COMPARING TEACHERS’ VIEWPOINTS OF CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STYLES WITH STUDENTS’ FEELINGS AT HANOI LAW UNIVERSITY

Vũ Văn Tuấn; Nguyễn Thị Hương Lan

doi:10.34238/tnu-jst.6062

COMPARING TEACHERS’ VIEWPOINTS OF CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT STYLES WITH STUDENTS’ FEELINGS AT HANOI LAW UNIVERSITY

About this article

Received: 26/05/22 Revised: 14/06/22 Published: 14/06/22

Authors

1. Vu Van Tuan , Hanoi Law University
2. Nguyen Thi Huong Lan, Hanoi Law University

Abstract

Good classroom management is an extremely important task for teachers because it directly affects student learning outcomes. Quantitative descriptive study through the survey method by using 5-level Likert closed-ended questionnaire survey method was carried out at Hanoi Law University to compare the views of lecturers on classroom management styles and their perceptions of students about 4 styles of classroom management, namely authoritarian, collaborative, democratic, and laissez-faire styles. The results show that there was a contradiction in the view of authoritarian management. Specifically, teachers disliked the authoritarian style but students hold a neutral stance. There were similarities in the collaborative and democratic management styles. However, the completely opposite viewpoint was acknowledged in the laissez-faire management. Although teachers would like to delegate the autonomy and rights to students in learning activities and the learning outcomes, students disagreed with this perspective and believed that teachers should bear the responsibilities in monitoring student success in academic outputs. Collaborative learning style is highly appreciated by students.

Keywords

Classroom management style; Higher education; Authoritarian style; Democratic style; Autonomy

Full Text:

PDF (Tiếng Việt)

References

[1] Central Committee of the Communist Party of Vietnam, “Resolution on “Fundamental and Comprehensive Innovation in Education, Serving Industrialization and Modernization in a Socialist-oriented Market Economy during International Integration” Ratified in the 8^th session,” 2013. [Online]. Available: https://vanbanphapluat.co/resolution-no-29-nq-tw-fundamental-and-comprehensive-innovation -in-education. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[2] J. P. Barile, D. K. Donohue, and E. R. Anthony, “Teacher-Student Relationship Climate and School Outcomes: Implications for Educational Policy Initiatives,” Journal of Youth and Adolescence, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 256-267, Mar. 15^th, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-011-9652-8. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[3] T. K. G. Bui and T. T. N. Tran, “Classroom Management Styles and Teacher-Student Relationship Congruency: Its Influence on Student Learning Outcomes,” TNU Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 199, no. 6, pp. 11-16, May 10^th, 2019. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.34238/tnu-jst.2019.06.333. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[4] L. Jung-Sook, “The Effects of the Teacher-student Relationship and Academic Press on Student Engagement and Academic Performance,” International Journal of Educational Research, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 330-340, May 15^th, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijer.2012.04.006. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[5] K. Lewin, “Patterns of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created Social Climates,” Journal of Social Psychology, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 271-299, May 1999. [Online]. Available: https://tu-dresden.de/mn/psychologie/ipep/lehrlern/ressourcen/dateien/lehre/lehramt/lehrveranstaltungen/Lehrer_Schueler_Interaktion_SS_2011/Lewin_1939_original.pdf?lang=en. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[6] T. N. Cao, “Psychological interaction in the classroom between lecturers and students at university,” Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Code: 62.31.04.01, Vietnam Academy of Social Sciences, 2016.

[7] P. Benson, “Learner Autonomy,” TESOL Quarterly, vol. 47, no. 4, pp. 839-843, Sep. 3^rd, 2013. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.134. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[8] J. Schreurs and R. Dumbraveanu, “A Shift from Teacher Centered to Learner Centered Approach,” International Journal of Engineering Pedagogy (iJEP), vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 36-41, Jun. 12^th, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.3991/ijep.v4i3.3395. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[9] Ministry of Education and Training, “No. 17/2021/TT-BGDDT. Circular on providing for standards and formulation, Appraisal and Promulgation of Training Programs of Higher Education,” Jun. 22^nd, 2021. [Online]. Available: https://moet.gov.vn/tintuc/Pages/tin-tong-hop.aspx?ItemID=7379. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[10] H. Q. Pham, Education environment. Vietnam Education Publishing House, 2006.

[11] J. C. Richards and R. W. Schmidt, “Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics (4th ed.),” Routledge, p. 81, Oct. 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833835. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[12] J. A. Norris, “Looking at Classroom Management through a Social and Emotional Learning Lens,” Theory into Practice, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 313-318, 2003. [Online]. Available: www.jstor.org/stable/1477394. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[13] V. T. Vu, T. H. Nhac and N. B. M. La, “Teacher-Student Relationship Harmony and Student Learning Outcomes Imprinted by Teacher Classroom Management Styles at a Higher Education Institution,” TNU Journal of Science and Technology, vol. 226, no. 13, pp. 36-42, Jun. 9, 2021. [Online], Available: https://doi.org/10.34238/tnu-jst.4313. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[14] G. Hagenauer and E. V. Simone, “Teacher-student Relationship at University: An Important yet Under-researched Field,” Oxford Review of Education, vol. 40, no. 3, pp. 370-388, May 21^st, 2014. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2014.921613. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[15] W. G. Cochran, Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1977.

[16] Z. Dornyei and T. Taguchi, Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration and Processing (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge, 2010.

[17] L. J. Cronbach, “Coefficient Alpha and the Internal Structure of Tests,” Psychometrika, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 297-334, Feb 28^th, 1951. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[18] H. Gehlbach, M. E. Brinkworth, and A. D. Harris, “Changes in Teacher-student Relationships,” British Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 690-704, Dec. 22^nd, 2012. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8279.2011.02058.x. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

[19] T. T. A. Nguyen, T. N. N. Thu, T. K. O. Dinh, and V. T. Nguyen, “Factors affecting the learning results of students in the 1st and 2nd years of Can Tho University of Technology and Technology,” Can Tho University Journal of Science, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 82-89, Oct. 26, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://dx.doi.org/10.22144/ctu.jvn.2016.560. [Accessed March 18, 2022].

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34238/tnu-jst.6062

Refbacks

There are currently no refbacks.



Remember me