Research has indicated that student performance is significantly correlated with cell phone use. A study by Duncan, Hoekstra, and Wilcox (2012) demonstrated that students who reported regular cell phone use in class showed an average negative grade difference of 0.36 ± 0.08 on a four-point scale. Students also underestimated the number of times they accessed their phones while in class. While students reported an average access rate of three times per class period, observation data showed the rate was closer to seven times per period. An interesting finding is that other students are distracted when students text in class (Tindell and Bohlander, 2012). So while a student may claim he’s only hurting himself when texting, studies show that others are affected also.

So what is the answer to this new form of passing notes in class? Faculty must assess their own feelings about their students using cell phones in the classroom. This will include the type of class one is leading. In the hospital setting, using a cell phone when caring for patients is disrespectful and can be dangerous to the patient’s and the student’s health. Many times it is against hospital policy to have a cell phone in a patient care area. In a lecture setting, the cell phone vibrating or a student texting can be very distracting to those around the student, including the faculty. In the exam area, students can use their cell phones to cheat on tests. Other faculty may incorporate the use of the cell phone in the course planning. The ability to quickly access the web for discussion information can be beneficial for the students. It also can encourage participation when paired with software like Poll Everywhere.

Once the instructor has a clear understanding of the potential positive or negative impact of allowing cell phone use, he or she must clearly state policies in the syllabus. If the faculty member allows phone use, he or she then must clearly state how the cell phone can be used. If no cell phone use is allowed, this too must be clearly stated and students need to know the repercussions for violating the policy. For example, if my students use their cell phones during class, they must leave class for the rest of the day. If the violation occurs in the clinical area, they receive a formal warning. After the second warning, they are dismissed from the program.

Most universities do not have a campus-wide policy concerning cell phones in the classroom. Instead, it is left up to the individual faculty to make those policies and state them in the syllabus – which also means it’s up to students to keep track of which professors allow cell phone use and which ones don’t under any circumstances. Whatever your policy, you need to communicate your expectations clearly so there’s no doubt in the students’ minds. As a faculty friend wrote in his syllabus, “If I see you looking at your crotch and smiling, you are dismissed.”

Readers, what’s your cell phone policy? Please share in the comment box.

References:
Duncan, D., Hoekstra, A., & Wilcox, B. (2012). Digital devices, distraction, and student Performance: does in-class cell phone use reduce learning? Astronomy Education Review, 11, 010108-1, 10.3847/AER2012011.

Tindell, D. & Bohlander, R. (2011). The use and abuse of cell phones and text messaging in the classroom: A survey of college students. College Teaching. 60. Pgs. 1-9.

Sydney Fulbright, PhD, MSN, RN, CNOR, is an associate professor in the College of Health Sciences at the University of Arkansas – Fort Smith.

As a book for new psychology teachers points out, “The way you handle excuses conveys a message to your students about your teaching philosophy, and most particularly about whether you view students as partners or adversaries, the degree to which you trust them, and how you care about them.” (p. 137)

The trick is separating the legitimate, bona fide excuses from the contrived, just plain made-up ones, and there are lots of gradations in between. Sometimes a teacher needs the wisdom of Solomon.

Some faculty opt for the hard line . . . no excuses accepted, none, under any terms. That was my policy early on. Then one semester a responsible, dedicated student lost his father in a car accident. He missed an exam to attend the funeral. In a situation like that, the hard-line policy fails pitifully.

On the other hand, it does seem absolutely true that the more excuses you accept, the more you are asked to consider. You can err on the side of gullibility. And learning that an excuse placates for missed deadlines, scheduled presentations, and far-in-advance exam dates should not be the lesson reinforced by experiences in college.

And so the teacher must adjudicate with firmness and with finesse. I’d like to report that it gets easier with age. It doesn’t. Some students are very good at making up stories, and some with legitimate excuses don’t present them very persuasively. The net result is that sometimes even concerned and caring teachers make mistakes. If they can be rectified, fine; if not, life does go on.

As for a general rule of thumb, the book reference below recommends “taking a firm, consistent, rational and caring approach to excuses that incorporates a ‘trust, but verify’ policy. Treat every excuse as genuine, but in fairness to the entire class, required that it be accompanied by supporting documentation.” (p. 137)

Reference: Lucas, S. G. and Bernstein, D. A. Teaching Psychology: A Step by Step Guide. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 2005.

Reprinted from The Teaching Professor, 20.1 (2006): 4-5.

But these examples are also extreme and, in my experience, rare. Far more common are classroom environments where the teacher is so in control that students passively perform what look like learning tasks (taking notes, feigning attention, etc.). Lately I’ve been wondering how much control is necessary to set the conditions for learning and whether that amount of control doesn’t need to be offset by a certain amount of freedom so that students can make the learning experience meaningful to them. And then there’s the question as to how teacher control affects the motivation to learn? Do students learn more or learn better in classrooms that are rule bound?

More fundamentally, I’ve been wondering if those assumptions about needing to establish control at the outset are supported by evidence, experiential or otherwise. What happens if you don’t? Do students automatically rise up and take control? Why do I have such trouble imagining students doing that? They seem so beaten down already.

More sinister are questions of whether teachers don’t benefit more from the control they assert than students do, even though most faculty I know would go to their graves arguing that they only control for the students’ sake. A tightly controlled classroom environment certainly makes for safer, saner teaching. If all potential challenges to authority are headed off at the pass, then the teacher can devote full attention to the content, and isn’t that where the teacher’s expertise really shines? And so the classroom becomes a place that showcases teaching more than learning?

My suspicion is that most teachers overreact to potential threats. Why? Do they question whether they can respond successfully to challenges? Are they in denial about the vulnerabilities that are inherently a part of teaching? Do they like this feeling of control? Depending on the teacher, all these answers may be possibilities, but I think for more teachers, it’s a matter of not trusting students or having lost faith in all of them because of the actions of a few.

