Skip to main content

Tackling Academic Incivility by Shifting the Focus to Student-Centered Pedagogical Approaches

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Challenges of Academic Incivility

Part of the book series: SpringerBriefs in Education ((BRIEFSEDUCAT))

Abstract

‘Power distance’ and ‘power relations’ are two concepts that have been repeatedly used to depict interactions between faculty and students, especially in uncivil learning environments. Different learning environments and corresponding pedagogical designs are often typified by different power relationships. The last several years have brought rapid changes to learning environments. New modes of teaching and learning as well as new communication strategies have been espoused as alternatives to the traditional, teacher-centered classroom model. Teachers in traditional classrooms, are largely, if not exclusively, responsible for setting goals, designing learning tasks and assessing progress. Traditional teacher-student relationships, described at length earlier in this book, are often perceived as an exhibition of authority and as the exercise of exclusive power by teachers. In contrast, in constructivist, student-centered classrooms, knowledge and authority are shared among teachers and students. The power structure that typifies traditional learning environments is similar to the structure that supports uncivil class encounters, while constructivist classrooms represent the opposite pole. This chapter describes the main tenets of constructivist pedagogy, centering on the shifts in control over the learning process, from external, as used in conventional and well-structured learning settings, to the students. It is through such shifts in power relationships between teachers and contemporary millennial students that constructivist approaches may mitigate academic incivility.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abington-Pitre, A. (2015). Where did we go wrong? Eight characteristics of multicultural schools. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 3, 99–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, D. (2014). Using structural equation modeling and multidimensional scaling to assess students’ perceptions of the learning environment and justice experiences. International Journal of Educational Research, 69, 38–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, D. (2015). Assessing the contribution of constructivist based academic learning environment to academic self-efficacy in higher education. Learning Environments Research, 18, 47–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, D., & Itzkovich, Y. (2018). The connection between perceived constructivist learning environments and faculty uncivil authoritarian behaviors. Higher Education, 77(3), 437–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alt, D. (2017). College students’ perceived learning environment and their social media engagement in activities unrelated to class work. Instructional Science, 45, 623–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alt, D., & Raichel, N. (2018). Lifelong citizenship: Lifelong learning as a lever for moral and democratic values. Leiden & Boston: Brill and Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronson, B., & Laughter, J. (2016). The theory and practice of culturally relevant education: A synthesis of research across areas. Review of Educational Research, 86(1), 163–206.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Assessment Tools for Higher Education Learning Environments [ASSET]. (2019). Retrieved from https://www.asset-erasmus.com/.

  • Beardon, T. (1995). Peer assisted learning and raising standards. In S. Goodlad (Ed.), Students as tutors and mentors (pp. 104–120). London: Kogan page.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ben Ezer, G. (2012). From Winnicott’s potential space to mutual creative space: A principle for intercultural psychotherapy. Transcultural Psychiatry, 49(2), 323–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cobb, P., Gresalfi, M., & Hodge, L. L. (2009). An interpretive scheme for analyzing the identities that students develop in mathematics classrooms. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 40(1), 40–68.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cornelius, L. L., & Herrenkohl, L. R. (2004). Power in the classroom: How the classroom environment shapes students’ relationships with each other and with concepts. Cognition and Instruction, 22(4), 467–498.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Da-Silva, C., Ruiz, V. M. C., & Porlan, R. (2006). Evolution of the conceptions of a secondary education biology teacher: Longitudinal analysis using cognitive maps. Science Education, 91(3), 461–491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donnelly, D. F., McGarr, O., & O’Reilly, J. (2014). “Just Be Quiet and Listen to Exactly What He’s Saying”: Conceptualizing power relations in inquiry-oriented classrooms. International Journal of Science Education, 36(12), 2029–2054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durán, R. P. (2010). Comments regarding the presentations by Margaret Heritage and Caroline Wylie on professional learning communities to support formative assessment in the classroom [PowerPoint slides]. Presented at the CCSSO National Conference on Student Assessment, Detroit, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Education for Employment Project. (2007). Teaching and learning in further and higher education: A handbook by the education for employment project. Retrieved from http://www.comp.dit.ie/dgordon/Publications/Contributor/e4/E4handbook.pdf.

  • Enyedy, N., Goldberg, J., & Welsh, K. M. (2005). Complex dilemmas of identity and practice. Science Education, 90(1), 68–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, F. (2010). Culture in society and in educational practices. In J. A. Banks, & C. A. McGee Banks (Eds.), Multicultural education: issues and perspectives (7th ed., pp. 33–56). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erstad, O. (2011). Weaving the context of digital literacy. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 295–310). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Esmonde, I., & Caswell, B. (2010). Teaching mathematics for social justice in multicultural, multilingual elementary classrooms. Canadian Journal of Science, Mathematics and Technology Education, 10(3), 244–254.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esmonde, I. (2009). Mathematics learning in groups: Analyzing equity in two cooperative activity structures. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 18(2), 247–284.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freire, P., & Macedo, D. P. (1995). A dialogue: Culture, language and race. Harvard Educational Review, 65(3), 377–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gay, G. (2010). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research and practice (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gay, G. (2013). Teaching to and through cultural aiversity. Curriculum Inquiry, 43, 48–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giroux, H. A. (2011). On critical pedagogy. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (Eds.). (2007). Millennials go to college: Strategies for a new generation on campus (2nd ed.). Great Falls, Va.: Lifecourse Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä, S., Hurme, T.-R., & Järvenoja, H. (2011). Self- regulation and motivation in computer-supported collaborative learning environments. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 330–345). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kang, R., & Hyatt, C. W. (2010). Preparing pre-service teachers for diversity: The power of multicultural narratives. SRATE Journal, 19(10), 44–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, T. (2002, July). Development of student skills in reflective writing. Paper presented at the 4th World Conference of the International Consortium for Educational Development in Higher Education, Perth, Australia. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.136.2518.

