another school when necessary/...


Notifying parents/asking parents to go to the school to solve problems/calling parents/informing parents when situations get worse/inviting parents of two sides to meet together at school/asking parents of two sides to come together to discuss problems/...


Cracking down on students by using public opinion/solving the problem together in class meetings/asking those who are popular to get close to the one who is bullied/asking students to report to teachers whenever they find something/finding someone to help the one who is bullied/arranging students to make friends with the one who is bullied/asking class leaders to help the one who is bullied/encouraging good and gentle students to first accept the one who is bullied/asking students who are kind and easy to cooperate with to assist the one who is bullied/asking those who are popular to help the one who is bullied/utilizing peer strength to restrain the one who bullies others/finding docile students to accompany the one who is bullied/asking justice students to help/advocating peace in public/utilizing the power of peers to reprimand students/arranging for well-behaved students to accompany the one who is bullied to inform teachers immediately when bullying happens/asking loving or enthusiastic students to assist/...

Being a good model

Finding a chance to praise students/being concerned more with those who are bullied/caring more/being compassionate/providing more concerns/respecting others/accepting every individual’s personality/love and patience/protecting the weak group/providing more concern and care/...

Using teacher power

Separating those who like to bully from those who don’t/assigning one who bullies to protect one who is often bullied/homeroom teachers must solve the dispute/homeroom teacher must be a strong mediator/telling students that bullying classmates is equal to bullying teachers/telling students that homeroom teachers forbid it/conveying that teachers expect students to improve their relationships/...

246


Handling Stopping bully immediately when finding them/being concernedproblems for students and stopping the bully at once/not letting matters getinstantly worse/reminding students frequently/homeroom teachers must

handle problems at once/handling problems on the spot/...Being Patiently solve problems until both sides can peacefully get alongthoroughly with each other/never tiring to remind students again andpersistent again/tracing the development of the students and keeping

continuous counseling/noticing the reaction of both sides/...Managing seats Arranging so that the one who bullies sits beside the one who is

bullied/arranging gentle students to sit around the one who is bullied/arranging seats/arranging special seats for students/making them sit separate from one another/...

4̂ Preventing Making every student responsible for the cleanness of the areaE3O problems around their seats/adjusting the cleanup task for eacho student/examining if the allotment of cleaning tasks iscT reasonable/assigning cleaning tasks clearly/making sure that theS3 allotment of cleaning tasks is clear and fair/allotting the cleaningera area near me to those who are lazy/letting students choose their13“Ol favorite cleaning task/keeping the area around the wastebasketOP* clean can prevent students from throwing trash aroundCfiCOIt it/reminding students frequently about cleaning/providingOO students more cleaning choices/assigning cleaning tasks3o according to the student personality/selecting an excellent clean

crew leader/allowing students to choose their favorite cleaningI area/setting a day for major cleaning/establishing classroom ruless . in the beginning/making sure the cleaning tools are£3era workable/watching out for every student in the? beginning/teachers must strictly monitor students during the firstCOST* two weeks of the school year, and if the students have good13“ habits, they will clean the classroom automatically/dividings students into two groups - one to clean the classroom in the

§ morning, the other to clean it in the afternoon/...Looking into Knowing the reason first/knowing motives/if students cannot docauses their tasks, it is because students are not willing to do it, or that

they don’t have enough time to finish cleaning because they play too much/students may be spoiled at home or are very lazy/...

Establishing Making classroom rules/establishing rules in advance in therules or set class/deciding the penalty with students/not asking too much oflimits students because students diverse/clarifying the teacher’s

standard/making the limit clear to the students/...



Rewarding those who achieve goals and win contests/rewarding more those who are earnest/punishing students by making them pick up trash on campus for a week/asking students to clean the classroom during the breaks, siesta time, or favorite classes/punishing students by assigning double tasks/hitting the palm with sticks/reducing the conduct grade/punishing students to stand in front of a trash can during the break/awarding enthusiasm through prizes/asking students to pick up all the trash in the school/asking students to pay fines for the class fund/asking students to clean the school after school/punishing students to run around the schoolyard several times/punishing students by putting them on duty for one week/placing the trash can beside the student’s seat/increasing students’ tasks/awarding cleanness citations/warning and reprimanding/asking students to clean the teacher’s office/punishing students by asking them to inform against next offenders/asking students to clean the school during weekends/rewarding those who improve/allowing those who clean the best to choose their own cleaning area/asking students to stand and read at the hall during the break/adding scores to whistle blowers/punishing students by asking them to clean the area they hate the most/asking students to carry lunch boxes (if they don’t do it, the whole class will have no lunch to eat)/punishing old offenders/..._____________________________

Keepingrecords

Recording the frequency of students’ mistakes/filling in and checking forms everyday/recording students’ mistakes in contact books/writing down in secret the names of those who don’t clean/hiding to observe the students’ performance or suddenly appearing to catch the offenders/asking class monitors to record students’ mistakes/writing names of offenders in record form/...


Changing students’ hearts by moral admonition/advocating the importance of class honors/telling students that it influences the emotion of everyone in the class/telling students to show that they are of good breeding/strengthening students’ responsibilities/guiding students’ concepts/telling students that throwing trash anywhere is without public-mindedness/telling students that the cleanness of a class is like the cleanness of a family/a clean environment is pleasant/telling students that they should work together and have responsibilities/telling students that picking up the trash others throw is picking up luck/pushing students to pursue class honors/telling students that everyone has a responsibility to clean the environment/..._________________


Teaching students how to clean/instructing and showing students how to clean/increasing the responsibility of the class leaders/demonstrating how to clean in person/...______________

248



Writing down the students’ mistakes/asking students to choose the penalty for themselves/making them write down the promise of improving/making them pick up trash on campus and having them write down how they feel/...