It is true that students unaccustomed to the rigors of college learning look for the loopholes. They opt for the easy way—so if the teacher stands idly by, they will not demand much of themselves or their classmates. Most of today’s college students aren’t going to do well in an environment where there are no rules, little structure, and low expectations, but the question is how much do they and their teachers need and how is the learning environment compromised when teachers err on the side of rigid control?

Please share your strategies for finding an effective middle ground between no structure and rigid structure.

Reprinted from How Much Control for How Much Learning? The Teaching Professor, 22.3 (2008): 4,5.

Every good teacher knows that learning doesn’t happen in isolation. Creating a learning community gives students a sense of security, study pals, and somebody to double-check with about assignments. While once upon a time classrooms were largely homogenous, filled with young white males who shared many of the same real-life experiences, these days most classrooms can, at first glance, seem to be a wild cacophony of humanity, tender and tough, curious and hostile, open-minded and most definitely, absolutely closed.

Here’s the question: How do you get them to connect? How do you get them to feel safe enough to express ideas in front of such a varied group, listen to one another’s ideas, engage in authentic dialogue, and push their own academic, social, and personal limits in order to grow?

From the moment the class passed the threshold, I feared this was one pot of stew that was never going to mingle flavors. It wasn’t just that there were a number of different “types,” it was that already, 43 seconds into class, an invisible but palpable distrust was rumbling just below the pitch of human hearing. However, it was not below the pitch of teacher hearing, and it filled me with fear. I had Goths and girlie-girls, straight-shooters and loose cannons, bookworms, and back-row mutterers. I had a guy proudly sporting a spaghetti stained chef’s hat, and another proudly displaying a bald and vibrantly tattooed skull, and they were glaring at each other.

I opened my mouth to say, “Class dismissed.” Fortunately, my inner administrator reminded me that if I dismissed them before the first class had even started, I would lose my job. My mouth has a mind of its own (often not a good thing) and instead, I said, “Let’s dump the desks.”

“Huh?” the class sang in unison. A good sign. Unison.

“Shove them out of the way and make two circles facing each other.”

“Huh?” they sang again.

“You with the gorgeously tattooed skull, you’re in charge. Make them do it!”

He glared. They scrambled. It was done.

The circles formed, the inner circle facing the outer one. They looked almost ready for some spontaneous folk-dancing.

“Inner circle: You’ve got one minute to pry out as much interesting information from the person you are facing as you possibly can. Skip the boring stuff parents ask their kids’ dates. Ask what they’re afraid of, if they’ve ever been lost, or what makes them laugh hysterically.”

“Ummm,” a girlie-girl trilled, “Like, what are we supposed to be doing?”

“You are speed dating,” I said. She perked up immediately, as did several of the older returning students who probably hadn’t dated in a while. “When I flick the lights, everyone absolutely stop talking—even if you’re in the middle of a word. When I flick them again, outer circle has one minute to ask questions. After your two minutes are up, inner circle steps to the left, outer circle stays put, and do it again. Go!”

“Are you crazy?” my inner administrator said. I didn’t bother to answer. The room became a concert hall filled with glorious word-music—murmurs and mutters, giggles and snorts, the rapid gallop of syllables leaping atop one another, all rising to a beautiful crescendo…

I flicked the lights.

Silence.

I flicked again.

Words. Conversations. Eye contact. Here and there, a hand reached out to touch a shoulder, mouths slipped from crescent-moon grins to open laughter.

And thus it went. Round and round the room they probed and questioned and probably overstepped bounds, but nobody complained so I let them be. When everybody had finally met everyone else and it was time to sit down, I saw several students grab their bags and books and slip next to someone from a completely different group. We reviewed policies and talked about my grading system, and they actually listened. But that wasn’t the best part. The best part was when the chef-hat guy and the tattooed skull guy left class together, their charmingly ridiculous heads tipped, chuckling over who-knows-what.

Dr. Cynde Gregory teaches composition and literature at Gwinnett Technical College in Georgia in addition to tutoring second language learners of all ages.

1. Have a distinct sounding object, such as a bell or cymbal. As long as you don’t use it too often, this can be an effective way to bring student’s attention back to the lecture or class discussion.

2. Signal nonverbally, and make eye contact with students when they hold side conversations, start to fall asleep, or show contempt for the lecture material. You can also use hand signals to encourage a wordy student to finish what he or she is saying, or make a time out “T” sign with your fingers to stop unwanted behavior.

3. Remember what your parents told you when a sibling was bothering you. Sometimes it is best to ignore mildly negative behaviors. Often the behavior will disappear if you do not pay any attention to it.

4. Discuss very negative behaviors in private. During break or after class firmly request a change in behavior of those students who are disruptive. At our university it is very easy for professors to drop disruptive students from class, so one warning is usually enough.

5. Use humor. One of my favorite techniques is to stop the lecture, put on a mysterious expression, and look directly at the disruptive student. I announce to the class that I am getting a vision of that student sitting in the same chair next semester repeating the class over again. Usually the whole class laughs, but it gets the message across to everyone that this particular behavior has consequences.

6. Rein in overparticipators. If somebody monopolizes a discussion, I acknowledge the value of their viewpoints and invite them to discuss their views with me during a break. An alternative is to ask for other class members for their perspectives on the topic.

7. Implement participation rules. Tell the class that you would like to use rules such as the following: Only students who have not yet spoken can add to the discussion moving forward. Each new comment must build on a previous idea, etc.

8. Mix it up. If the last idea does not work very well, change the method of participation. Sometimes, you can experiment with new formats, such as using pairs or small groups rather than whole-class activities.

