Page 207 - Štremfel, Urška, and Maša Vidmar (eds.). 2018. Early School Leaving: Contemporary European Perspectives. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut.
P. 207
the relationship between teachers’ teaching styles, students’ engagement ...
demands and responsiveness) and an uninvolved parenting style (charac-
terised by parents’ lack of demands and responsiveness) (Baumrind, 1967).
Similarly to research on parenting styles, researchers have focused on
dimensions of teachers’ demandingness and responsiveness in the class-
room, and investigated students’ outcomes when different teaching styles
were used in the classroom (e.g. Barnas, 2001; Walker, 2009; Wentzel, 2002).
Impact of teaching style on students’ learning
and social outcomes
Different studies that analysed teaching styles through the parenting styles
framework indicate that teachers’ characteristics, similar to those parent-
ing behaviours characterised as authoritative (warm and supportive of au-
tonomy as opposed to controlling), were found to be positively related to
student motivation and feelings of academic competence (e.g. Moos, 1978;
Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994; Wentzel, 1997). Walker (2008), for example, re-
searched students’ (12-year-olds) perceived self-efficacy, their readiness for
schoolwork and their academic performance in mathematics in classrooms
with different teaching styles. Students in the class where the teacher ap-
plied the authoritative teaching style (as categorised by observers) made
greater achievement gains than their peers who had permissive teachers.
They also showed more engagement in school work than their peers who
had authoritarian teachers. Similar results were found by Wentzel (2002).
Students whose teachers set high academic expectations (a characteristic
of authoritarian and authoritative but not permissive teaching styles) ob-
tained better grades and were more interested in school. In contrast, stu-
dents with teachers who were more critical and negative in their feedback (a
characteristic of authoritarian but not authoritative and permissive teach-
ing styles) had worse grades and were less interested in school (Wentzel,
2002). Barnas (2001) observed her own teaching style (teaching students
at the university level) during the progress of her career. She perceived her
teaching style as progressing from being permissive to authoritarian to au-
thoritative. Her perception and student evaluation indicated that the au-
thoritative teaching style was the most effective in that students were both
prepared for class and participated enthusiastically. There is also evidence
that students prefer college teachers who possess characteristics consist-
ent with the authoritative style, such as warmth and approachability (e.g.
Basow, Phelan, & Capotosto, 2006; Basow & Silberg, 1987). Bassett, Snyder,
Rogers and Collins (2013) applied the parenting styles model to teachers in
207
demands and responsiveness) and an uninvolved parenting style (charac-
terised by parents’ lack of demands and responsiveness) (Baumrind, 1967).
Similarly to research on parenting styles, researchers have focused on
dimensions of teachers’ demandingness and responsiveness in the class-
room, and investigated students’ outcomes when different teaching styles
were used in the classroom (e.g. Barnas, 2001; Walker, 2009; Wentzel, 2002).
Impact of teaching style on students’ learning
and social outcomes
Different studies that analysed teaching styles through the parenting styles
framework indicate that teachers’ characteristics, similar to those parent-
ing behaviours characterised as authoritative (warm and supportive of au-
tonomy as opposed to controlling), were found to be positively related to
student motivation and feelings of academic competence (e.g. Moos, 1978;
Ryan, Stiller, & Lynch, 1994; Wentzel, 1997). Walker (2008), for example, re-
searched students’ (12-year-olds) perceived self-efficacy, their readiness for
schoolwork and their academic performance in mathematics in classrooms
with different teaching styles. Students in the class where the teacher ap-
plied the authoritative teaching style (as categorised by observers) made
greater achievement gains than their peers who had permissive teachers.
They also showed more engagement in school work than their peers who
had authoritarian teachers. Similar results were found by Wentzel (2002).
Students whose teachers set high academic expectations (a characteristic
of authoritarian and authoritative but not permissive teaching styles) ob-
tained better grades and were more interested in school. In contrast, stu-
dents with teachers who were more critical and negative in their feedback (a
characteristic of authoritarian but not authoritative and permissive teach-
ing styles) had worse grades and were less interested in school (Wentzel,
2002). Barnas (2001) observed her own teaching style (teaching students
at the university level) during the progress of her career. She perceived her
teaching style as progressing from being permissive to authoritarian to au-
thoritative. Her perception and student evaluation indicated that the au-
thoritative teaching style was the most effective in that students were both
prepared for class and participated enthusiastically. There is also evidence
that students prefer college teachers who possess characteristics consist-
ent with the authoritative style, such as warmth and approachability (e.g.
Basow, Phelan, & Capotosto, 2006; Basow & Silberg, 1987). Bassett, Snyder,
Rogers and Collins (2013) applied the parenting styles model to teachers in
207
