Chris Esson

Independent Research Project

Student Expectations of Classroom Dynamics
Rationale
In my Diploma sessions I have sat where my students sit and experienced what it is like to
sit in a class all day. I realised very quickly how much I normally move while I teach and
how little in comparison students sometimes move. This experience chimed with that of
another teacher, Alexis Wiggins. In an originally anonymous blog post the American high
school teacher described her experience of shadowing a student for two days. From her
position as a student in the classes she highlighted three recommendations for changes to
her own teaching, the first of which was that [s]tudents sit all day, and sitting is
exhausting (Wiggins:2014). My discomfort and frustration at my sedentary study period
was coupled with an awareness of the way in which I worked with my peers, the people I
sat next to each class, and how those groupings changed, or did not. The way in which I
became more personally aware of the dynamics of the classroom

suggested a personal

topic for my Independent Research Project. I have two primary questions: 1) What
preferences do students have for the dynamics of their classrooms?; and 2) How do they
feel about the way in which their classes are currently organised?
In conducting research into language classrooms Van Lier highlights the way in which
[i]deals, expectations, and conceptions of the properties that a classroom must possess so
that it can be regarded as an ordinary, good classroom, play an important role in
determining what will happen in the classroom (Van Lier, 1988:81). Similarly, Tudor
argues that language teaching is complex in part because of differences in the way in
which participants perceive the nature and goals of language teaching, and the behaviours
and interactional patterns to which these different perceptions give rise (Tudor, 2001:32).
What both authors make clear is that the diversity of students' motivations and
expectations play an important part in defining the interactional dynamics of the
classroom. For this reason my research will be focused on gathering student responses to
questions about their expectations of a an ordinary, good classroom.
In his 1987 work Tony Wright makes the claim that [c]lassrooms are usually regarded as
very formal environments, status-marked and asymmetrical (Wright, 1987:114). While
perhaps I would argue that innovations in approaches to teaching have reduced the

Chris Esson

formality of the classroom these innovations are not universally recognised or implemented,
and such an opinion is probably shared by a great many learners and stakeholders in
learning. The layout of classrooms as well as the ways in which teachers and students use
the space will certainly vary, but the perceived status of teachers and the asymmetry of
classroom relations remain. To what extent teachers are aware of these asymmetries will
also vary, but what is important is how they organise their classes to best benefit their
students. Especially in the communicative approach, an approach which informs my
teaching and the environment of my school, the dynamics of the classroom are the medium
through which communication and opportunities for learning take place. Arnold argues
that underlying his basic approach to teaching is the assumption that group processes are
a fundamental factor in most learning contexts and can make all the difference when it
comes to successful learning experiences and outcomes (Arnold, 1999:155). I hope that
questions for students can making explicit their personal feelings on the classroom and its
organisation. This will include their position in the classroom and their relations with their
peers and teachers.
Expanding upon the dynamics of learning groups Arnold argues that the development of a
group is a continuous process (Arnold, 1999:162). This is true not only in the basic sense
of rolling enrolment, but also with regards to the changing dynamics of the learners their
progress, good and bad days, friendships and fallouts. Wright, commenting on the changing
relations of

groups of learners, sums up what I feel is most important about these

relations: Quite simply, group activity is dynamic (Wright, 1987:11). This dynamism is
twofold: the dynamics of individual lessons and the dynamics of a series of lessons. My
assessment of a student's needs begin as as soon as I ask their name in a new class. I do
my best to make judgements about character, educational background, and strengths and
weaknesses. These judgements inform my organisation of pair or group work. Often I
devolve at first to simply mixing nationalities. I am aware that I might not move students
at all through a lessons. I know from experience that if I have not planned specific moves
for the students I may not attempt them. The purpose of this research project is to gather
opinions which make clearer students own feelings on the dynamics of their classrooms.
The hope is that equipped with this information I can reflect on the organisational
dynamics of my own classes and work more effectively with students. I am aware that a
single student questionnaire will not provide a dynamic picture of any classroom. To truly

Chris Esson

capture the changing processes of classroom dynamics a piece of action research might be
more effective. However, as an opening insight into this area student's opinions on
classroom dynamics can inform more effective class planning and possible future areas of
research.
Tudor argues that the starting point for decision-making in language teaching is an open
and constructive understanding of the diversity of perceptions which meet and interact in
the classroom (Tudor, 2001:32-3). A better understanding of these perceptions is the
proposed for this research project. There are three main aims to this. By collecting
questionnaire responses from current EFL students
1. What are the expectations for the dynamics of their classrooms that students bring
to their classes.
2. What are their feelings about the way in which their classes are currently organised?