Sending names of offenders to the Clean-up Department for punishment/sending students to the Student Affairs Office/asking the Student Affairs Office to execute penalty after school/...


Contacting parents frequently/contacting old offenders/asking parents to cooperate to monitor their child/sending records of students’ performance to parents/...

Governing by class leaders

Asking the clean crew leader to be in charge of the class cleanliness/it is important to select a good clean crew leader/assigning a monitor to take charge of every cleaning area/assigning a student to monitor his/her own cleaning area/assigning a responsible student to supervise cleaning/authorizing the clean crew leader to examine cleaning areas/asking class monitors to record the names of offenders/...


Asking students to discipline each other/using peer pressure/sometimes punishing the whole class/punishing the clean crew leader/punishing a group of students instead of only the one who does not clean/encouraging whistle-blowing/telling students the misbehavior is invidious/holding group contests/asking each student to write a list of earnest and lazy students/assigning a student who can monitor to be in the same group with one who does not often clean/asking students to help each other/training students to persuade offenders to behave better/asking the offenders’ closest friends to help clean for him/her/discussing cleaning in class meetings/training students to help each other at any time/...

Being a good model

Being a good model/being earnest in accompanying students/leading students to clean without being afraid of being dirty/picking up trash frequently to lead students to imitate you/cleaning the classroom with students/being surly on the spot/supervising or demonstrating cleaning in person/keeping teachers’ desks clean frequently/being a pleasant and devoted teacher/...

Using teacher power

Having the power to order many students to rush and pick up trash immediately/...

Supervising and instructing in person

Supervising students/observing on the spot/examining students at any time/monitoring students on the spot/frequently inspecting whether students are cleaning up/accompanying students until they finish cleaning/instructing students/keeping an eye on students closely/...


Encouraging more and blaming less/helping students by cleaning with them/cleaning with students to build close relationships/...

249



Correcting mistakes immediately/punishing immediately/... •

Bing Teaching frequently and continuously/reminding studentsthoroughly untiringly/forming students’ habits day by day/keeping onpersistent reminding to make the one who is difficult to change

change/preaching frequently/frequently reminding and warning/earnestly supervising students/keeping on supervising/reminding students repeatedly/preaching until students clean up to escape from being preached/examining students again and again/frequently grading students/teachers must stop the problem otherwise students gradually do not clean up any more/not yielding to students/keeping an eye on students closely until they clean classroom clearly/never stopping until the students improve/...

y\ Enhancing Using simple questions to enhance students’ interests andB. motives and willingness to leam/playing jokes on students frequently/makingCTQ interests teaching materials interesting and lively/using different teaching

methods/adding interesting stories/using auxiliary

s materials/mentioning issues that concern students/varying1B3

teaching methods/being familiar with various teachingapproaches/making students exercise or play games/making

CDCl topics lively and relevant to daily life/playing games or singing songs/using teaching supplies/interacting with students by asking and answering questions/discussing with the class/play-acting/using body language to attract students/making the lessons attractive/rewarding students who can forestall to answer questions/using multimedia/changing teaching methods or activities/chatting with students about life experiences/being humorous at the appropriate time/playing jokes/using students as protagonists to play a joke/using various ways to teach/sometimes using funny things to make students laugh/“Oh taking back your soul that is flying away”/ teaching contents must be humorous and interesting/walking beside students and singing songs (e.g. How I love you)/...


Preventingproblems

Asking students to pull the chairs near their desks as their eyes follow their teachers’ movements in the beginning of every class/designing activities that every students must engage in/asking students questions to increase the scores of those who have the right answers/walking in-between seats/asking students to sit up straight/letting students use both hands and brains/lfequently inspecting learning situations in person/announcing that the next test will include what is currently being taught/designing activities for students to do with their hands, to write with their pens, and to answer with their mouth/asking students questions frequently during class/warning students not to do bad behavior again/being earnest in class and being tough in teaching/the tone shouldn’t be too low/paying attention to students and providing more chance for them to talk/asking students to underline the important parts in their textbook/asking questions frequently and asking students to answer/...

Looking into Finding if there is something that bothers students or if they havecauses difficulties in learning/knowing the problems that students

face/being concerned about their health/knowing why they are not able to understand or are uninterested in class/there may be something that bothers them/asking students the reason why they are absent-minded after class/finding if students have difficulties in learning/students may have burned the midnight oil last night/the student may be in love with someone/students may have no interest in the lesson, dislike the teacher, or worry about their relationships/...

Establishing Making the rules in advance/asking students not to give up onrules learning/...Issuing rewards Giving after-school retention/asking students to stand up forand punishment several minutes during class/asking students to stand at the back

of the classroom during class/students who are not able to answer questions cannot go back to sit/asking the student to stand up to read a book’s content/asking students to complete a tiring task after school like copying articles/asking students to stand for five minutes/reducing their grade/punishing students to copy the teaching content/punishing students to repeat standing and crouching several times/it is necessary to encourage and praise students after punishing them/using a card where they can accumulate points/...

Keepingrecords

Keeping on observing/...



Counseling students after class/telling students about the hardships of the teacher and the importance of progress/asking students to respect teachers more/communicating with students to help them improve/encouraging students to do what they are interested ml...

Changingactivities

Asking the student to go to the platform and blackboard to practice/asking students to pull their chairs and sit up straight/stopping teaching to lead students to take exercises/asking students to repeat after the teacher/asking student to wash their faces/asking the student to repeat what they are being taught/asking students to take notes/asking student to erase the blackboard/asking students who sit around the one who is absent-minded to answer questions/asking the studentsquestions several times/giving out a quiz immediately/- ■ ■

Oral or physical proximity

Directly calling students/walking towards students/looking at students/suddenly making a loud noise/suddenly speaking loudly/tapping students’ shoulders gently/knocking on students’ desks/chatting with students for a while/suddenly stopping speaking/not directly pointing the student out (e.g. saying “Let’s find a person who is absent-minded.”)/playing a joke on students/teaching while walking towards the student/hinting at students to admire the funny facial expression of the one who is absent-minded/knocking on the student’s desk once/...