9. Don’t take it personally. Many problem behaviors have nothing to do with you. They often represent the personal frustrations and insecurities of the student. Make a point of getting to know the disruptive student during breaks or after class. It is less likely that students will continue to give you a hard time or remain distant if you have taken an interest in them.

By experimenting with one or more of these classroom management techniques, you will probably find that losing control of a class happens much less frequently and you will feel more confident in your ability to quickly regain students’ attention when it does.

Dr. Rick Sheridan is an assistant professor of Mass Communications at Wilberforce University.

Consider the following scenarios one might experience in the classroom:

• A student behaves in an entitled manner. He texts in class, shows up late, gets up frequently to use the bathroom (or take a smoke break) and surfs the Internet during class. The student was asked to reduce these behaviors. He does not comply. The student smells of alcohol and talks about parties the night before.
• An older student emails her adjunct faculty member, challenging two exam questions and her grade. The faculty member responds via email. Then the student brings it up during class, becoming argumentative and enraged, resulting in her yelling and shoving a desk.

Either of these behaviors can quickly derail the learning experience and create an unpleasant, or even dangerous, environment. During the online seminar Handling Annoying, Disruptive, and Dangerous Students, presenters Brian Van Brunt, director of Counseling and Testing at Western Kentucky University, and Laura Bennett, student conduct officer at Harper College, outlined strategies for dealing with difficult students.

One of the keys, they said, is to be proactive in setting expectations on the first day of class, and communicating those expectations, both verbally and in the syllabus. Explain what types of behavior you expect from your students and the type of learning environment you are looking to create. Taking the time to set the tone, learn students’ names and share a little bit about yourself is an investment that will pay dividends throughout the semester.

And yet, even if you do everything right, there still will be students who push your buttons and become (or have the potential to become) a destructive force in the classroom. Depending on the situation, you may want to refer that student to the student conduct office or campus behavioral intervention team. More often, however, you will first want to speak with the student about the behavior, and Bennett offered the following tips.

Eight-step outline for difficult conversations with students

1. Describe the behavior and its impacts
2. Listen to the student’s perspective and response
3. Discuss appropriate behavior
4. Discuss resources to promote success
5. Reiterate or set parameters for future behaviors
6. Share consequences for noncompliance
7. Summarize the conversation
8. Inform of any follow up:
• Document the conversation and plan
• Decide who you will inform
• Check in with the student

“These are not easy conversations to have but you want to approach the conversation from the point of ‘I’m really concerned about this behavior because if it continues it’s going to get in the way of you being successful’ and not ‘How dare you,’” said Van Brunt. “Students, particularly this generation of students, want to know that you care about them and that you want to see them succeed.”

Editor’s Note: This article was updated at 12:25 p.m. Eastern based on reader feedback.

A survey of more than 3,600 students at a public university in the Midwest provides an answer to that question. After reviewing previously published work on incivility in the classroom, faculty researchers identified 23 uncivil classroom behaviors. The list is included in the article. Students were asked, “To what degree do you consider the following behaviors to be uncivil?” Respondents ranked each behavior by using a five-point Likert-type scale, with 1 being not uncivil and 5 being extremely uncivil.

Four of the 23 behaviors had means above 4.0. They were continuing to talk after being asked to stop (4.50); coming to class under the influence of alcohol or drugs (4.45); allowing a cell phone to ring (4.14); and conversing loudly with others (4.09). Nonverbally showing disrespect for others followed closely, with a mean of 3.94. The two behaviors ranked lowest were nose blowing (1.72) and yawning (1.88). Just above them was eating and drinking, with a 2.03 mean.

Some of the midrange behaviors, those not of great concern to students in terms of classroom civility, still do compromise the climate for learning in the classroom and therefore must be of concern to teachers. Examples include using a PalmPilot, iPod, or computer for nonclass activities, with a 3.25 mean; getting up during class; leaving and returning (2.99); doing homework for other classes (2.88); and reading nonclass material (2.70). Although students may not consider these behaviors seriously uncivil, they are behaviors indicative of a lack of engagement with the content of the class.

Students were asked to respond to a second question that inquired about the frequency with which the behavior was observed. As might be guessed, texting topped the list, with a 4.00 mean. It was followed by packing up books before class is over (3.76), yawning (3.47), and eating and drinking (3.39). Those behaviors observed least often included coming to class under the influence of alcohol or drugs (1.65), continuing to talk after being asked to stop (1.97), nonverbally showing disrespect for others (2.04), and making disparaging remarks (2.06).

A Pearson product moment correlation calculated between the mean ratings of the degree of incivility of student classroom behaviors and the means ratings of the frequency of these behaviors was significant at minus 0.46. “This negative correlation demonstrates that the most egregious classroom behaviors are perceived to be occurring less frequently.” (p. 17)

The faculty researchers make this observation in their discussion section. “Whatever approach an individual faculty member or administrator takes, the rationale for addressing the behavior can be squarely located not in the individual’s personal preferences or idiosyncrasies, or even in the perceptions of faculty generally, but in the perceptions of students. Faculty or administrators can have greater confidence that they are indeed addressing classroom behaviors that may interfere with learning.” (p. 17) Said more succinctly, when it comes to classroom incivility, students and faculty are pretty much on the same page.

Reference: Bjorklund, W. L. and Rehling, D. L. (2010). Student perceptions of classroom incivility. College Teaching, 58 (1), 15-18.

Reprinted from The Teaching Professor, 25.1 (2011): 4.

From common problems, such as class disruptions, disrespect, and cheating, to more serious, potentially dangerous behaviors, instructors may face a myriad of unwelcome behaviors in their classroom. How they respond is important, but even more critical are the proactive steps instructors can take to prevent these behaviors from occurring in the first place. Or, if they cannot prevent the problems completely, at least recognize the early signs and respond appropriately before the situation spins out of control.