Chris Esson

Evaluation
This evaluation will proceed first by briefly describing the questionnaire and then by
analysing the data collected. Second, we will reflect upon the design and usefulness of the
questionnaire and make recommendations for further research. Finally, the most significant
findings and the implications for classroom practice will be discussed.
Data and Analysis
The process of developing the questionnaire began by drafting a number of questions for
students. The first questions were aimed at collecting basic personal information which
could put the later responses into context. A series of questions asked respondents to
reflect on how they felt in their classroom. The final questions enquired about the ways in
which teachers organised classroom dynamics and the feelings of respondents in relation to
this. The number of questions was deliberately kept low, just nine, in order to encourage
the maximum number of responses. For the same reason the questions were graded to allow
lower

level

students

to

respond

also.

The

questionnaire

was

produced

using

SurveyMonkey.com and distributed to students by URL and QR code. Students completed

the questionnaire anonymously online.
Thirty five responses were collected from students of thirteen different nationalities (table
1.). Although Saudi, Kuwaiti, South Korean and Italian students made up the majority of
responses (making up twenty responses altogether), the results from later questions showed
differences of large enough significance to suggest that this did not skew the data. On the
other hand, the respondents were overwhelmingly in their twenties (twenty five
respondents), meaning that the results that follow should be considered as representative of
a younger generation of learners rather than a broader demographic (table 2.).
The majority of respondents (twenty three) had been at the current language school for
between 1 and 6 months (table 3.). This suggests that they may have had time to become
accustomed to this environment and reflect with some objectivity on it. This is especially
important in relation to the questions that follow.
The first significant finding comes from question four (table 4.). Nearly half of the
respondents (seventeen) would describe themselves as only quite comfortable in the first
week at their current language school. Just under a third (ten) said they were a bit or

Chris Esson

very uncomfortable. The total of thirty five respondents would divide into three classes at
my current school (with a maximum of twelve per class). This means that there is a strong
likelihood that up to four students in each of those classes was a bit or very uncomfortable
in their first week.
The second, and possibly most significant finding comes from question five (table 5.). A
strong majority (nineteen) described classes in their current language school as totally
different to classes in their home country. A significant number (twelve) said that they
were a bit different, and only five said that they were the same. Considered in light of
the responses to questions four we can surmise that the transition to a language school in
the UK represent a considerable change accompanied by a potentially uncomfortable
change in circumstances.
Question six and the third part of question seven suggests that most students have a good
relationship with their classmates (tables 6. and 7.). In contrast to the mostly positive
preference of students to work with their friends, it is interesting to note that students are
almost evenly divided about whether they have a preference over where they sit. Equally
mixed, although perhaps more significant when considering seating arrangements, are
respondents' opinions about students they prefer not to work with. The conclusion must be
drawn that nearly 50% of students have negative feelings about working with at least some
other members of their class. Nothing in the data collected suggests how many individuals
respondents have negative feelings about. It could be just one or a whole group. However,
the mostly positive attitudes towards their classmates expressed in question six suggest
that the number is small. Nevertheless, 50% of students is a significant number, and it
must be up to the teacher to be aware of which students can productively work together,
and which cannot.
Question eight shows that students are quite used to being asked to move around in class.
Approximately two thirds responding that they change seat, stand up and walk around,
with a small drop ion frequency in each case (table 8.). In combination with question nine
it can be seen that overall students do not have strong negative or positive feelings about
these classroom dynamics (table 9.). The vast majority responded that they felt OK
about these movements, with fewer than six responding that they felt either happy or
unhappy.

Chris Esson

Design and Further Research

The rationale for this research project set two questions:
1. What are the expectations for the dynamics of their classrooms that students bring
to their classes.
2. What are their feelings about the way in which their classes are currently organised?
The design of the questionnaire was such that while some light can be said to have been
shed upon the second question, there is much more limited information in response to the
first. Apart from question five on how different students' classes were, there was no further
enquiry into students' expectations. This is a failing of the questionnaire by the terms of
its intended purpose. The reason for this is the already stated decision in the design
process to keep the questionnaire short and easy to complete. To collect and compare
information about both students current and previous classroom experience would have
entailed a doubling of the number of questions.
The failure to answer one of the two questions set, and the trend that is revealed by the
data, suggest a new area for more detailed research. If the majority of students say that
their current school is a bit or totally different, it would serve an interesting purpose to
ask in what ways they perceive these differences. A series of questions with answers on a
sliding scale could be asked, such as how different are seating arrangements?. Further
questions could ask about whether

students feel positive or negative about these

differences.
Further to students perception of the differences in their classes, the discomfort reported
by many in the first week at their current school also suggests an avenue for more research.
The wording of the question included only the first week, and the data collected gives no
indication of how long any discomfort persisted, or how long it took for students to become
accustomed (if indeed they did) to their school. With the majority of respondents having
been at their school for between one and six months, this group would be ripe for
questioning about their changing feelings across their course of study. Another interesting
idea is a longitudinal study, with students asked to report periodically on their feelings
about their classes.