Constructing Frequently communicating with parents about their child’sparentpartnerships

condition/- ■ ■


Asking everyone to remind each other frequently/taking students to contests to compete and improve/asking nearby students to act as reminders/using cooperative learning methods/...


Leading students to follow all requests/good relationships can solve every problem/“Don’t you see how earnest I am? How can you break the heart of a beautiful old lady?”/ “Sorry, my teaching cannot attract you.”/ ...

Handlinginstantly

Handling instantly/...

Managing seats Making students to move to sit in the first row/asking the student to sit beside the lectern/changing the students’ seats/...

Thanks to every expert teacher. The result of the questionnaire 3 will be posted at http://groups.msn.com/MindysHAPPYfamily/ (There is no control and it is open for anyone to discuss. Please click on “messages”. Welcome to this Website!) Happy New Year & may you work happily & I hope that everything is going well with you.

252


http://groups.msn.com/MindysHAPPYfamily/

Appendix K

IRB Approval Letter

June 9, 2004

Meng-Ling Tsou 550 NW 39th Terrace Deerfield Beach, FL 33442

Re: 2004-018

Dear Ms. Ling,

Your proposal entitled “Classroom Management Strategies for Addressing Discipline

Problems from Expert Junior High School Teachers in Taiwan,” has been reviewed and

approved by the Institutional Review Board with the following recommendations:

1. In the Research Protocol section 2, the benefits and risks involved with the

study should be stated as minimal.

2. In the Research Protocol section 2/J, it should be stated that in case of any

adverse events the events will be reported to the IRB.

3. The Informed Consent Form must follow the Guidelines for Writing Informed

Consent Documents. Do not include sponsor, risks-benefits; add duration of

253


the research project and add Dr. Dembowski’s name as a contact person.

Indicate that there will be a stamped envelope for each mailing material.

4. The letter to the principals should be revised. The content of the letter should

include permission for conducting the research.

Please consult Dr. Dembowski for further clarification.

Please provide me with a copy of the revised research protocol, consent forms, and the permission letter. If you have any questions, please call me at 561-237-7847

Sincerely,Farideh Farazmand, Ph.D.Institutional Review Board, Chair

cc. Dr. Dembowski Dissertation Chair


References

Alexander, K., Alexander, M. D. & Alexander, D. (2001). American public school

law (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: West/Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Algozzine, B & Kay, P. (Eds.). (2002). Preventing problem behaviors: A handbook

o f successful prevention strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press,

Council for Exceptional Children.

Anonymous (1997). Backtalk. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(1), 95-95. Retrieved June

10, 2004, from ProQuest database.

Baker, W. P., Lang, M. & Lawson, A. E. (2002). Classroom management for

successful student inquiry. The Clearing House, 75(5), 248-252.

Barton-Arwood, S. M., Wehby, J. H., Gunter, P. L. & Lane, K. L. (2003).

Functional behavior assessment rating scales: Intrarater reliability with students

with emotional or behavioral disorders. Behavioral Disorders, 28(4),

386-400.

Belvel, P. S. & Jordan, M. M. (2003). Rethinking classroom management:

Strategies for prevention, intervention, and problem solving. Thousand Oaks,

CA: Corwin Press, Inc.

255


Bender, G. (2001). Resisting dominance? The study of a marginalized masculinity

and its construction. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in schools: A

challenge to American democracy (pp. 61-78). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

Birch, D. A., Duplaga, C., Seabert, D. M. & Wilbur, K. M. (2001). What do master

teachers consider important in professional preparation for school health

education? The Journal o f School Health, 77(2), 56-60.

Block, C. C., Oakar, M. & Hurt, N. (2002). The expertise of literacy teachers: A

continuum from preschool to grade 5. Reading Research Quarterly, 37(2),

178-206.

Bowles, N. (1999). Jhe Delphi Technique. Nursing Standard, 75(45), 32-36.

Bowman, C. P. (2002). Discipline strategies from successful teachers of African

American adolescents. Dissertation Abstracts International, Spalding

University, Kentucky. (UMI No. 3065638)

Brinton, M. C. (2004). Learning to be adolescent: Growing up in U.S. and Japanese

middle schools. Contemporary Sociology, 33(1), 98-99. Retrieved May 7,

2004, from ProQuest database


Brophy, J. (1999). Perspectives of classroom management: Yesterday, today, and

tomorrow. In J. J. Freiberg, (Ed.), Beyond behaviorism: Changing the

classroom management paradigm (pp. 43-55). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Browne, J. A. (2002). The ABC of school discipline. In W. Ayers, B. Dohm & R.

Ayers. (Eds.), Zero tolerance: Resisting the drive for punishment in our schools

(pp. 188-201). New York: New Press.

Brownell, M. T. & Walther-Thomas, C. (2002). An interview with Dr. Michael

Rosenberg: Preventing school discipline problems schoolwide. Intervention in

School and Clinic, 35(2), 108-112.

Bucher, K. T. & Manning, M. L. (2001). Exploring the foundations of middle

school classroom management. Childhood Education, 78(2), 84-90.

Bucher, K. T. & Manning, M. L. (2003). Challenges and suggestions for safe

schools. The Clearing House, 76(3), 160-164.

Burstyn, J. N. (2001a). Violence and its prevention: A challenge for schools. In J.