During the recent 90-minute seminar, Managing Student Discipline Issues Legally and Effectively, Rob Jenkins, associate professor of English at Georgia Perimeter College, and attorney Deborah Gonzalez shared strategies for maintaining appropriate discipline without alienating students or compromising the course. They also explained the legal issues around disciplinary hearings, including differences between public and private institutions with regards to student rights and due process.

One of the key tools for preventing disruptive student behavior is the syllabus. Used properly, the syllabus—and how you present it on that first day of class—can go a long way in setting the tone for your course, Jenkins said.

Before crafting your syllabus, you’ll first want to familiarize yourself with your institution’s student code of conduct. Then, Jenkins recommends asking yourself a few questions:

• How do I expect students to behave?
• What will or won’t I tolerate?
• What compromises or “concessions to reality” am I willing to make?

As you write your syllabus, it’s important to set clear expectations for learner behavior and responsibilities, as well as workload, learning outcomes, deadlines, grading, late assignments and assessment. Then, as you go over the syllabus with students, you’ll want to clarify specific points that are particularly important to you so as to avoid any misunderstandings down the road. Jenkins likes to use this time to explain why he has certain rules and often shares past experiences to illustrate his point.

“One of the things that I’ve learned in 26 years of teaching is that there are steps faculty can take very early on that will head off a lot of these problem to begin with,” said Jenkins. “I think sometimes we create rules because things annoy us and not because they actually disrupt the class. You have to decide, what’s your level of tolerance? Are you really going to try and ban smart phones in your class? Is that even feasible? It’s important not to have rules that you can’t enforce.”

The numbers are alarming and do require a serious response, but have you ever turned the numbers upside down? For example, if 42 percent of college students admit to working with others on individual assignments, that means 58 percent aren’t getting help from others and those students would like you to do something about the 42 percent. If 38 percent admit to plagiarizing, that means 62 percent aren’t plagiarizing and those students expect you to do something about the 38 percent.

It’s an interesting view presented by Tricia Bertram Gallant, PhD, academic integrity coordinator at the University of California, San Diego, during the recent online seminar Teaching Integrity: Effective Responses to Cheating. The seminar challenged participants to dispel some of the myths around student cheating and rethink their role in establishing a culture of integrity.

“The common theme for today and for all my writing really is about encouraging students, teachers and administrators to not focus on policing, preventing and punishing cheating, which is by far the most typical response, but focus more on the more realistic picture of student cheating, the positive responses of infusing academic integrity back into our daily conversations in the classroom and in our responses to cheating.”

Promoting Academic Integrity
During the seminar, Bertram Gallant shared the following do’s and don’ts for promoting academic integrity in the college classroom.
Do

• Be clear about your expectations and rules for completing every assignment and test.
• Model integrity by citing your sources, showing up on time and prepared, and changing your exams and assignments from year to year.
• Limit temptations for cheating during your examinations.
• Work with your school’s policy and processes to reduce cheating.
• Rethink your out-of-class assignments – are they really measuring what you think they are?
• See academic and professional integrity as part of your teaching job – it may be one of the most important things you teach!

Don’t

• Assume the students know which behaviors are cheating and which are not.
• Tell students “don’t cheat or else” and expect that to work.
• Allow students to keep their exams and then wonder why your exams are “out there.”
• Confuse sloppy authorship with plagiarism – not all missed citations are an attempt to deceive.
• Expect students to learn from their mistakes unless someone is facilitating that learning.

“Just like every student has a different learning style, they have different ways in which they respond to different approaches to prevent cheating,” said Bertram Gallant. “At the Center for Academic Integrity we encourage faculty to focus on academic integrity standards and our five fundamental values of honesty, respect, responsibility, fairness and trustworthiness rather than on compliance and control.”

Students’ expectations for top marks, whether they earned them or not, unfortunately can be coupled with foolish tendencies on the part of some teachers (this writer excepted of course) to play the role of the avuncular professor. The kindly avuncular professor is easily deluded to think that “encouraging” students with exaggerated praise and slight grade inflation will be helpful. It isn’t. How do I know? For me, the tell-tale sign is that often after handing in my grades, I feel a mild self-loathing. This is the feeling I get when I give grades that don’t truly reflect the totality of what I experience from students.

For professionals in the psychology field it is particularly important to be evaluated in this way because our patients give us marks on an experiential level. For that matter, spouses, friends give grades too. They grade us by the feelings we give and receive. For too long I felt an undeserving, inappropriate loyalty to test scores, the totals, the “numbers.”

Not this year. This year I would give grades that would reflect performance as people, as students as professionals. How would they manage the side of them that was good, and the (unacknowledged) part that was not so good, that was snide, selfish and denigrating and well, bratty? I and others had seen that in the class, felt it, knew it was there as sure as the air we breathed.

I anticipated wrath and hatred from students and was frightened. Yet when I allowed myself the very freedom that I gave them, the freedom to exercise just a tad of healthy cruelty, the smallest dollop of therapeutic hate, I felt energized. Why attack myself (through depression and disappointment and the usual despair) why not use the aggression to help the educational relationship that I am sworn to uphold.

So what monstrous, “cruel” thing did I do? I gave them just a tad below what they were expecting. An A- instead of A for the most part, although some did score slightly lower based on their performance.

Shortly after logging in the grades I received emails from five of the students. Some of them were incensed. “Why did I receive only an A-?” One irate student wrote: “I will not accept less than an A for this class. I will go straight to the dean and complain about you.” A classmate wrote something quite similar. Clearly the A- (and in one case, a B+) were attacks on their sense of self, or perhaps just their academic vanity.

