Decoding the Classroom: Understanding Teacher-Student Power Dynamics

Introduction

The classroom, a microcosm of society, is a space where power dynamics are constantly at play. The established power dynamics within K-12 schools influence student behavior and learning. Though often overlooked, the interplay between these dynamics, physical positioning in the classroom, and student behavior is an area ripe for exploration. This article delves into the multifaceted nature of teacher-student power dynamics, examining how factors like physical positioning, teacher behavior, and student perceptions contribute to the overall classroom environment.

The Impact of Physical Positioning

Previous research has demonstrated that body positioning can influence interpersonal behavior. A study by researchers at Harvard University, the University of California, Berkley, and INSEAD, found that power posing, or taking a broader posture, has been shown to increase confidence and improve performance. Other research done through the University of Amsterdam indicates a more slumped-over posture is worse for participants’ moods. Stooped participants were found to have more negative overall thoughts than participants in a straighter posture. The study also found there is less mood recovery for participants in a negative mood when stooped. Another study on cardiac vagal activity and power posing found power posing is associated with higher levels of bodily activation and thus affects power. These studies have shown posture can affect intrapersonal behavior as well as power.

To understand the effects of physical positioning on power dynamics, consider four possible classroom arrangements:

Position 1: Standing teacher, seated students.
Position 2: Seated teacher, standing students.
Position 3: Both teachers and students standing.
Position 4: Both teachers and students seated.

Opposite Positioning: Standing Teacher vs. Standing Students

Regarding opposite positioning, research indicates Position 2 may have better outcomes on student behavior. A study conducted by researchers at the Autonomous University of Madrid and Ohio State University found, in reference to interpersonal power, that “the more powerful the message source behaves, the less powerful the message recipient acts by comparison.” This conclusion suggests that with physical expressions of power, the positioning of two people may often be complementary rather than involve mimicry. Since this is the natural response of recipients of power, a complementary position may be most comfortable. Applied to the classroom, Positions 1 and 2 may be most comfortable for students since they will complement the teacher’s seated body position as they stand. This complimentary feature could work both ways whether students sit or stand, but this does not necessarily mean that Position 1 would be equally beneficial for students. As has been discussed previously, a more expansive posture has numerous benefits for an individual’s behavior which a more constricted posture cannot seem to offer. These studies may suggest Position 2 may be the most favorable in the classroom for students.

Same Positioning: Standing Together vs. Sitting Together

Regarding “same positioning,” my hypothesis seems to align with the research in this area. Turning to Position 3, a study performed through a collaboration of universities in the United Kingdom examined 25 employees’ experiences of standing in normally-seated workplace meetings. Researchers found employees felt discomfort due to challenges in norms and authority. The standard for these meetings was to sit, and by standing, employees directly ran counter to it. Standing employees also expressed feeling as if they were challenging the authority of the person in charge because of their position in relation to the meeting presenter, who also was standing. If generalizable to the classroom level, this demonstrates students in Position 3 could feel they are challenging the authority of their teachers if both parties are standing. This research suggests students assuming this position would lead to more discomfort but also implies students would feel more powerful than if sitting, which could affect behavior. While discomfort would theoretically increase, this begs the question of change in norms. If, for instance, students were taught to stand in relation to their teachers at a younger age, which was the norm, students may not necessarily be uncomfortable since this would be what they were used to. Ideally, future experimentation could explore this idea. Meanwhile, the above study’s findings indicate that students may feel powerful, though discomforted, when standing in relation to a standing teacher more than they would if they were standing and their teachers were sitting. This evidence suggests Position 3 may have less of a positive impact on student performance behavior than Position 2, which would likely involve power and comfort.

Read also: Impact of Teacher Shouting

A different study conducted through Northumbria University and the University of Liverpool discusses the importance of height on status. The study noted that in men, height is linked to a higher social status across cultures, and taller men are generally thought to be more dominant and leaderlike than their shorter peers. This phenomenon allows them to wield more authority. Since these findings suggest height is positively related to interpersonal dominance, and if this research were to be expanded and found true for women, height and associated status could play out heavily in the classroom. When children are developmentally shorter, having not grown past their teacher’s height, and if both students and teachers stand, students may feel less dominant and in power due to height differences with their teacher. If both teachers and students were to assume a seated position, height differences would be minimized, which could have potentially positive implications on student behavior.

This study also introduces an interesting axis to examine the question of height and power- gender- since differences may come into play in perceiving height and dominance between male and female teachers. As teaching is a predominantly female-dominated profession in the United States per the National Center for Education Services, this could be an essential factor on which to keep an eye. Also, height, age, and associated physical growth patterns could be a critical factor in this research. Later in the K-12 years, when students presumably could grow taller than their teachers (male or female), given their stage in development, the height of teachers and its effect on student behavior would have to be re-examined. Both age and gender may overlap: the average height for women in the United States is 5’4, so it is highly likely in this profession, notably, some students will eventually surpass their teachers in stature. This research leads me to conclude that out of the “same positions,” Position 3 may be more beneficial to student intrapersonal power perception. Students may feel more powerful while standing in a more expansive position and behave accordingly. If taught at an early age, discomfort associated with students standing in relation to their standing teacher may not be as impactful of a factor and could prove Position 3 to be reasonably beneficial for student behavior. Position 4, on the other hand, seems like it may be more beneficial to student interpersonal power perception because height differences and the status associated with people of taller stature will be minimized as much as possible.