N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in schools: A challenge to American

democracy, (pp. 1-14). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

Burstyn J. N. (2001b). The challenge for schools: To prevent violence while


nurturing democracy. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in schools:

A challenge to American democracy (pp. 225-234). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

Burstyn, J. N. & Stevens, R. (2001). Involving the whole school in violence

prevention. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in schools: A


Cancio, E. J., West, R. R & Young, K. R. (2004). Improving mathematics

homework completion and accuracy o f students with EBD through

self-management and parent participation. Journal o f Emotional and

Behavioral Disorders, 12(1), 9-22.

Cannon, R. M. (2002). Music student teaching in Texas: A Delphi study of issues in

the new millennium. Dissertation Abstract International, University o f North

Texas. (UMI No. 3076235)

Casella, R. (2001a). Being down: Challenging violence in urban schools. New

York: Teachers College, Columbia University.

Casella, R. (2001b). What is violent about “school violence”? The nature of

violence in a city high school. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in

schools: A challenge to American democracy (pp. 15-46). Mahwah, NJ: L.


Erlbaum.

Casella, R. (2001c). The cultural foundations o f peer mediation: Beyond a

behaviorist model o f urban school conflict. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing

violence in schools: A challenge to American democracy (pp. 159-180).

Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

Chambliss, J. J. (Ed.). (1996). Philosophy o f education: An encyclopedia. New

York: Garland Pub.

Chen, K., Chen, C., Fagot-Campagna, A. & Narayan, K. M. (2001). Tobacco, betel

quid, alcohol, and illicit drug use among 13-to 35-year-olds in I-Lan, rural

Taiwan: Prevalence and risk factors. American Journal o f Public Health,

91(1), 1130-1135.

Cheng, K. & Wong, K. (1996). School effectiveness in East Asia concepts, origins

and implications. Journal o f Educational Administration, 34(5), 32.

chiou, c . (2002).

[The investigation o f how homeroom teachers’ beliefs and their classroom

management strategies relate to classroom management efficiency in junior

high schools]. Taipei:


c h o u , s . (2 0 0 0 ) . m®. tfMMmmMm[A comparative study of the belief, cognition, act

strategies and the effects o f classroom management between the expert and

novice teachers in the junior high school]. Taipei:

Chuang, W. (2002). ^ W O rMt [The collaborative action

research on implementation o f learning classroom management], Hualien: HI

Clement, M. C. (2002). What cooperating teachers are teaching student teachers

about classroom management. The Teacher Educator, 35(1), 47-62.

Cotton, K. (2004) Schoolwide and classroom discipline. Retrieved March 5, 2004,

from http ://www.nwrel .org/scpd/dirs/5/cu9 .html

Curwin, R. L. & Mendler A. N. (1997). As tough as necessary: Countering violence,

aggression, and hostility in our school. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Data collection techniques. (2003). Retrieved June 5, 2003, from

http://www-distance.syr.edu/needs.html

Davidson, G. S. & Maurer, M. M. (1998). Leadership in instructional technology.

260


http://www.nwrel

http://www-distance.syr.edu/needs.html

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hill, Inc.

Delphi techniques. (1994). Michigan State University Extension. Retrieved June

5, 2003, from http://www.msue.msu.edu/msue/imp/modii/iii00006.html

Dickerson, A. (1999). Student councils. The Clearing House, 72(3), 133-134.

Retrieved May 24, 2004, from ProQuest database.

[Dissertation and thesis abstract system]. (2005).

Retrieved June 25, 2005 from http://datas.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/l/

Duhaney, L. M. G (2003). A practical approach to managing the behaviors o f

students with ADD. Intervention in School and Clinic, 38(5), 267-279.

[Interviews of Teachers o f the Year] (2004). Retrieved

May 16, 2004, from National Sun Yat-sen University Web site:

http://www2.nsysu.edu.tw/education/classmanagement/

[Duties o f Chinese homeroom teachers o f junior high schools].

(2004). Retrieved May 20, 2004, from Ministry of Education Web site:

www.edu.tw

[Duties o f Chinese homeroom teachers o f junior high schools],

(2004). Retrieved May 20, 2004, from National Chung-Hsing University Web


http://www.msue.msu.edu/msue/imp/modii/iii00006.html

http://datas.ncl.edu.tw/theabs/l/

http://www2.nsysu.edu.tw/education/classmanagement/

http://www.edu.tw

site: http://www.nchu.edu.tw/etc/menu2/menu2_l/list_lO.htm

[Duties o f Chinese homeroom teachers o f junior high schools].

(2004). Retrieved May 20, 2004, from Chiayi Sheng-Ping Junior High School

Web site: http://www.spjh.cyc.edu.tw

ffi [Duties o f Chinese homeroom teachers o f junior high schools].

(2004). Retrieved May 20, 2004, from Kaohsiung San-Min Junior High

School Web site:

http://mail2.smjh.kh.edu.tw/~shindow/01activity/3download/06.htm

Dykeman, B. F. (2003). School-based interventions for treating social adjustment

difficulties in children with traumatic brain injury. Journal o f Instructional

Psychology, 30(3), 225-230. Retrieved June 10, 2004, from ProQuest

database.

Ellliot, D. S., Hamburg, B. A. & Williams, K. R. (Eds.). (1998). Violence in

American schools: A new perspective. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C. M. Sanford, J. P., Clements, B. S. & Worsham, M. E.

(1989). Classroom management fo r secondary teachers (2nd ed.).

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

262


http://www.nchu.edu.tw/etc/menu2/menu2_l/list_lO.htm

http://www.spjh.cyc.edu.tw

http://mail2.smjh.kh.edu.tw/~shindow/01activity/3download/06.htm

Emmer, E. T., Evertson, C. M. & Worsham, M. E. (2003). Classroom management

tFfo r secondary teachers (6 ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Evertson, C. & Harris, A. H. (1999). Support for managing learning-centered

classrooms; the classroom organization and management program. In J. J.