I did not answer any of the emails. My silence more than my words, I determined, would help them reflect. But had I responded, here is what I might have said: Why indeed did you get an A-? You got an A- because you did well enough in the class to get an A-, but not well enough for an A.

Woody Allen is famous for saying that 90% of life is just showing up. But that’s just it, you don’t get an A for just showing up. You have to be extraordinary to get an A.

You do not get an A in life for just showing up and complying or even for cooperating. You get an A for adding to the experience, for giving, for risking, for showing enthusiasm, for adding life.

After several days of email messages unanswered, I received one this morning from a student whom I love dearly, but to whom I gave a B+: “I wanted to say thanks,” he wrote, “because you know what … I failed this semester (B+ was a failure for me) [but] it just gives me the fuel to push myself and remember that I have to work for things…, thank you for considering me enough to not lie to me and just place an A because [you and I] have a good chemistry. Thank you, that means a lot and is the ultimate lesson….much love and much respect to you Dr. F.”

My dear students: Hating me is one of the most constructive things you will ever do if it leads to reflection for you and for me. Thank you for your candor and have a wonderful summer.

Simon Yisrael Feuerman, PsyD, LCSW, is the director of the New Center for Advanced Psychotherapy Studies (NCAPS), and an adjunct professor of psychology at Kean University.

Before I stand accused of holding all kinds of warped pedagogical attitudes and beliefs, I want to make clear my belief that most learning, whether in kindergarten or graduate school, is built on a foundation of love and trust.

But as in many relationships, things can go askew, and within the love matrix negative feelings, even hatred, can develop. Good teachers and students deal creatively with strong negative feelings.

One might think: what kind of animosity can develop in say, a classroom of first-graders or at the other end of the educational spectrum, graduate students in a doctoral program? Experience tells me that there is plenty of it to go around.

For example, in the graduate school of psychology at the university where I teach, we studied such topics as psychopathology of childhood and analysis of group processes this past semester. It was a large class of bright, appealing and motivated students. They were as good as you will find in most places. Yet even in these seemingly intellectually-laden precincts, an exciting palpable sense of hatred started to brew.

A significant number of students found the class was not what they expected. “Too much free-floating discussion, not enough text-driven material” was what a few said. This seemingly minor quibble erupted into full-fledged despising and white-knuckle stare-downs. Although satisfying compromises were seemingly reached (we could talk about actual situations with children and refer verbally to text), there were holdouts.

One particularly bright and articulate student wrote to me in her weekly log (a requirement for each class session) “This class has just dragged on and on. This is not what we paid for. I won’t talk about how I feel during class and if you ask me to do it, I will disavow that I wrote this!”

And so the semester haltingly progressed. Students did learn, but the educational flow was impaired. It was a bit of a slog.

Of course, at the end of the semester came grading time. I had always found grading students to be joyless and depressing, and on occasion it would bring about periods of self-loathing.

Brooding about this semi-annual task, I came upon an idea. Why not share the burden with the students? On the last day of the class I asked everyone to divide into groups and grade each other. After brief discussion they handed in their grades. Not surprisingly, they gave each other A’s. I said I would take their recommendations under advisement.

I came to understand that many, if not most, of these students expected to get A’s almost as their birthright. They walked in with that expectation even before the class began. After all, they were “great” students. They were young, bright and articulate. One had the sense that they had been told that all their lives and what’s more, they had the scores to prove it. Their silent demands of the academic world were potent and powerful. It was if they were saying I am an “A.”

Editor’s Note. Coming tomorrow, part two of this article in which the author describes his final lesson for his students: “You do not get an A in life for just showing up and complying or even for cooperating.”

Simon Yisrael Feuerman, PsyD, LCSW, is the director of the New Center for Advanced Psychotherapy Studies (NCAPS), and an adjunct professor of psychology at Kean University.

What are some common behaviors of difficult students?

Brian: Some behaviors that I have experienced in the classroom that I would consider disruptive often center on inattentive behaviors and those indicating a poor sense of classroom motivation. Here the students are surfing on their laptops, checking their phones for text messages, or generally not paying attention to the lecture at hand. More serious disruptive behaviors have involved students who directly and persistently challenge my authority in the classroom or seek to disagree with points in the lecture merely to make their own unrelated points.

Perry: The common behavior I see is chronic tardiness to class. These are the students who are perpetually late and as they come in, usually find the one seat in the room that causes the most disruption as he or she settles in. Other disruptive behaviors have included side conversations, monopolizing the discussion with your own agenda, electronic issues (cell phones, PDA, inappropriate laptop usage, etc.), and leaving early without discussing it with the instructor.

Are there certain difficult or disruptive behaviors that are becoming more prevalent among college students?

Brian: I think the inattentive behaviors mentioned above are the most common for students to demonstrate in the classroom. These are often followed quickly by either rude or disrespectful behavior or what I would consider a general lack of civility and manners in the classroom.

Perry: There has been an increase in a lack of respect and common manners towards each other and the instructor. This comes out in classroom discussion, private conversations between the instructor and the student, and a lack of a willingness to meet someone halfway.

What are some common mistakes professors make in dealing with difficult students?

Brian: I think the most common mistake is adapting the approach of “It’s my way or the highway” or exerting power and control too quickly and in a heavy-handed fashion when a more sophisticated, tactical response would get the job done more effectively—for example, embarrassing a student who is misusing technology in the classroom in front of the entire class instead of taking the time to meet with the student after class and have a more respectful conversation with them about what they are doing and why you find it distracting. The latter approach takes more time and requires more patience from the faculty member—but it often is more effective in achieving long-term compliance. It also teaches the student the idea of giving respect to get respect.

Perry: One common mistake is instructors who do not share their classroom expectations at the beginning of the course. Often the syllabus contains all the course assignment information but very few classroom expectations. Additionally, if the expectations are in the syllabus, they need to be shared during the first class, just like you would share the information on the assignments. The expectations also need to be flexible to meet the needs of the instructor as he or she teaches AND the students as they learn. It is generally not a one way highway.

