Article
| Title: | Nevhodné chování učitelů k žákům a studentům |
| Variant title: | Teachers' misbehaviour towards pupils and students |
| Author: | |
| Source document: | Studia paedagogica. 2013, vol. 18, iss. 1, pp. [7]-36 |
| Extent: | [7]-36 |
| ISSN: | 1803-7437 (print); 2336-4521 (online) |
| DOI: | 10.5817/SP2013-1-2 |
| Type: | Article (Czech) |
| Stable URL: | http://hdl.handle.net/11222.digilib/127038 |
| License: |
PDF
Abstract(s):
Přehledová studie shrnuje dosavadní stav poznání v oblasti, která je sice veřejnosti známa už dlouho, ale exaktní výzkum probíhá teprve třicet let. Nevhodným chováním učitele se rozumí chování, které nepřekračuje hranice zákona, ale interferuje s výukou, a tím narušuje vztahy mezi učitelem a žáky a zhoršuje učení žáků. Studie upozorňuje na dvě výzkumné tradice, které se rozvíjely souběžně: v bývalých socialistických státech pod označením didaktogenie, v západní Evropě, USA a Japonsku pod označením nevhodné chování učitele. Studie předkládá čtyři psychologické teorie, které se snaží vysvětlit příčiny učitelova nevhodného chování: teorii kauzální atribuce, teorii vnímané vlastní zdatnosti učitele (self-efficacy), teorii interakčního chování učitele a teorii uplatňování učitelovy moci. Ve studii jsou dále diskutovány možnosti diagnostiky učitelova nevhodného chování a shrnuty výsledky šestnácti deskriptivně-analytických výzkumů realizovaných v této oblasti.
This study summarises current knowledge on a phenomenon which has long been known to the public yet which has only been scientifically researched for the last 30 years. Teachers' misbehaviour is understood as a type of behaviour which does not transgress law yet interferes with teaching. As such it impedes the relationship between teachers and pupils and leads to a deterioration in pupils' learning. The study emphasises two branches of research that were developed concurrently: didactogeny in former socialist states and teacher misbehaviour in Western Europe, the USA and Japan. The study puts forward four psychological theories which aim to explain the rationale behind inappropriate teacher behaviour: causal attribution theory, self-efficacy theory, the theory of interactive behaviour, and the theory of power. The study also discusses the possible ways of diagnosing misbehaviour behaviour by teachers and summarises the results of 16 descriptive-analytical studies.
This study summarises current knowledge on a phenomenon which has long been known to the public yet which has only been scientifically researched for the last 30 years. Teachers' misbehaviour is understood as a type of behaviour which does not transgress law yet interferes with teaching. As such it impedes the relationship between teachers and pupils and leads to a deterioration in pupils' learning. The study emphasises two branches of research that were developed concurrently: didactogeny in former socialist states and teacher misbehaviour in Western Europe, the USA and Japan. The study puts forward four psychological theories which aim to explain the rationale behind inappropriate teacher behaviour: causal attribution theory, self-efficacy theory, the theory of interactive behaviour, and the theory of power. The study also discusses the possible ways of diagnosing misbehaviour behaviour by teachers and summarises the results of 16 descriptive-analytical studies.
Keywords:
učitelovo nevhodné chování; didaktogenie; legální chování; výuková komunikace; žáci; výsledky učení
teacher misbehaviour; didactogeny; legal behavior; instructional communication; pupils; learning results
teacher misbehaviour; didactogeny; legal behavior; instructional communication; pupils; learning results
References:
[1] BANDURA, A. (1997). Self-efficacy. The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
[2] BANFIELD, S. R. (2009). How do College/University teacher misbehaviors infl uence student cognitive learning, academic self-efficacy, motivation, and curiosity? (Disertační práce). Morgantown: West Virginia University.
[3] BANFIELD, S. R., RICHMOND, V. P., & MCCROSKEY, J. C. (2006). The effects of teacher misbehaviors on teacher credibility and affect for the teacher. Communication Education, 55(1), 63–72. | DOI 10.1080/03634520500343400
[4] BARRETT, D. E., CASEY, E., & VISSER, R. D., et al. (2012). How do teachers make judgements about ethical and unethical behaviors? Toward the development of a code of conduct for teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(6), 890–898. | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2012.04.003
[5] CLAUS, C. J., BOOT–BUTTERFIELD, M., & CHORY, R. M. (2012). The relationship between instructor misbehaviors and student antisocial behavioral alteration techniques: The roles of instructor attractiveness, humor, and relational closeness. Communication Education, 61(2), 161–183.