Chris Esson

Analysis and Conclusions

In examining Van Lier's has suggestion that classroom dynamics are determined by ideals
and expectations, then the question suggests itself what ideals and whose expectations?.
Jane Arnold describes the norms regulating classroom life while Tudor describes different
rationalities - the set of rational principles which guide a group's activity. Tudor suggests
five distinct rationalities (2001:33-39):
1. Student rationalities
2. Methodogical rationalities
3. Sociocultural rationalities
4. Institutional and corporate rationalities
5. Teacher rationalities
If it is our intention as teachers, as Arnold suggests (1999:168), to build cohesive groups
which promote learning, then we must enquire what power we have in understanding and
influencing these rationalities. The focus of this research project has been on understanding
student rationalities, yet these may be the rationalities most variable and opaque to
teachers. It is in our understanding of the other rationalities how we plan, promote
cultural understanding, contribute to our school and other stakeholders, and most
importantly how we teach that we can build groups who work together to support
learners whatever their background, aims and expectations.
The fact that a sizeable majority of students reported that their current school is totally
different to school in their own country should be a serious point of consideration for EFL
teachers in the UK. We must think about the origins and management of student ideals
and expectations. In mixed nationality classrooms student rationalities will be varied, the
responses to question one show that this is true of the current data set. But even among
students from the same cultural and educational

backgrounds there will be different

rationalities.
It would seem sensible to draw a connection between the differences in classrooms and the
affective factors influencing students' perceptions of their classes. Nearly half of all
students reported that they felt only quite comfortable and nearly a third reported feeling
a bit or very uncomfortable in their first week. It is possible that a certain amount of
this may be due to the stresses associated with any change of circumstances; for example,

Chris Esson

that a new class in a student's home country may be just as uncomfortable. Indeed these
findings back up Jane Arnold's description of the process of group formation:
In the first occasions participants meet, an element of tension is present in the
interaction: people typically experience unpleasant feelings of anxiety, uncertainty
and a lack of confidence . They must deal with people they hardly know.
(Arnold, 1999:159)
This reinforces the fact that it must be the responsibility of teachers to monitor new
students and to do what is possible to bring them into the class. Whatever the origins of
any class group, it will bring together diverse individuals who must negotiate outcomes if
the group is to function successfully. This is an an ongoing process. It is worth quoting
Wright on group dynamics in full:
During the group's activity, people may modify their behaviour and change roles in
light of the contributions of others. This in itself will create new conditions, and
modify expectations. Knowledge will be gained or modified as time progresses and
the activity unfolds. Quite simply, group activity is dynamic (Wright, 1987:11).
While Wright also suggests that classrooms are status-marked and asymmetrical
(1987:114) we must remember that despite the prestige that might be given to us as
teachers, we are but one part of the groups that are our classrooms. Through our
methodological choices, and through our teaching, it is our responsibility to foster
supportive learning environments.
When dealing with diverse, dynamic groups there must be a process of open negotiation. If
students come with certain experiences and expectation we must negotiate these
expectations with the class. Opening class decision-making to the group and getting input
from everyone can help to promote group cohesiveness and the ideal of a shared purpose.
Teachers must be attentive to affective factors, and, where appropriate, offer choices or
make requests about who students work with, how they work and where they work.

Chris Esson

Bibliography
Arnold, J. (1999) Affect in Language Learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Borg, M. (2004) The Apprenticeship of Observation. ELT Journal, Volume 58/3, July
2004. Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Tudor, I. (2001) The Dynamics of the Language Classroom. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Van Lier, L. (1988) The Classroom and the Language Learner: Ethnography and Second
Language Classroom Research. Longman, London.
Wiggins, A. (2014) A veteran teacher turned coach shadows 2 students for 2 days a
sobering lesson learned. Granted, and... [blog]. 10 October. Available from:
https://grantwiggins.wordpress.com/2014/10/10/a-veteran-teacher-turned-coach-shadows2-students-for-2-days-a-sobering-lesson-learned/ [Accessed 30/12/14]
Wright, T (1987) Roles of Teachers and Learners. Oxford University Press, Oxford.