HIGH AND LOW ACHIEVERS CLASSROOM INTERACTION PATTERNS IN AN

LOWER PRIMARY CLASSROOM

Abstract
This study sought to examine if students motivation level influenced their interaction levels

in the classroom. Low achievers were compared to high achievers on their motivation, self-

regulation, and attitudes toward their school and teachers.

It used qualitative data gathering methods of semi-participant observations, field notes and

semi-structured interviews to describe and investigate the nature and frequency of the

interaction patterns of four high and four low achieving students in one lower primary

classroom. Significant factors influencing high and low achievers willingness to initiate

interactions in the classroom were also investigated.

Students were selected to participate in this study using a purposive sampling method where

test scores, class performances and teacher judgement were used to identify students

possessing the highest and lowest levels of achievement in the areas of literacy and

numeracy. Once selected, participants were observed extensively interacting with their

teacher and peers in the classroom. Data gathered was coded according to themes generated

during the study and from relevant literature reviewed in the field.

Findings revealed that the high achieving students initiated more interactions than the low

achievers. Such a finding differed when the teacher initiated interactions with students. When

the teacher called randomly on students, the inequity between the two achievement levels

balanced out and the low achievers, due to the teachers intervention, became more active,

though still unwilling participators. The nature of the high and low achievers interactions in

the study also varied. The high achievers were found to initiate interactions to volunteer

answers, whereas one of the low achievers interacted purely for the purpose of help-seeking.
Significant factors influencing the interaction patterns of the studys high and low achievers

were being uncertain of the answer, just not wanting to be involved, getting teased by other

students, feeling embarrassed, concerned about being wrong and lack of enjoyment for a

particular subject. These findings showed that no one factor alone influenced high or low

achievers interaction patterns. Past and present successes and relationships in classrooms

were seen as being responsible for students willingness to initiate interactions in this

classroom.

Keywords

qualitative methodologies, curriculum, lower primary school, motivation, academic

achievement, teacher characteristics, gifted and talented, differentiation

This study was undertaken to identify the interaction patterns of a small group of high and

low achieving students from one lower primary classroom in a kuala muda/yan sjkt school.

The study focussed on the nature and frequency of those interactions that occurred during

regular classroom activities that were specifically initiated by high and low achieving

students towards their teacher and peers in the classroom. The problem this research sought to

answer was:

Does students achievement level influence the nature and frequency of interactions with

their teacher and peers?

To assist in addressing the research problem, the following two research questions were

formed to guide the study.

What effect does achievement level have on the nature and frequency of student initiated

interactions in the classroom? And

What are the factors that influence the interaction patterns of high and low achieving

students?

Classrooms are extremely busy environments. In a single day classroom teachers could find

themselves engaged in more than a thousand inter-personal exchanges with their students

(Jackson, 1968, cited in Good & Brophy, 1994, p.26). With the number of such interactions

being so great and the demand being so intense, it is not surprising to know that most

teachers, regardless of their experience, have difficulty remembering all the interactions that

take place and in particular which students are involved in the most number of those

exchanges. This study aims to make explicit to one teacher the nature and frequency of the

interactions initiated by a small representation of students in his classroom. The findings from

this study will illustrate to the teacher involved which student(s) dominated the interactions in

his classroom and reasons why.

Educationalists believe that interactions between students and teacher are fundamental to the

learning process. Jones and Gerig have suggested there is evidence to strengthen the view

that verbally active students are high achievers (1994, p.169). During the past twenty-five

years, increasing research has focussed on the influence that student-teacher interactions have

had on the cognitive development of students (Jones & Gerig, 1994, p.170). Student

involvement in class discussions was also deemed to be a major component of effective

Gerig, 1994, p.170).

For the purpose of this research, the interactions being focussed on are those taking place

between high and low achieving students, their teacher and peers in the classroom, commonly

referred to as classroom interaction.

WHAT IS INTERACTION?

Interaction is the process referring to face-to-face action. It can be verbal, channelled

through written or spoken words, or nonverbal, channelled through touch, proximity, eye-

contact, facial expressions, gesturing etc (Robinson, 1994, p.7).

THE NATURE OF STUDENT-TEACHER INTERACTIONS

Students and teachers interact with one another for a number of different reasons and on a

continued basis throughout the school day. As there is usually only one teacher to respond to

the needs of a number of students, their time and assistance is in great demand.

Students display more motivational benefits from teachers they like over teachers they dislike

(Montalvo, 1998). However, education is much more than a personality contest. The role of

teachers seems to be shifting from preprogramed knowledge dispensers to instead managers

of student learning and the learning environment. Therefore, teachers must be empowered to

exercise professional judgment in the classroom to attain clearly expressed goals.

Professional educators should be given latitude to test individual approaches based on

strategic goals and incentive systems. Also, teachers should be provided with training to

support them in this expanded role including more time for peer interaction to share views on

what is effective. Overall, teachers should do unto the students as they would want done unto

themselves.
STUDENTS SELF-CONCEPTIONS OF THEIR ACADEMIC STANDING IN THE

CLASSROOM

Students are active perceivers and mediators of classroom events. There is evidence from past

studies supporting the view that students construct detailed views of the ability and

behaviours of themselves and their peers (Blumenfeld, Pintrich & Hamilton, 1986,

Rohrkemper, 1985 and Stipek & Tannatt, 1984, cited in Mitman & Lash, 1988, p.55- 56).

The students role in education is crucial and should go beyond the traditional view of student

as customer or recipient of knowledge. In addition to the roles of buyer and recipient,

students are the raw materials for education and the primary products of educational

transformations; and most important...students are key members of the labor force involved

in creating education (Lengnick-Hall and Sanders, 1997, p. 1335). Also, the increasing

diversity of individual differences among students can be seen in time management, learning

styles, maturity, demographics, experiential background, cultural orientation, and interests.

As such, Senge et al. (1994, p. 489) suggest that teachers should be producers of

environments that allow students to learn as much as possible or that schools should become

learning habitats wherein relationships are fostered between people, students develop their

own individual instruction plan, and a variety of investigating system options replace the

passive receipt of information. (Senge et al., 1994; Lengnick-Hall and Sanders, 1997).

Students themselves are classroom observers, they are aware to a great extent of their own

academic standing in the classroom, as well as that of others. Some examples of strategies

students use to evaluate their own academic standing include the tasks that they are given,
grouping strategies implemented in the classroom (eg: ability grouping), teacher feedback

and evaluation information regarding ability, the responsibilities that teachers provide

students with and the quality of teacher-student relationships (Taken from Marshall &

Weinstein, 1984, cited in Mitman & Lash, 1988, p.57).

METHOD

As the aims of the study were to investigate the interaction patterns of a small group of high

and low achieving students, a qualitative methodology was implemented so that detailed

descriptions of students behaviours and attitudes could be collected, recorded and analysed.

This study aimed not only to describe the nature of interactions that took place in the

classroom among four high and four low achievers, but also to investigate how often they

occurred, why they occurred and what factors influenced their frequency. This study was

therefore both descriptive and investigative in its nature.

With this approach, student perceptions are the primary form of research because the

classroom experience is different for every individual (Ames & Archer, 1988; Kaplan, Gheen,

& Midgley, 2002). To better understand the students perspectives, we selected a focus group

interview model for this study (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007). Focus groups have become a

popular data collection procedure for researchers because participants in group settings often

spur thoughts in others regarding shared, similar, or dissimilar experiences.

PARTICIPANTS

We conducted two separate focus groups with students from sjkt lower primary school. All

the participants are from year 3 high achievers and lower achievers class. Therefore, most

participants were likely to have been 9 years old.

number of students in a focus group was eight and 71% of the participants were female. All

the students were actively participating in the interview session.

This purposeful intensity sampling allowed us to examine motivational factors from the

perspective of a population on the far end of the academic continuum (Patton, 1990).

The key informants:

Using the criteria just described, the teacher hand-picked eight students who were the key

informants for the study. The eight students were made up of four girls and two boys. The

four high achieving students researched were _____________________ whilst the four low

achieving students were ________________________.

Recruitment Procedures

We randomly choose students from year 3 lower primary school. We gathered information

from their class teachers and subject teachers and choose 4 high achievers and 4 low

achievers students for our study. The students were given bread and drinks as a small

incentive for their participation.

Table 1. Open-Ended Exploratory Questions Posed to the

What motivates you to come to school?

why do you think so?

give some explanation on this?

your personal relationship with the teacher

why do you think it is important to come to school?

Data Collection

We conducted these two separate focus group sessions over a 1-week period . The sessions

were held in the school library. We digitally recorded each focus group and transcribed the

conversations. Prior to the focus group sessions, we prepared open-ended discussion

questions designed to encourage a free and open dialogue among participants (see Table 1).

During the sessions, we also asked impromptu follow-up questions as needed. All participants

were encouraged to participate, but they were not specifically asked to answer every

question.

Data Analyses