[6] CLINCIU, A. I. (2010). Comparison concerning the stress caused summative assessment. In Proceedings of the 4th international conference "Education contemporary world issues" (s. 23–33). Pitesti: University of Pitesti.
[7] CUKIER, J. (2005). Didactogenia. 6. Congreso virtual de psiquiatría. Interpsiquis. Dostupné z: http://www.psiquiatria.com/bibliopsiquis/bitstream/10401/3295/1/interpsiquis_2005_19936.pdf
[8] DENSON, A. (2001). Student perceptions of teacher violation of expected verbal and nonverbal immediate behavior (Diplomová práce). Morgantown: West Virginia University.
[9] FORDHAM, H. M. (2005). An examination of standard violations from 2002 to 2004 of the Georgia code of ethics (Disertační práce). Athens: University of Georgia.
[10] FOUCAULT, M. (2000). Dohlížet a trestat. Praha: Dauphin.
[11] FRENCH, J. R., & RAVEN, B. (1968). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwrigt, & A. Zander (Eds.), Group dynamic: research and theory (s. 259–270). New York: Harper and Row.
[12] FRENCH, J. R., & RAVEN, B. (1959). The bases for social power. In D. Cartwrigt (Ed.), Studies in Social Power (s. 150–167). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
[13] GOODBOY, A. K. (2011). The development and validation of the instructional dissent scale. Communication Education, 60(4), 422–440. | DOI 10.1080/03634523.2011.569894
[14] GOODBOY, A. K., & BOLKAN, S. (2009). College teacher misbehaviors: Direct and indirect effects on student communication behavior and traditional learning outcomes. Western Journal of Communication, 73(2), 204–219. | DOI 10.1080/10570310902856089
[15] GOODBOY, A. K., BOLKAN, S., & MYERS, S. A., et al. (2011). Student use relational and influence messages in response to perceived instructor power use in American and Chinese college classroom. Communication Education, 60(2), 191–209. | DOI 10.1080/03634523.2010.502970
[16] GOODBOY, A. K., MYERS, S. A., & BOLKAN, S. (2010). Student motives for communicating with instructors as a function of perceived instructor misbehavior. Communication Research Reports, 27(1), 11–19. | DOI 10.1080/08824090903526604
[17] GORHAM, J., & CHRISTOPHEL, D. M. (1992). Students' perceptions of teacher behaviors as motivating and demotivating factors in college classes. Communication Quarterly, 40(3), 239–252. | DOI 10.1080/01463379209369839
[18] HARTL, P., & HARTLOVÁ, H. (2000). Psychologický slovník. Praha: Portál.
[19] KEARNEY, P., PLAX, T. G., & HAYS, E. R., et al. (1991). What students don't like about what teachers say and do. Communication Quarterly, 39(4), 309–324. | DOI 10.1080/01463379109369808
[20] KELSEY, D. M., KEARNEY, P., & PLAX, T. G. (2004). College students' attributions of teacher misbehaviors. Communication Education, 53(1), 40–55. | DOI 10.1080/0363452032000135760
[21] KOHOUTEK, R. (n.d.). Didaktogenie. In Slovník cizích slov. Dostupné z: http://slovnik-cizichslov.abz.cz/web.php/slovo/didaktogenie
[22] LEARY, T. (1957). An interpersonal diagnosis of personality. New York: Ronald Press.
[23] LEWIS, R., & RILEY, P. (2009). Teacher misbehaviour. In L. J. Saha & A. G. Dworkin (Eds.), International handbook of research on teachers and teaching (s. 417–431). New York: Springer.
[24] MAŇÁK, J. (2006). Hrozí nebezpečí pedagogické ergogenie? In E. Řehulka (Ed.), Škola a zdraví 21 (s. 1–5). Brno: Paido.
[25] MARESH, M. M. (2009). Exploring hurtful communication from college teachers to students: A mixed methods study (Disertační práce). Lincoln: University of Nebraska.
[26] MAREŠ, J., & GAVORA, P. (1999). Anglicko-český pedagogický slovník. Praha: Portál.