Challenging Authority and Classroom Management

A practical reservation one might have regarding student standing positions (Position 2 and Position 3) is the impact on classroom management and composure. Standing students, in their more empowered positions, may challenge the teacher’s authority negatively in that the teacher is unable to maintain a productive learning environment. To that, research is needed to examine the effects of such positions. Perhaps this issue would present itself, and a balance between time in a dominant standing position versus a constricted seated position would need to be stricken to give students just the right amount of empowerment and not defiance. If the norms were altered from a young age, it is also possible that students may not feel as if they are challenging authority, as the Mansfield study suggests. Likewise, they may not seemingly associate standing with rebelliousness, and thus this objection may not hold true.

Contradictory Evidence and the Need for Further Research

As with all research, there is some contradicting evidence to my claims. A 2017 analysis of Amy Cuddy and Dana Carney’s 2010 work surrounding power posing found that though adopting powerful postures led to self-reported increases in feelings of power, “it did not affect participants’ behavior or hormonal levels.” This conclusion suggests that differences in performance due to positioning may be only in participants’ heads. A further statement in the analysis maintains they are not entirely denouncing the results of the 2010 study. Instead, they suggest these experiments can’t be replicated successfully, meaning there is an element of uncertainty surrounding these findings.

Whether differences are actual or merely self-reported, these findings do not disprove physical position effects on behavior. While hormonal changes may not necessarily occur, countless studies demonstrate the impact of physical positioning on behavior, regardless of if changes only occur in participants’ heads. This analysis does not derail my argument but simply casts small doubt on how certain studies in the literature may have been conducted, meaning more research is needed.

Beyond Physicality: Other Facets of Power Dynamics

Power dynamics in the classroom extend beyond just physical positioning. They encompass various aspects of the teaching and learning environment, including:

Teacher Authority: Teachers inherently hold a position of authority due to their role as educators, evaluators, and classroom managers. This authority is both necessary for maintaining order and potentially detrimental if abused.
Grading and Assessment: The power to assign grades can create anxiety and influence student behavior. Students may perceive grades as a reflection of their worth, leading to a focus on achieving high marks rather than genuine learning.
Classroom Discourse: Teachers control the flow of conversation, deciding who speaks and whose ideas are valued. This can inadvertently marginalize certain students and reinforce existing status hierarchies.
Social Identities: The social identities of both teachers and students (e.g., race, gender, class) can influence power dynamics in subtle and complex ways.

Read also: Solving the Special Education Shortage

Strategies for Shifting Power Dynamics

To create a more equitable and engaging learning environment, teachers can consciously work to shift power dynamics in the classroom. Some strategies include:

Creating a Collaborative Environment: Emphasize group work and peer teaching to foster a sense of shared responsibility for learning. By reordering a traditional lesson format and having students start by working together in groups, we communicate that students are responsible for and capable of constructing mathematical understanding. We position students as sense-makers and we position the work of learning math as a collaborative endeavor.
Giving Students Agency: Provide students with choices and opportunities to make decisions about their learning. When feasible, involve students directly in shaping your syllabus and pedagogical choices.
Valuing Student Perspectives: Actively solicit and incorporate student perspectives into classroom discussions. Create assignments that ask students to take on perspectives other than their own, without of course asking them to take on perspectives harmful to themselves, including in content, essays, role-playing activities, and performances.
Practicing Kindness and Empathy: Treat students with respect and understanding, recognizing that they come from diverse backgrounds and have unique needs.
Being Mindful of Physical Positioning: Consider how your physical presence in the classroom affects student perceptions of power. When I am sitting with the students, at the oval table, and we can all see each other’s faces, I am equal with them. I’m communicating to them that we are all on the same level intellectually. It’s OK that that might not be entirely true (I almost certainly know more about the subject I teach than they do), but I am giving them the impression that I think of them as intellectual equals and earning their trust.

The Importance of Teacher Self-Reflection

Intentionally taking note of all these dynamics and reflecting on your own identities and positions-and perhaps sharing these reflections explicitly with the class-can help you navigate this complex social space. “Educating the whole person” requires paying attention to the wholeness of the teacher as well. And students are likely already paying attention. In fact, they may carry unconscious preconceived expectations for how instructors of certain identities “should” behave in the classroom (DeSoto, 2005). Serious questions have been raised about whether students apply different standards when evaluating faculty of different social identities (Mengel et al., 2019; Reid, 2010), and they may also make different demands of teachers with different social identities (El-Alayli et al., 2018).

tags: #teacher #student #power #dynamics