  • Lachman, V. D. (2015). Ethical issues in the disruptive behaviors of incivility, bullying, and horizontal/ lateral violence. Urologic Nursing, 35(1), 39–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dream keepers: Successful teaching for African American students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larsson, J. (2012). Traditions in transition: Reflections on teacher authority in late modernity. Retrieved from http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:589221/FULLTEXT01.pdf.

  • Lorente, E., & Kirk, D. (2013). Alternative democratic assessment in PETE: An Action-research study exploring risks, challenges and solutions. Sport, Education and Society, 18(1), 77–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lund, A., & Hauge, T. E. (2011). Changing objects in knowledge-creation practices. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 206–221). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMahon, M., & Pospisil, R. (2005). Laptops for a digital lifestyle: millennial students and wireless mobile technologies. In Proceedings of the 22nd ASCILITE Conference, 4–7 December 2005 (pp. 421–431). Retrieved from http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/brisbane05/blogs/proceedings/49_McMahon%20&%20Pospisil.pdf.

  • Meyer, H. (2004). Novice and expert teachers’ conceptions of learners’ prior knowledge. Science Education, 88(6), 970–983. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minick, N., Stone, C. A., & Forman, E. A. (1993). Introduction: Integration of individual, social, and institutional processes in accounts of children’s learning and development. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: sociocultural dynamics in children’s development (pp. 3–15). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicoletti, A., & Merriman, W. (2007). Teaching millennial generation students. Momentum, 38(2), 28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oblinger, D. G., & Oblinger, J. L. (Ed.) (2005). Educating the net generation. EDUCAUSE. Retrieved from https://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/pub7101a.pdf.

  • Patry, J.-L., Weinberger, A., Weyringer, S. & Nussbaumer, M. (2013). Combining values and knowledge education. In B. J. Irby, G. Brown, R. Lara-Alecio, & S. Jackson (Eds.) and R. A. Robles-Piña (Sect. Ed.), The handbook of educational theories (pp. 565–579). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelech, J., & Pieper, G. W. (2010). The comprehensive handbook of constructivist teaching. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perret-Clermont, A.-N., & Perret, J.-F. (2011). A new artifact in the trade: Notes on the arrival of a computer supported manufacturing system in a technical school. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 87–102). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, C. (2009). Why don’t my students think I’m groovy? The new “R”s for engaging millennial learners. The Teaching Professor, 23. Retrieved from http://www.drtomlifvendahl.com/Millennial%20Characturistics.pdf.

  • Ramaekers, S. (2010). Multicultural education: Embeddedness, voice and change. Ethics and Education, 5(1), 55–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reinsvold, L. A., & Cochran, K. F. (2012). Power dynamics and questioning in elementary science classrooms. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 23(7), 745–768.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sengupta-Irving, T., & Enyedy, N. (2015). Why engaging in mathematical practices may explain stronger outcomes in affect and engagement: Comparing student-driven with highly guided inquiry. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 24(4), 550–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Topping, K. (2009). Peer assessment. Theory into Practice, 48, 20–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, A., & Leary, H. (2009). A problem based learning meta-analysis: Differences across problem types, implementation types, disciplines, and assessment levels. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based Learning, 3(1). http://dx.doi.org/10.7771/1541-5015.1061.

  • Walker, A., Leary, H., Hemlo-Silver, C. E., & Ertmer, P. A. (Eds.). (2015). Essential readings in problem-based learning: Exploring and extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows. United States of America: Purdue University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wegerif, R., & De Laat, M. (2011). Using Bakhtin to re-think the teaching of higher order thinking for the network society. In S. Ludvigsen, A. Lund, I. Rasmussen, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Learning across sites: New tools, infrastructures and practices (pp. 313–329). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weyringer, S., Patry, J-L., & Weinberger, A. (2012). Values and knowledge education. Experiences with teacher trainings. In D. Alt, & R. Reingold (Eds.), Changes in teachers’ moral role. From passive observers to moral and democratic leaders (pp. 165–180). Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wride, M. (2017). Guide to peer assessment. Academic Practice, University of Dublin, Trinity College.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yariv Itzkovich .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Itzkovich, Y., Alt, D., Dolev, N. (2020). Tackling Academic Incivility by Shifting the Focus to Student-Centered Pedagogical Approaches. In: The Challenges of Academic Incivility. SpringerBriefs in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46747-0_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46747-0_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-46746-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-46747-0

  • eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics