This section describes for each study teacher and class: the physical and emotional classroom environment; teacher and class characteristics; interpersonal relationships; and mathematics timetable. In the discussion, teachers are grouped by school, SS and ST, then WW and WK, and finally UU and UM.
Junior classes at Samasama have four one-hour mathematics lessons a week.
SS was the Head of Department and had taught at the school for nine years. An experienced teacher of mathematics with a primary school teaching background, SS had also taught other secondary school subjects (e.g., English). In the forty-to-fifty age group, SS has New Zealand European and Māori heritage but does not speak conversational Māori. SS’s classroom was colourful, pleasant, organised, and cared for. Commercial posters were well displayed. Shelves held clearly labelled storage boxes. New furniture was set out neatly in pairs and groups. The whiteboard was marked in sections, organised, and the boardwork was colourful and legible.
SS’s class was the top Year 10 group, selected by overall ability. Most were together in the previous year. SS had prior pastoral care relationships with many class members as she was the dean for their year group, but had not taught these students prior to the study. SS placed importance on knowing the students. She asked all to write a letter about themselves for her within the first week of the year. SS taught the study class on Monday, Thursday, and Friday mornings, and Tuesday afternoons. The classroom atmosphere was strict, generally non-confrontational, safe, and friendly. Students were on-task and controlled. There was room for student individuality within the bounds of the lesson. SS enforced school uniform rules at the start of most lessons and interacted individually with all students several times each lesson. SS and the class appeared more comfortable with one another in Term 2 than in Term 1, consistent with a statement made in the interview carried out after the Term 2 lesson observations:
The more I’ve got to know them, the more I’ve enjoyed the class. (SS)
SS smiled and used humour more often, and students initiated conversations and humour with the teacher more readily, in Term 2 than in Term 1.
An Assistant Teacher, ST predominantly taught commerce subjects having worked in commerce prior to teaching. He had less than four years’ teaching experience and
no formal training in teaching mathematics. In his thirties, ST had taught within the school for several years. ST is a first generation New Zealander and speaks his heritage language and English at home. ST was initially anxious about being part of the study because he believed mathematics teaching not to be his teaching strength. ST’s classroom was tidy and organised. There were commercially produced posters on the walls and textbooks organised tidily on shelves at the front of the room. Desks were in pairs or groups. The room was very sunny and sometimes hot. ST used the whiteboard and the overhead. The overhead could be difficult to read at times.
ST’s class was a mixed ability Year 9 group. The students did not initially know one another well having come from different classes and schools. ST knew several of the students having previously taught them. ST likes to get to know students gradually through informal conversations in and out of class; however, ST spent most of each lesson at the front of the room. ST taught the study class on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and Friday mornings. ST enforced a seating plan that became a cause of friction with students at the beginning of each lesson. ST did not place importance on learning students’ names. In the first few days of Term 1, the classroom atmosphere was good with students paying attention and being compliant. However, this deteriorated and within the first few weeks of the year, the behaviour became noisy, rude, and generally non-compliant. ST endeavoured to maintain control and to teach, but in the researcher’s opinion, his intentions were undermined mainly by his low expectations of the quantity and quality of students’ work. The main changes between Terms 1 and 2 were that the negative class behaviour patterns were firmly established in Term 2. A group of the more able students was seated together in Term 2 and every lesson this group was given different work to that of the rest of the class. This group was largely on task. The teacher constantly endeavoured to establish control before explaining and giving new work to others, delaying the lesson beginning. This led to student frustration and poor behaviour.
Generally fifty minutes long, mathematics lessons were held every day for junior classes at Whero.
WW was the Head of Department and an experienced mathematics teacher, well established in the school. Having taught in the Pacific (Cook Islands, Nauru, Tokelau, and Samoa) for over ten years, WW had much experience teaching Pacific-based and New Zealand-based Pasifika students. He is New Zealand
European and aged between fifty and sixty years old. Usually used for English and Social Studies classes, the classroom WW taught in was large, light, and well ventilated. The desks were grouped in fours and posters from subject areas other than mathematics were on the walls.
WW’s class was a top Year 10 group, selected by overall ability. All but three of the class were together in the previous year. WW had taught most of the class for the year prior to the study and had prior pastoral care-based relationships with many class members, as the head of the junior school. WW prefers to get to know students slowly through exposure. WW explained his philosophy regarding knowing and accommodating students:
To teach well you’ve got to want to like kids no matter what you’re doing. You’ve got to be able to put up with the rough stuff as well as the good. To get on with students well you’ve got to be prepared to find ways of getting around barriers (and the kids have got lots of those), and you’ve got to have a lot of patience with them. (WW)
WW spent extended periods of time each lesson working with students in small groups. He taught the study class on Monday, Thursday, and Friday mornings, and Tuesday and Wednesday afternoons. The classroom atmosphere was comfortable but students often worked slowly or were off-task. WW was generally non- confrontational and placed emphasis on students being self-motivated and taking responsibility for their learning. Students could be themselves during mathematics lessons and were able to move around the room, eat, drink, and play music as long as WW considered they were getting their work done. WW occasionally raised issues of conformity with school rules such as uniform requirements. There was little change in teacher-student rapport noticed between Terms 1 and 2. However, in Term 2, the three students new to the class in Term 1 were more positive about their relationship with the teacher and about their maths work than they had been at the start of the year.