What are some possible consequences of ineffective classroom management?

Brian: If they are too heavy-handed in their approach, faculty can end up creating an atmosphere of fear in the classroom that will ensure compliance but never quite achieve a respectful classroom atmosphere. Students will comply with behavior out of fear of being embarrassed and never truly buy-in as stakeholders in the process of learning. If a faculty member ignores classroom behavior then they run the risk of losing total control of their classroom, which also drastically impacts the creation of a successful learning environment.

Perry: Not being clear about your expectations leaves the students with no boundaries and sets them up to have a run-in with the instructor. Also, being rigid with your expectations invites silence in the classroom, with students not buying into the course because they do not respect the instructor.

In the online video seminar, Classroom Management 102: Working with Difficult Students, Drs. Brian Van Brunt and Perry Francis provide four live-action demonstrations of typical classroom management problems, including the right and wrong way to respond to the unwanted behavior. Learn More >>

As you know, some students are late to class on a regular basis, and in doing so are probably displaying a form of resistance or defiance—and it is wise to see it as such.

When questioned about their habitual lateness, students are apt to justify or excuse it on the grounds that they have other tasks to attend to, such as child care or job responsibilities that preempt punctual class attendance. Many instructors are thus made to feel guilty and are thereby disarmed by such reasons or excuses. They allow students to talk them into considering these excuses as authentic extenuations.

If this sounds familiar to you, here are a few opinions on the subject to consider.

1. Arriving to class punctually is an important responsibility borne entirely by the student, not the instructor.
2. Although child care or job responsibilities are clearly time consuming, and when combined with the demands connected with attending college can be downright overwhelming, it is again largely the responsibility of the student, not the instructor, to decide which takes priority — one’s job, one’s child care responsibilities, or punctually attending classes.
3. Lateness is often a rude and disruptive form of behavior, especially when it is accompanied by doors opening and shutting, loud noises, and students distractingly passing in front of the instructor to get to their seats.
4. Habitual lateness to class, much like when friends or family members habitually arrive late for social gatherings and usually infuriate us because of their thoughtlessness, is typically a sign of devaluation of and contempt for instructors and other students who have arrived to class punctually. Even more important, it is most likely a sign of devaluation and contempt for one’s own education, albeit unconscious, since the student’s habitual lateness will necessarily curtail his or her time in class and cause the student to forfeit important opportunities for learning.
5. Instructors who habitually arrive late to class themselves are poor models for their students and should find any reasonable means possible to correct this form of unprofessional behavior.

Generally speaking, strict rules and adverse consequences for chronic lateness almost always improve attendance and punctuality. Remember, this form of passive-aggressive behavior can be remedied if you allow yourself to use a clear, fair, and proportionate set of adverse consequences to deal with it.

Excerpted from Coping with Seven Disruptive Personality Types in the Classroom. Learn more about this whitepaper »

Be very clear. Establish criteria for each assignment and put them in writing. That is, you must clearly tell students what you expect them to do and how the assignment should look when they turn it in. Some instructors communicate exactly how long each assignment is supposed to be and even go so far as to indicate what font and spacing students should use.

You must also communicate to students how their work will be graded. One option is to prepare a criteria sheet that lists expectations and points associated with assignments. Another option is to have a rubric with criteria on one side and quality indicators across. It might seem like excessive hand-holding to some instructors, but many students appreciate knowing exactly what they need to do and against which standards their work will be measured. Conveying this information on the first day allows students to plan their time and prioritize their various obligations.

Many students also appreciate a thorough explanation of how final grades will be calculated. A grade-calculation worksheet is a simple tool that allows students to track and monitor their performance over the course of the term. At any given moment, they can know exactly where they stand, what grades are possible, whether they need to spend more time on this course, or whether they can reprioritize to dedicate more effort to another course. In most cases, the math on the worksheet is simple and can vastly minimize stress for students, since it eliminates any uncertainty over how they are performing.

Ultimately, clear expectations and consistent application of consequences will sustain the efficient yet friendly classroom environment that you wish to create. They will also ease stress and should encourage more active student participation.

Note: Although you explain grading on the first day, expect to review it again when you return the first assignments, papers, and exams. Once students have their graded papers in hand, you can walk them through the syllabus and how the material relates to it. You can explain how you applied your grading criteria and made final determinations about the quality of students’ work. You can also help them enter their grades on their worksheet to begin to track their performance and progress.

Excerpted from Ten Ways to Engage Your Students on the First Day of Class, a Magna Publications White Paper.

Unfortunately, the pressures of modern life and recent concerns over the hazards of developing inappropriately close relationships with students seem to be combining to push professors and students further apart. As class sizes increase, the possibility for college students to remain anonymous—and alienated—grows. This situation serves to undermine more than just education; it can also have negative effects on campus safety.

New security devices such as better sirens, text messaging, and warning systems may be useful in combating school violence, but it would be a fundamental mistake for college officials to turn exclusively to a hardware solution to address campus threats. While faculty colleagues looking at the headlines or thinking back to horrific news accounts of campus shootings might feel the urge to withdraw or pull away from students, that is precisely the opposite of what needs to happen.

The main point and recommendation of campus safety research was summarized eloquently in Deadly Lessons, which states: “We could not put it better than the words of a beloved, long time teacher at one of the schools we studied—‘The only real way of preventing school violence is to get into students’ heads and hearts.’” As idealistic as this sounds, it is actually very realistic, practical, and security-oriented advice.

