According to Stipek (2002), a correlation has been found with children who are not doing well academically and their poor relationship with their teachers. Having been constantly reprimanded in class could begin a negative association between the two. On the contrary, those who have a nurturing relationship with their teachers have better attitudes with academics and performance. Tyler & Boelter (2008) affirmed this association between a positive student-teacher relationship and high academic gain whereas a negative relationship could result in decreased academic performance. Moreover, Walker Tileston (2004) stated that the classroom environment especially that of the teacher’s influences their act of cheating during exams, their decision on dropping out and the decline of the student’s motivation and academic success.
Optimal learning occurs in an environment of intrinsic purposeful engagement through supportive instructional methods.” (Taylor and Nesheim, 2000/2001: 309) A number of research studies identify the influential role played by the learning environment in the success or otherwise of adolescents’ learning experiences. Alvermann argues that schools often fail adequately to value and make connections between the literacy concepts and skills that students bring to school and the literacy demands they encounter within the school. If students do not readily identify with or belong to the prevailing culture of the school – a culture that is manifested in things such as, choice of textbooks, the language and experience that is valued in the classroom and school – then these individuals may struggle to succeed according to what is often an apparently arbitrary set of academic assessment tasks, and expectations (Alvermann, 2001). As such, I believe that it is important to build a strong, safe, and conducive classroom environment in which all students feel able to call upon the expertise and advice of the teacher and peers. It is one of the teacher’s foremost responsibility in making the classroom environment conducive to learning.
He claimed that the important differences subsist between the labels even to the “dyslexic students” and to those who “needed glasses.” His research also suggests that not all labels are regarded equally and “the specific learning disability labels affect the perceptions of the labeled individual differently” (p. 11). The findings of Ercole’s (2009) study indicate that labeling in the classroom setting is a real happening especially when the students shift to the more advanced levels of education. His study inspected how labeling theory can unavoidably be utilized in the classroom to explain the concepts of the “deviant academic vs. deviant criminal behavior” (p.
As well as factors that may affect learning and troubles that a student may have with concentrating and remembering information, a student’s grades should not measure his or her intelligence because of the difference between intelligence and effort that not everyone understands. People who pressure others about their grades must realize that getting good grades on a test or in a class will not mean anything if they cannot apply the material that they learned
Rudolph Dreikurs: Democratic teaching Misbehaviour results from four major causes or mistaken goals. Democratic teaching, logical consequences and encouragement, rather than praise. The reaction of teachers to students' misguided goal-seeking behavior can be instrumental in either reducing or increasing the incidence of misbehavior in the classroom. Avoiding these discipline problems depends to some degree on teachers' personalities. Different teachers tend to react to their students in different ways, and their reactions produce different results.
Student motivation has been found as a critical component to student success (Brophy, 2004; Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991). According to Crump (1995), “Student motivation is a major problem in classrooms today. Many students are bored, inattentive and unable to see a connection between schoolwork and their lives outside the classrooms” (p. 3). Learning is influenced not only by the interest of student about what is taught and how is taught, but learning also influenced by the interaction and relation between student and teacher. McCroskey (2001) find out that student’s learning is considerably affected by teacher’s immediacy.
General education teachers have different opinions about the attendance of special need students in mainstream schools. The severity in special need children affects teachers’ readiness to adjust and manage particular students (Macrothink, 2012). Teachers are concerns about having students with the behavioral disorder in the general education setting. Many teachers do not believe they can teach these group effectively while they do not have enough training and support. Besides, teachers’ attitudes toward students with disabilities radically affect their education success (UNESCO, 2013).
Conclusion Discussion and Implications This study discussion and implication is framed by three questions arising in the methodology. First, the study showed that the overall level of English majors’ English learning anxiety was moderate (M=3.01), higher the mean of whole students’ English learning motivation 3.38. Among the four categories of anxiety, the mean scores of communicative apprehension anxiety was the highest and the fear of negative evaluation anxiety’s mean ranked second, which indicated that teachers should pay more attention to encourage students actively as well as bravely communicate in English and give a proper evaluation for their performance. In the categories of motivation, since the mean of personal development motivation,
High-expectation students will be led to achieve at high levels; low-expectation students’ achievement will decline. And, over time, students’ achievement and behavior will conform more and more closely to teachers’ expectations (Good T. L., 1981). Most of the research conducted to date has examined differential behavior of teachers toward high- and low-achievement students (Good T. L., 1981). The communication of differential expectations is often unconscious on the part of teachers. Or, in cases where teachers are aware that they are practicing differential treatment, they often see this as appropriate to their students
These students bring with them a precise set of cultural standards and customs that are contrasting with those expected in the mainstream classroom. For example, Asian students may feel uncomfortable in a classroom environment where the teachers are informal and the students are encouraged to speak in front of the class (Nieto, 1992). Such cultural differences between students and teachers, plus the teacher’s failure to understand student 's cultural behaviors may result in conflicts that hinder students