WK was the Assistant Head of Department with over thirty years’ experience teaching mathematics. Originally with a primary school teaching background, WK was well established in the school. He is New Zealand European but grew up in a colonial community in which one’s race determined one’s life chances and expectations. WK was aged between fifty and sixty. WK’s classroom was tidy with mathematical, colourful, and engaging classroom displays created by his students and him. WK’s boardwork was immaculate. He considered the classroom his and the students guests.
WK’s group was a top Year 10 class, selected by overall ability. WK knew all but a few students well at the start of the year, having taught the class for the previous year. Respectful and caring teacher-student relationships were in place. WK clearly enjoyed the company of the students, was relaxed, and had a jovial but firm manner. WK taught the study class on Monday, Tuesday, and Friday mornings, and Wednesday and Thursday afternoons. WK made mathematics learning the priority in every lesson and had high expectations of the students. He shared these through his teaching style and by telling the students of his expectations. There was a strict but fair classroom atmosphere. WK constantly moved around the room helping students and checking their progress. WK enjoyed teaching this class:
I think every lesson with them is great, I just sort of enjoy teaching them; I mean some days are worse than others but most days I look forward to teaching them. (WK)
There were no major changes in teacher-student relationships or classroom atmosphere apparent between Terms 1 and 2.
Two differences between Whero and the other study schools, both aimed at improving achievement, may have helped enhance teacher-student relationships:
• a new junior school structure had been implemented at the beginning of Phase One data collection:
…we felt that by changing the structures we could get the kids more incentive to achieve. In changing structures I actually think the kids might develop better relationships with their teachers as well (WW); and
• many junior mathematics classes kept the same mathematics teacher for two years.
Uliuli used a six-day timetable. Year 10 mathematics was taught on four consecutive days, thus a long break between subsequent mathematics lessons occurred when the two days with no mathematics were combined with the weekend. This effect was magnified on public holiday weekends and when the last mathematics lesson before the four-day break was the final lesson of the day, a challenging time of the school day for mathematics learning.
UU was the Head of Department and an experienced teacher of mathematics. In the fifty-to-sixty age group, UU was originally trained as a primary school teacher. She is New Zealand European, had taught at the study school for one year prior to the study, had previously taught at schools similar to the study school, and had worked in tertiary mathematics education. UU’s classroom was fairly bare. Well ventilated, the
classroom had large tables each with four chairs. UU’s class was a mixed ability Year 10 group. Drawn from many Year 9 classes from the previous school year, the class did not initially know one another well. UU had taught several of the students in the previous year but had no pre-existing relationships with the rest of the class. She likes to learn students’ names quickly and to know more about the students over time.
UU had two morning and two afternoon lessons with this class in each six-day cycle. Lessons varied from having a pleasant and productive atmosphere to being loud and off task. Although UU expected compliance, her approach was generally non- confrontational with, at times, low expectations of the quality and quantity of student learning. UU reinforced school rules and procedures frequently, for example by requiring late passes when students were late. UU made the students line up outside the classroom before each lesson and often made them wait until all were quiet. Changes were noticed in teacher-student relationships between Terms 1 and 2, for example, the students challenged the teacher less frequently during the Term 2 lesson observations than in Term 1. UU appeared much more comfortable with the class in Term 2, was smiling more, and making more use of valid praise than in Term 1; however, many students worked very slowly or were off task for long spells of many lessons.
UM was an Assistant Teacher. He was in his first few years of teaching and had been at the school for all of this time. Mathematics was his preferred subject area and he was new to teaching top band junior classes. Aged between thirty and forty, UM is a first generation New Zealander with English his second language. UM’s classroom was small for the size of the class and rather barren with little or no student work on the walls. His desk was near the front and it and the surrounding shelves were untidy. UM used a loudspeaker system to amplify his voice. The desks were in pairs or groups.
UM’s class was a top Year 10 group, selected by overall ability. UM had taught several of the study students in the year prior to the study and had a friendly, firm manner. He used humour to help manage student behaviour and got to know the students’ names quickly. He liked to get to know the students gradually. UM had two morning and two afternoon lessons with this class in each six-day week. The atmosphere was pleasant, generally non-confrontational, and focused on mathematics learning. UM was always available to help students and, when not using teacher exposition, constantly moved around the classroom. The two main changes noticed in UM’s classroom between Terms 1 and 2 were that later in the year he made more use of students’ names and there was an increase in student- initiated interactions.