Freiberg, (Ed.), Beyond behaviorism: Changing the classroom management

paradigm (pp. 59-74). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Fast, J., Fanelli, F. & Salen, L. (2003). How becoming mediators affects aggressive

students. Children & Schools, 25(3), 161-171.

Freiberg, H. J. (1999a). Beyond behaviorism. In J. J. Freiberg, (Ed.), Beyond

behaviorism: Changing the classroom management paradigm (pp. 3-20).

Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Freiberg, H. J. (1999b). Consistency management and cooperative discipline: From

tourists to citizens in the classroom. In J. J. Freiberg, (Ed.), Beyond



Froyen, L. A. (1993). Classroom management: The reflective teacher-leader (2nd

ed.). New York: Merrill.


Fu, Y. (2005). [Classroom management plan]. Retrieved June 20,

2005 from Web site o f Taipei Nan-Gang Junior High School

http ://user.nksh.tp. edu. tw/teacher/minus/plan.html

Gable, R. A., Hendrickson, J. M., Tonelson, S. W., & Acker, R. V. (2000). Changing

disciplinary and instructional practices in the middle school to address IDEA.

The Clearing House, 73(4), 205-208. Retrieved May 24, 2004, from ProQuest

database.

Garrick, D. & Laurel M. (2003). A practical approach to managing the behaviors o f

student with ADD. Intervention in School & Clinic, 35(5), 267-279.

George, D. & Malley, P. (2003). SPSS for Windows step by step: A single guide

f L

and reference (4 ed.). MA: Allyn and Bacon

Glasser, W. (1969). Schools without failure. New York: Harper and Row.

Glasser, W. (1986). Control theory in the classroom. New York: Perennial

Library.

Gordon H. W. (2001). Someone is screaming. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing




Gould, D. (2004). Chapter 3 Methodology—Delphi Study. Retrieved December

29, 2004, from http://www.seanet.com/~daveg/chapter3.htm

Grant, S. H., Acker, R. V., Guerra, N., Duplechain, R. & Coen, M. (1998). A school

and classroom enhancement program to prevent the development o f antisocial

behavior in children from high-risk neighborhoods. Preventing School Failure,

42(3), 121-127.

Guerra, D. R & Bursten J. N. (2001). Reaching troubled teens through a literacy

tutoring project. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in schools: A


Gunter, R L., Coutinho, M. J. & Cade, T. (2002). Classroom factors linked with

academic gains among students with emotional and behavioral problems.

Preventing School Failure, 46(3), 126-132.

Harlan, J. C. (1996). Behavior management strategies for teachers. Springfield,

IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Hester, P., Gable, R. A. & Manning, M. L. (2003). A positive learning environment

approach to middle school instruction. Childhood Education, 79(3), 130-136.

265


http://www.seanet.com/~daveg/chapter3.htm

Hsu, h . (2002).

ffi^E [Using co cooperative learning as teaching method and classroom

management strategy to improve junior high school students learning; An

action study]. Changhua:

Hwang, K. (2001). [The research on

the classroom management: Strategy for directors of vocational school].

Taipei:

[Items o f school contests o f students’ behaviors]. (2004).

Retrieved May 20, 2004 from Yunlin Luen-Bey Junior High School Web site:

http ://www.lpjh.ylc. edu.tw/convertion/9211 pplan/life3 .htm


Retrieved May 20, 2004 from Taipei Wey-Lee Girls’ Junior High School Web site:

http://www.wlgsh.tp.edu.tw/DATA/3/cdtinfo/cdt030.htm


Retrieved May 20, 2004 from Taipei Jiann-Cheng Junior High School Web site:

http://stweb.jcjh.tp.edu.tw/admin/a23/members.htm


266


http://www.lpjh.ylc

http://www.wlgsh.tp.edu.tw/DATA/3/cdtinfo/cdt030.htm


Retrieved May 20, 2004 from Chiayi Sheng-Ping Junior High School Web site:



Retrieved May 20, 2004 from Taoyuan Wen-Chang Junior High School Web site:

http://www.wcjhs.tyc.edu.tw/year89/unit/students/

Jhan, Y. (2005). □ □ □ □ □ □ [Classroom management plan]. Retrieved June 20,

2005 from Web site o f Taipei Fang-he Junior High School

http://teal .fhjhs.tp.edu.tw/yuejen0301 /

Johnson, D. W. & Johnson, R. T. (1999). The three Cs o f school and classroom

management. In J. J. Freiberg, (Ed.), Beyond behaviorism: Changing the

classroom management paradigm (pp. 119-144). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Kalb, L. M. & Loeber, R. (2003). Child disobedience and noncompliance.

Pediatrics, 111(3), 641-652.

Kamps, D. M., Tankersley, M. & Ellis, C. (2000). Social skills interventions for

young at-risk students: A 2-year follow-up study. Behavioral Disorders, 25(4),

310-324.

Kaplan, A., Gheen, M. & Midgley, C. (2002). Classroom goal structure and student

267



http://www.wcjhs.tyc.edu.tw/year89/unit/students/

http://teal

disruptive behaviour. The British Journal o f Educational Psychology, 72,

191-211.

Kerr, M. M. & Nelson, L. M. (1983). Strategies for managing behavior problems in

the classroom. Columbus, OH: C.E. Merrill Pub. Co.

Kohn, A. (1996). Beyond discipline: From compliance to community. Alexandria,

VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Kosier, K. (1998). The discipline checklist: Advice from 60 successful elementary

teachers. National Education Association.

Kulinna, P. H., Cothran, D., & Regualos, R. (2003) Development o f an instrument

to measure student disruptive behavior. Measurement in Physical Education

and Exercise Science, 7(1), 25.