In other words, faculty members and college administrators need to be more engaged with students, not less. This will require some courage, particularly when working with a deeply troubled student, but if it is framed properly, engagement becomes the best security measure. It is important to bear in mind that professors are teaching the whole person, not merely focusing on their brains. Emotions comprise part of the intellectual process, as well.

The absolute best security measure on your campus is to develop a culture of two-way listening where students who have valid concerns about other students, or even about themselves, feel they can come forward and can talk to a faculty member or administrator. Students at risk need to believe that there is a faculty member who is an attentive listener, who seems to care about the students in class and is receptive to talking to them as a guide and as a trusted, helpful mentor.

Unfortunately, most campus tenure and promotion guidelines currently do not reward faculty members professionally for their efforts in getting to know their students personally. This is part of the campus culture that will need to change to promote safety and reduce the likelihood of future violence.

Reference:
Moore, Mark, et al. (2003). Deadly Lessons: Understanding Lethal School Violence. National Research Council: Washington, DC. ii.

Excerpted from What Faculty Must Know About Campus Security, a Magna Publications white paper. Learn More »

“Hell can be the daily ordeal of having a student in the front row of your class chewing gum much in the manner of a gapped-jawed alligator devouring an opossum,” he says. “Hell can be the student who persistently uses your class to stretch out and catch up on his sleep after late-night partying. Hell can be the student who scowls at you each day and constantly interrupts your lectures with reminders that he knows more about the subject under discussion than you do. Hell can be students who plagiarize, use cell phones in class, chronically and rudely arrive late to class, use bullying tactics to extort higher grades, and incessantly chatter with their classmates as if your class were a social club.”

In the recent online seminar Proven Strategies for Managing Disruptive Student Behavior, Amada revealed his time-tested strategies for restoring classroom civility. Whether it’s the students who begin packing up their belongings a few minutes before the end of class, the students who are always late, or the students who dress provocatively, the key is to address the misconduct in a timely and decisive manner, he says. Don’t wait until you’ve reached your breaking point.

“Generally speaking if students are approached in the spirit of good will and humor, it is likely they will respond in kind, and be open to changing their inappropriate behavior,” he says. “Too often instructors allow their objections and resentments over student behavior to fester and immobilize them and then when they finally act, they overreact.”

In addition, permitting rude and inappropriate behavior sends the unspoken message that it’s OK, and the unwanted behavior will likely escalate and spread to other students. Meanwhile, those students who are following the classroom rules will not only resent the disruptive students but will resent the instructor for allowing the few problem students to poison the entire classroom climate, says Amada.

So what do you do? March into class and more or less let them have it?

Well, if you do, you certainly are not alone. In a study of teacher anger, researchers asked students to think of a specific teacher who had become angry in class and then describe that angry episode. Only five of the 301 students asked could not think of an angry-teacher event.

Specifically, these researchers were interested in seeing if they could identify some conditions under which the expression of teacher anger was seen as violating expected norms for teacher behavior. In a nutshell, they discovered that “teacher anger is not in and of itself a classroom norm violation. It is the manner in which anger is expressed that defines it as a norm violation.” (p. 85)

Expressions of anger by teachers are deemed appropriate when teachers “avoid intense, aggressive anger displays and instead assertively and directly discuss the problem with the class.” (p. 85) When they have those discussions, teachers are well advised to be fair and open and to consider carefully student perceptions of what has happened and why.

Put another way, even if you’re mad as hell, you want to turn down the volume, you don’t want to use a lot of emotional language, you don’t want to throw things (chalk, papers), you don’t want to exaggerate (not every last person in the class is lazy), you don’t want to turn red and look as though a stroke may be imminent, and you don’t want to be rude or condescending. You want to describe how student behavior affects you and what it causes you to do and to think. You also want to propose some alternatives—identify behaviors that are appropriate. You know yourself best, but sometimes it makes sense to let the intense wave of emotions pass before you respond. You want to control your emotions rather than let them control you.

If you do express anger in ways that violate norms, those expressions negatively influence student perceptions of you and your course. Any expression of anger is a high-stakes moment, as seen by how readily students remember them. Interesting side note: these researchers found that angry displays students considered inappropriate at the beginning of the course were more accepted by students later in the course. The researchers think that once students get to know a teacher and come to trust how she is running the course, they are more willing to accept an angry display.

If you think these research results indicate that you should suppress angry feelings—not let students know that you are upset by what they’ve done (or haven’t done)—that conclusion is not supported by this research. What these researchers found was that “students perceived teachers who did not display anger as neither appropriate [nor] inappropriate.” (p. 85) In other words, suppressing anger does not gain you higher marks with students. It gains you no marks. It’s back to what the researchers observed initially: “Not all angry episodes are similarly perceived. The way teachers express their anger affects how students respond.” (p. 86)

Reference: McPherson, M. B., Kearney, P., and Plax, T. G. (2003). The dark side of instruction: Teacher anger as classroom norm violations. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 31 (1), 76-90.

Reprinted from “Teacher Anger: When Does it Violate Expected Norms of Teacher Behavior.” The Teaching Professor, 23.10 (2009): 5.

Photo courtesy of RL Hyde, Flickr Creative Commons license.

This surprised me. Although I’m still fairly new to higher education, after spending more than 10 years in corporate communications management in the private sector, my colleagues are very seasoned educators. I didn’t expect they would have issues with students disrupting the learning environment by using mobile devices, coming late to class, and the like.

As I listened to the conversation, I reflected on my personal experiences. Even though we taught some of the same students, I didn’t encounter the same classroom management issues that my counterparts did. I wondered why this was the case, and realized that I followed three critical steps that help me preserve the optimal learning environment for my students’ success.

