Classroom Dynamics and Children at Risk: A Followup

Abstract

The two studies reported in this article followed up on an initial investigation of classroom dynamics and young children identified as at risk (AR) for developing learning, emotional, and behavioral disorders (LD/EBD) (Lago-Dellelo, 1998). In the present studies, measures were taken of teacher-student interactions, peer interactions, students' perceptions of their teachers' expectations, student self-perceptions, and academic engaged time. In our first study, when the children were in grades 2 and 3, results replicated those of Lago-Dellelo (1998) conducted the previous year when the children were in grades 1 and 2. That is, significant differences between students at risk for LD/EBD and not-at-risk (NAR) peers were found for type of teacher responses and academic engaged time. Teachers made significantly more negative and nonacademic responses to the AR students, who spent significantly less time on task than NAR peers. In our second followup study, when the children were in grades 3 and 4, significant differences between groups were found for academic engaged time, self-perceptions, and perceptions of teachers' expectations. At-risk students spent less time on task, perceived themselves more negatively, and perceived their teachers as having more negative expectations of them than did NAR students. These findings suggest that as children at risk for LD/EBD get older, they begin to realize that their teachers view them negatively, and in turn begin to view themselves negatively. The effects of this realization on the these students' achievement and selfesteem as well as adult and peer relationships in later years need to be further explored.

An examination of teacher instruction and student engagement involving adolescents with and without challenging behavior.

“…Passive engagement, time spent looking at the teacher but not reading, writing or speaking, has been reported about 42% of the observed time for elementary students with and without identified disabilities (Greenwood, Horton, & Utley, 2002). Additionally, Montague and Rinaldi (2001) noted significantly less engagement with academic material in elementary students at risk for learning and behavior concerns when compared to typically performing peers.…”

“…Unfortunately, students with behavior concerns and students at risk for behavior problems exhibit lower rates of on task behavior when compared with students without behavior concerns (Baker et aI., 2008;Kauffman, 2001;Montague & Rinaldi, 2001). Baker et al (2008) considered the percent of on task behavior for students with and without behavior challenges at the elementary level given differing instructional contexts; students with behavior challenges revealed a mean on task percentage between 3% and 45% lower for students with behavior challenges.…”

“…In a similar study Montague and Rinaldi (2001) noted these additional concerns: (a) few interactions occurred between students, (b) data reflected interactions only in the classroom environment, (c) elementary grades lacked teacher/student interaction data due to scheduling issues, and (d) analysis did not consider differences between gender, ethnicity of the student, matched gender, or ethnicity interactions between the students and the teachers.…”

“…Montague and Rinaldi (2001) revisited analysis of teacher and student interactions with direct observation in elementary classrooms. Noting the influence of general school outcomes on teacher and student interactions, the differences between number and type of teacher-student interaction and percent of academic engaged time was analyzed for students at risk of learning and behavior problems and students not at risk (Montague & Rinaldi, 2001). This study involved students followed from grade two to grade three or grade three to grade four, male and female students, and included ethnic representation from African-American and Hispanic identification.…”

“…Trained observers collected 15 minutes of direct observation from each targeted student on two occasions assessing teacher response, student opportunities to respond, and student initiated behaviors (Montague & Rinaldi, 2001). Social interactions between students were also observed using 15 minutes sessions and two collection times.…”