Lane, K. L. (2003). Identifying young students at risk for antisocial behavior: The

utility o f “teachers as tests.” Behavioral Disorders, 28(4), 360-369.

Lee, I. (1997).

[Instructional practices and classroom management: A case study on an

experienced junior high school biology teacher]. Kaohsiung: M K W- SfiIS

k m .

268


Lee, m. (2002).

[Implementing and restructuring the integrated model of instruction, discipline

and guidance]. Taipei: 11 i S

Lee, M. et al. (2004) [An interview with a

successful middle school teacher in classroom management]. Retrieved

March 20, 2004, from http://class.ncue.edu.tw/articles 63.html

Leshnoff, S. K. (2003). Teaching art, moral conduct, and John Dewey for today.

Art Education, 55(6), 33-39.

Level o f education. (2004). Retrieved April 8, 2004, from Ministry o f Education Web

site: http://l40.111.1.22/english/

Lewis, T. J., Sugai, G & Colvin G (1998). Reducing problem behavior through a

school-wide system o f effective behavioral support: Investigation o f a

school-wide social skills training program and contextual interventions.

School Psychology Review, 27(3), 446-459.

Li, S. (1994). BUd' — [ The research o f the

elementary school first grade children’s classroom life discipline] Taipei: §S

269


http://class.ncue.edu.tw/articles

http://l40.111.1.22/english/

Liu, J. (1997). The emotional bond between teachers and students: Multi-year

relationships. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(2): 156-157.

Lohrmann, S. & Talerico, J. (2004). Anchor the boat: A classwide intervention to

reduce problem behavior. Journal o f Positive Behavior Interventions, 6(2),

113-120.

Luschen, K. V. (2001). Interrupting “good” girlness: Sexuality, education, and the

prevention o f violence against women. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing



Madsen, C. H., Jr. & Madsen, C. K. (1991). Teaching/discipline: Apositive

approach for educational development (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Marzano, R. J. (2003). Classroom management that works [Electronic version].

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

McEwan, B., Gathercoal, P. & Nimmo, V. (1999). Application o f judicious

discipline: A common language for classroom management. In J. J. Freiberg.

(Ed.), Beyond behaviorism: Changing the classroom management paradigm (pp.

98-118). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

270


McKenna, F. R. (1995). Philosophical theories o f education. Lanham, MD:

University Press o f America.

McLeod, J., Fisher, J. & Hoover, G. (2003). The key elements o f classroom

management: Managing time and space, student behavior, and instructional

strategies. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development.

Mendez, L. M. R. & KnofF, H. M. (2003). Who gets suspended from school and

why: A demographic analysis o f schools and disciplinary infractions in a large

school district. Education and Treatment o f Children, 26(1), 30-51.

Mercy, J. A. & Rosenberg, M. L. (1998). Preventing firearm violence in and around

schools. In Ellliot, D. S., Hamburg, B. A., & Williams, K. R. (Eds.), Violence in

American schools: A new perspective (pp. 159-187). New York: Cambridge

University Press.

Meyers, S. A. (2003). Strategies to prevent and reduce conflict in college

classrooms. College Teaching, 5/(3), 94-98.

Miller, G. E., Brehm, K. & Whitehouse, S. (1998). Reconceptualizing school-based

prevention for antisocial behavior within a resiliency framework. School

271


Psychology Review, 27(3), 364-379. Retrieved May 7, 2004, from ProQuest

Database.

Mitchell, J. C. (1998). An alternative approach to the Fourth Amendment in public

schools: Balancing students’ rights with school safety. Brigham Young

University Law Review, 1998(3), 1207-1240.

Mitchem, K. J., Young, K. R., West, R. P. & Benyo, J. (2001). CWPASM: A

classwide peer-assisted self-management program for general education

classrooms. Education & Treatment o f Children, 24(2), 111-140.

Munn, P., Johnstone, M. & Chalmers, V. (1992). Effective discipline in primary

schools and classrooms. London: Paul Chapman Pub.

Nelsen, J, Duffy, R., Escobar, L., Ortolano, K., & Owen-Sohock, D. (2001).

Positive discipline: A teacher’s A-Z guide: hundreds o f solutions for almost

every classroom behavior problem. Deb Publisher: Prima Lifestyles.

Nelsen, J., Lott, L., & Glenn, H. S. (1993). Positive discipline in the classroom:

How to effectively use class meetings and other positive discipline strategies.

Rocklin, CA: Prima Pub.

Noguera, P. A. (2002). Finding safety where we least expect it: The role o f social


capital in preventing school violence. In W. Ayers, B. Dohm & R. Ayers.

(Eds.), Zero tolerance: Resisting the drive fo r punishment in our schools (pp.

202-218). New York: New Press.

O’Neil, J. (2004). Discipline zingers. NEA Today, 22(4), 24-30.

O’Neill, R. E., Johnson, J. W., Kiefer-O’Donnell, R. & McDonnell, J. J. (2001).

Preparing teachers and consultants for the challenge of severe problem behavior.

Journal o f Positive Behavior Interventions, 3(2), 101 -108.

Parent bulletin. (2004). Retrieved May 11, 2004, from

http://buckeye.kl2.ca.us/rollingh/rhparbul.htm

Pfiffher, L. J., O’Leary, S. G., Rosen, L. A., & Sanderson, W. C., Jr. (1985). A

comparison o f the effects o f continuous and intermittent response cost and

reprimands in the classroom. Journal o f Clinical Child Psychology, 14(4),

348-352.

Rhodes, L. N. (1994). Homeroom teachers in Japan. National Forum, 74(1),31.

Retrieved May 7, 2004, from ProQuest database.