[27] McCROSKEY, J. C., & RICHMOND, V. P. (1983). Power in the classroom I – Teacher and student perceptions. Communication Education, 34(2), 175–184. | DOI 10.1080/03634528309378527
[28] McCROSKEY, J. C., RICHMOND, V. P., PLAX, T. G., KEARNEY, P. (1985). Power in the classroom V. Behavior alteration techniques, communication training and learning. Communication Education, 34(3), 214–226. | DOI 10.1080/03634528509378609
[29] MURRAY, F. B. (2007). Disposition: A superfl uous construct in teacher education. Journal of teacher education, 58(5), 381–387. | DOI 10.1177/0022487107307950
[30] POENARU, R., & SAVA, F. (1998). Didactogenia în şcoală. Aspecte deontologice, psihologice şi pedagogice. Bucureşti: Editura Danubius.
[31] PRŮCHA, J., WALTEROVÁ, E., & MAREŠ, J. (2009). Pedagogický slovník. Praha: Portál.
[32] RILEY, P., LEWIS, R., & BREW, C. (2010). Why did you do that? Teachers explain the use of legal aggression in the classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(4), 957–964. | DOI 10.1016/j.tate.2009.10.037
[33] SAVA, F. A. (2002). Causes and effects of teacher conflict-inducing attitudes toward pupils: A path analysis model. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(8), 1007–1021. | DOI 10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00056-2
[34] SEMLAK, J. L., & PEARSON, J. C. (2008). Through the years: An examination of instructional age and misbehavior on perceived teacher credibility. Communication Research Reports, 25(1), 76–85. | DOI 10.1080/08824090701831867
[35] SIDELINGER, R. J., BOLEK, D. M., & FRISBY, B. N. (2011). When instructors misbehave: An examination of student-to-student connectedness as a mediator in the college classroom. Communication Education, 60(3), 340–361. | DOI 10.1080/03634523.2011.554991
[36] ŠEĎOVÁ, K. (2011). Mocenské konstelace ve výukové komunikaci. Studia paedagogica, 16(1), 90–118.
[37] ŠEĎOVÁ, K., ŠVAŘÍČEK, R., & ŠALAMOUNOVÁ, Z. (2012). Komunikace ve školní třídě. Praha: Portál.
[38] THWEATT, K. S., & McCROSKEY, J. C. (1996). Teacher nonimmediacy and misbehavior: unintentional negative communication. Communication Research Reports, 13(2), 198–204. | DOI 10.1080/08824099609362087
[39] THWEATT, K. S., & McCROSKEY, J. C. (1998). The impact of teacher immediacy and misbehavior on teacher credibility. Communication Education, 47(4), 348–358. | DOI 10.1080/03634529809379141
[40] TOALE, M. C. (2001). Teacher clarity and teacher misbehaviors: relationships with students' affective learning and teacher credibility (Disertační práce). Morgantown: West Virginia University.
[41] TOALE, M. C., THWEATT, K. S., & MCCROSKEY, J. C. (2001). Factor analysis of 114 teacher misbehavior items. Paper presented at Annual Meting of the National Communication Association. Atlanta.
[42] WEINER, B. (2000). Intrapersonal and interpersonal theories of motivation from an attributional perspective. Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 1–14. | DOI 10.1023/A:1009017532121
[43] WUBBELS, T., CRÉTON, H. A., & HOOYMAYERS, H. P. (1985). Discipline problems of beginning teachers, interactional behaviour mapped out. Paper presented at the AERA Annual meeting, Chicago.
[44] WUBBELS, T., & LEVY, J. (Eds.). (1993). Do you know what you look like? Interpersonal relationships in education. London: Falmer Press.
[45] WUBBELS, T., LEVY, J., & BREKELMANS, M. (1997). Paying attention to relationships. Educational Leadership, 54(7), 82–86.
[46] ZHANG, Q. (2007). Teacher misbehaviors as learning demotivators in college classrooms: A cross-cultural investigation on China, Germany, Japan, and the United States. Communication Education, 56(2), 209–227. | DOI 10.1080/03634520601110104
[47] ZHANG, Q., ZHANG, J., & CASTELLUCCIO, A. A. (2011). A cross–cultural investigation of student resistance in college classroom: The effects of teacher misbehaviors and credibility. Communication Quarterly, 59(4), 450–464. | DOI 10.1080/01463373.2011.597287