1. Set the Tone from Day One. Be proactive, not reactive. It’s important that you set and communicate your classroom guidelines from the first day of class – no matter what the instructional environment. Don’t wait until an incident occurs (i.e. a student’s phone ringing aloud in class or a student being disrespectful in an online discussion board) to put a guideline in place. Document and publish your guidelines within your syllabus or create an addendum document to accompany your course outline.
2. Model the Way. As educators, our students look to us as role models, whether we embrace it or not. It’s imperative that we ‘walk the talk’ when it comes to our classroom guidelines. If you have banned food and drink from your classroom, then you can’t eat your lunch while your class is taking an exam because you have a committee meeting at noon that day.
3. Be Consistent. Consistently enforcing your classroom guidelines is critical to preserving the classroom environment for learning. In politics, you often hear legislators proclaim, “What’s the purpose of a law, if no one enforces it?” The same applies for your classroom guidelines. If you don’t enforce your own guidelines, then no one will follow them.

At the end of the day, as educators, we want to focus on learning and promoting our students’ success. Even though we may not encounter the volume of behavioral issues that our secondary school educators do; it’s our duty to ensure that the classroom environment is optimal for learning. Following these tips will hopefully help you do that — our success and our students’ success depends on it.

Monique Perry, M.A. is a communications instructor at York Technical College in Rock Hill, S.C. Ms. Perry is also pursuing her doctorate in higher education administration at the University of Florida in Gainesville.

If you were in this professor’s shoes (and maybe that’s not too hard to imagine) how would you handle a student like James?

During the recent online video seminar Classroom Management 102: Working with Difficult Students, Brian Van Brunt, EdD and Perry Francis EdD used role playing to demonstrate both effective and ineffective responses to students like James. Some of the ineffective approaches include ignoring the behavior and hoping it improves, embarrassing the student in front of the class, and enforcing a new, no technology rule for everyone in the class.

But there’s a better way, of course, and it centers on setting clear expectations upfront and communicating those expectations to the students. It also means being willing to share a little bit of yourself so your students can see you as a real person. In the case of a student like James, you could, for example, let him know that you’re addicted to your Blackberry or iPod, but when you’re in class you shut it off out of respect for the class. And while you can sympathize that it’s sometimes hard to pay attention in a class that fulfills a requirement, but is not part of one’s major, you also need to be firm in communicating your expectations for classroom behavior, and the consequences for ignoring class rules.

“One of the things that I’ve discovered in the time I’ve taught is if we don’t address things appropriately they have a tendency to fester and not just impact that particular student, but impact the entire classroom and make it less than it could be,” says Francis, a professor of counseling at Eastern Michigan University.

The scenario with James was just one of four scenarios played out during the seminar. Others involved a veteran struggling to adapt to civilian life, an extremely shy student, and an ultra-competitive student who participates in class to the point of distraction. In working with each of these student types, Van Brunt encourages the use of what is known in the counseling field as motivational interviewing, which includes the following five techniques.

Express Empathy

• Avoid communications that imply a superior/inferior relationship.
• Respect the student’s freedom of choice and self-direction.
• Attitude change attempts are gentle, subtle and change is up to the student.

Develop Discrepancy

• Change occurs when a student perceives a discrepancy between where they are and where they want to be.
• Help student develop a discrepancy by raising their awareness of the adverse academic consequences of their choices.

Avoid Argumentation

• Don’t argue, it tends to evoke resistance.
• Show the consequences of their behavior.
• Help devalue perceived positive aspects of their negative choices.

Roll with Resistance

• Invite new ways of thinking.
• View ambivalence as normal.
• Evoke solutions from the student.

Support Self-Efficacy

• Persuade student that it is possible to change his or her own behavior and thereby reduce overall problems.

How about a regularly scheduled two-to three-minute break in the middle of class? John A. Olmsted III recommends it for the following reasons: 1) it provides a change of pace and lets students recharge tired brains; 2) it can be used to get students involved with the content; and 3) it can be designed to provide valuable feedback. Olmsted offers these examples to illustrate how he uses the break in his chemistry courses.

In-class assessment breaks

Based on the classroom research model, Olmsted uses the short break to assess a specific skill he wants students to master such as drawing a particular molecular picture. Students do the task and offer feedback as to how confident they are that they completed it successfully. Or he may ask students to assess an instructional technique such as the effectiveness of his presentation on a particular topic. Other times the questions encourage the students to self assess: “Were you satisfied with your performance on the first hour examination?” followed by some probes as to why and/or why not. And finally there are questions about what students think might support their efforts to learn: “Friday’s class will be a review in preparation for Monday’s exam on thermodynamics. What specific topics would you like me to cover in the review?” (p. 526)

Feedback breaks

During feedback breaks, Olmstead reports back on the feedback students have provided during a recent assessment break. He illustrates the general class conclusions with examples of positive and negative comments. In responding to the request for topics for review sessions, Olmsted prepares an overhead and uses it to guide the content of the review session.

Bottom-of-the-hour-news-breaks

For this break the instructor presents interesting and relevant chemistry news such as introducing winners of the Nobel Prizes in chemistry and talking a bit about their research. Sometimes it’s “local” news like announcements about a schedule change for a class session or reminders about due dates. Olmsted incorporates a bit of humor by occasionally offering a “crime” report involving students who are delinquent in picking up exams or requests for information on “missing persons” who have not been seen in class for some time. The “weather report” may include a prediction about events to come in the class. “Weather will be clear through the weekend, but a storm front is expected early next week, with the probability of quizzes reaching 75% on Monday.” (p. 526)

Olmsted concludes with a warning. “Mid-lecture breaks are addictive. At the end of one semester, I announced that I planned to forgo the mid-lecture break in order to allow a full review of topics that would be on the final. The uproar was deafening, and I hastily improvised a mid-lecture break.” (p. 527)

Reference: John A. Olmsted, III (1999). The mid-lecture break: when less is more. Journal of Chemical Education, 76 (4), 525-27.