Rinne, C. H. (1997). Excellent classroom management. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth

Pub. Co.

273


http://buckeye.kl2.ca.us/rollingh/rhparbul.htm

Robinson, T. R., Smith, S W. & Miller, M. D. (2002). Effect o f cognitive

behavioral intervention on responses to anger by middle school students with

chronic behavior problems. Behavioral Disorders, 2 7(3), 256-271.

Rosenbaum, J. (1991). The pedagogic Delphi: A pilot application in an

introductory global studies course. Retrieved June 5, 2003, from

http ://www.ithaca. edu/j ohnrosenbaum/writing/ delphi .htm

Rosenberg, M. S. & Jackman, L. A. (2003). Development, implementation, and

sustainability o f comprehensive school-wide behavior management systems.

Intervention in School and Clinic, 39(1), 10-21.

Sato, N., & McLaughlin, M. W. (1992). Context matters: Teaching in Japan and the

United States. Phi Delta Kappan, 73(5), 359-366. Retrieved May 7, 2004,

from ProQuest database.

Scott, B. & Lindberg, P. (2000). Psychological profile and somatic complaints

between help-seeking and non-help-seeking tinnitus subjects. Psychosomatics,

41(4), 347-352.


http://www.ithaca

Slee, R. (1999). Theorizing discipline-practical research implications for schools. In

J. J. Freiberg. (Ed.), Beyond behaviorism: Changing the classroom management

paradigm (pp. 21-42). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Soodak, L. C. (2003). Classroom management in inclusive settings. Theory into

Practice, 42(4), 327-333.

Stevens, R. (2001). Peer mediation: An examination o f a school district’s training

program for educators. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in

schools: A challenge to American democracy (pp. 181-198). Mahwah, NJ:

L. Erlbaum.

Stewart, E. A. (2003). School social bonds, school climate, and school misbehavior:

A multilevel analysis. Justice Quarterly, 20(3), 575-604.

Strategies for classroom management. (2003). Retrieved June 15, 2003, from

Department of Education Web site:

http://osi.fsu.edu/waveseries/htmlversions/wave3.htm

a d t T f T [Student code o f conduct for junior high school

students in Taipei city]. (2004). Retrieved May 20, 2004, from


275


http://osi.fsu.edu/waveseries/htmlversions/wave3.htm


Stuter, L. (2003). The Delphi Technique: How to achieve a workable consensus

with time limits. Retrieved June 5, 2003, from

http://www.premierl.net/~barkonwd/school/DELPHI.HTM

Supapom, S., Dodds, P. & Griffin, L. (2003). An ecological analysis o f middle

school misbehavior through student and teacher perspectives. Journal o f

Teaching in Physical Education, 22(3), 328-339.

Synder-Halpem, Thompson & Schaffer. (2004). Comparison o f mailed vs. Internet

application o f the Delphi Technique in clinical informatics research.

Retrieved February 9, 2004, from

www.amia.org/pubs/symposia/D200120.PDF

Syn, J. (2005) [Knowing Taiwan must begin from

knowing Japan]. Retrieved June 20, 2005, from

www.japanresearch.org. tw/twhistory-03. asp

Tai, W. (2003). [An integrative

study of Taiwan’s “classroom management” dissertation and theses]. Taipei:

Taubert, R. T. (1999). Classroom management: sound theory and effective practice.


http://www.premierl.net/~barkonwd/school/DELPHI.HTM

http://www.amia.org/pubs/symposia/D200120.PDF

http://www.japanresearch.org

[Electronic version] Westport, CT: Bergin and Garvey.

The Delphi Technique. (2003). Retrieved June 5, 2003, from

http://www.sncpr.org.uk/delphi.htm

[Treasure chest o f classroom management]. (2003) Retrieved

March 20, 2003 from http://websrv.nioerar.edu.tw:8080/89edu/

Todd, A. W., Homer, R. H., & Sugai, G (1999). Self-monitoring and self-recmited

praise: Effects on problem behavior, academic engagement, and work

completion in a typical classroom. Journal o f Positive Behavior

Interventions, 7(2), 66-122.

Tsai, S. (2004). [Research on using

interactive class website to assist the homeroom teacher in managing the

class]. Koushung:

Utley, C. A., Kozleski, E., Smith, A. & Draper, I. L. (2002). Positive behavior

support: A proactive strategy for minimizing behavior problems in urban

multicultural youth. Journal o f Positive Behavior Interventions, 4(4),

196-207.

Volicer, L. & Hurley, A. C. (2003). Management o f behavioral symptoms in

277


http://www.sncpr.org.uk/delphi.htm

http://websrv.nioerar.edu.tw:8080/89edu/

progressive degenerative dementias. The Journals o f Gerontology, 58A( 9),

837-845. Retrieved June 10, 2004, from ProQuest database.

Warger, C. & Repeck, S. (1998). Partnerships in place: Positive behavioral supports

for high-risk students. Reclaiming Children and Youth, 7(2), 99-103.

Wayson, Bill. (2004). Preventing school violence by creating non-violent schools.

Retrieved May 11, 2004 from

http://www.atriskeducation.net/news/02-03-24.htm

Weinstein, C. S. (1999). Reflections on best practices and promising programs:

Beyond assertive classroom discipline. In J. J. Freiberg. (Ed.),

Beyondbehaviorism: Changing the classroom management paradigm (pp.

147-161). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Weller, L. D. (2000). School attendance problems: Using the TQM tools to identify

root causes. Journal o f Educational Administration, 3£(1), 64.

Weinstein, C. S. (1999). Reflections on best practices and promising programs:

Beyond assertive classroom discipline. In J. J. Freiberg. (Ed.), Beyond




http://www.atriskeducation.net/news/02-03-24.htm

Williams, K. M. (2001a). The importance o f ethnography in understanding violence

in schools. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in schools: A


Williams, K. M. (2001b). “Frontin’ it”: Schooling, violence, and relationships in

the ’hood. In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.), Preventing violence in schools: A


Williams, K. M. (2001c). What derails peer mediation? In J. N. Burstyn. (Ed.),

Preventing violence in schools: A challenge to American democracy (pp.

199-208). Mahwah, NJ: L. Erlbaum.

Winter, R. (2003). Classroom management issues and suggested strategies.

Retrieved February 28, 2003, from

http://www.rickwinter.net/Education/ClassroomManagementIssuesStrategies.

htm

Wolfgang, C. H. & Glickman, C. D. (1980). Solving discipline problems: Strategies

fo r classroom teachers. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Wu, f. (1999).

[The study of the relationship o f teachers’ classroom management

279


http://www.rickwinter.net/Education/ClassroomManagementIssuesStrategies

strategies with classroom climate in elementary school in Taiwan-compare good

teachers with general teachers]. Taipei: S§ ® A ̂ .

Wynne, E. A. (1997). Homerooms: Rediscovering new possibilities in an old tool.

National Association o f Secondary School Principals. NASSP Bulletin, £7(587),

46-50. Retrieved May 12, 2004, from ProQuest database

Yang, K. N., Schaller, J. L. & Parker, R. (2000). Factor structures o f Taiwanese

teachers’ ratings o f ADHD: A comparison with U.S. studies. Journal o f

Learning Disabilities, 55(1), 72-82.

Yen, L. (2002). Child and adolescent behaviour in long-term evolution (CABLE): A

school-based health lifestyle study. Promotion & Education, 33-40.

Zabel, R. H. & Zabel, M. K. (1996) Classroom management in context: Orchestrating

positive learning environments. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.


Bibliography

American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication Manual o f the American

t tiPsychological Association (5 ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Chang, I. (2001).

the relationships between classroom teachers’ leadership behaviors and

classroom management effectiveness in comprehensive high schools].

Changhus:

Chen, H. (2000). 3 ' f ~ I B M [A case study of

classroom management strategies o f the first grade teacher in a primary school].

Taitung:

c h e n g , s . ( 1998).

[A study o f elementary school education: The relationship between the

climate o f classroom management, the management o f classroom conflicts and

teachers ’ teaching efficacy]. T aipei:

cMang, y . (2003).

[A case study o f English classroom management in relation to children’s

281


individual proficiency difference issues in Taipei primary schools]. Hsinchu:

Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research designs: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed

methods approaches (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Feldman, S. (2003). Classroom management-all year long. Teaching PreK-8,

34(1), 8.

Guo, m. (1994).

[Relationship o f teacher self-efficacy, classroom management strategy and

classroom management effectiveness in elementary school]. Kaohsiung: 19

I W A I .

Hawes, G. H. & Hawes, L. S. (1982). The concise dictionary o f education. New

York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

Hung, Y. (2003).

[An interpretative study on teacher’s belief o f classroom

management and the learning process o f class rules for third-graders]. Taipei:

Lin, J. (2001). [A study o f the

282


relationship on teachers’ beliefs and classroom management strategies in

comprehensive high school], Changhua:

Poulou, M. & Norwich, B. (2000). Teachers’ causal attributions, cognitive,

emotional and behavioural responses to students with emotional and

behavioural difficulties. British Journal o f Educational Psychology, 70,

559-581. Retrieved May, 2004, from ProQuest database.

Shellady, S. M. & Sealander, K. A. (2003). Rethinking school discipline.

Principal Leadership, 4(2), 29-34.

W u, c . (2 0 0 3 ) . j

[The interpretive research on classroom management and

student autonomy—a language class observation of a sixth-grade teacher].

Taipei: £d b r |T *eii*S *K .

W u, w . (2 0 0 2 ) . MffiMfl&Mmmmmmeg, j

M [A study on the relationships among teachers’ class management, parents’

educational attitude and students’ learning motivation o f pragmatic skills

programs at vocational high schools]. Changhua: HHbfSP®

283


VITA

Meng-Ling, Tsou

t

English Name : Mindy Sex : F Date of Birth : Feb. 27, 1964Student No.: 2575581 Blood Type : O Marriage : MarriedHeight: 160 cm Weight: 50 kg

TEL : 042-2933047 Cellular: 0927637900 E-mail: [email protected]

Address : No. 49, Taiwan, I

Jang-Yang Street, Taichung City, 404 LO.C.

Education1. Taichung First Girls' Senior High School2. Tunghai University Foreign Literature and Language Department3. Provindence University English Literature and Language Graduate School4. Chang-Hwa Education University Department o f Education5. China Culture University Geography Department6. National Open University Computer and Management Department7. Tamkang University Department o f Chinese8. Lynn University Ph.D. program in Educational Leadership___________________

Experience1. Youth Corps Social worker2. Provindence University Language Lab. Assistant3. Chung-Chin Vocational School English teacher4. Chin-0 Vocational School English teacher5. National I-lan Institute of Technology part-time English lecturer6. Jakarta Taipei School (in Indonesia) English teacher7. National I-Lan Vocational School English teacher___________________________

Publication1. The Teaching o f Poetry : A Program with Robert Frost's Poems as Demonstration

(thesis)2. 1996 Graduation Memorial Book (Editorj3. Being a Teacher isn't Easy {Chinese newspaper)4. Those days in Indonesia {Chinese newspaper)_____________________________

Interest1. Languages (English, Spanish, Taiwanese, Chinese, Haga language, Indonesia

language)2. Computer3. Psychology4. Education5. Chinese Traditional Instrument-Guchen6. Chinese Knot7. Leather Curving________________________________________________________

284

