P a g e | 1

MASTERS PROGRAMME

Student number: 1327405

Course: PGCE Secondary (School Direct)

Module: EP908: PGCE Secondary Subject Studies: English

Dissertation/Assignment title: MA2 - The Impact of Seating Arrangements on Behaviour for Low Attaining Students

Agreed Grade and Mark

C 52

Overall comment

This study has potential, which unfortunately is not well exploited. You give a clear explanation of the context and reason for this study and it is evident that you are interested in this area. Your research intervention do produce some interesting data: this is evident in the appendices. There is, however, very little reference to research methodology or acknowledgement of the constraints and strengths of the methods you chose. In parts, especially in the early sections when you are describing what tool place, the work is repetitive. Overall, it just merits a pass grade.

Subject Knowledge Your understanding of the research methodologies and concepts lacks depth and breadth. You do not recognise or comment on the strengths and limitations of these or mention reliability or validity. You have read something about conducting research and do mention it briefly, but overall you need to use a wider range of sources both in relation to research methodology and in relation to the use of seating plans. What , for example are the advantages and disadvantages of using a Likert scale? How was triangulation achieved? what have others found in relation to using seating plans? You say a little about this but do not set your work clearly against that of others

You do give a clear rationale for choosing this study and set it clearly in context. It is also interesting that you tried your strategies out in another context with differing results. It would have been helpful to have hypothesised why this might be. Could cultural norms have played a part, given the ethnic make-up of the school, for instance?

It is clear that you have personally gained a greater understanding of the importance of the classroom environment to learning and I hope you will carry on researching this in future

Analysis and CritiqueYou recognise the demands of the question and cover the basic requirements. You have analysed your data and produced charts to show the results. However, these might have been more effective if they had been combined to show the changes in the three modes in one chart. More importantly, although you state the findings clearly, there is a very low level of analysis and synthesis and very little reference in this section to research and reading against which you could set your findings. This weakens the analysis considerably: its quality is uneven. You do make sensible commentary on the evidence . The interviews produced some interesting comment and this could have been further exploited perhaps. You do make some sensible commentary on the evidence

Presentation

Overall , presentation was satisfactory. The work has a satisfactory structure. The standard of writing and written style is adequate and the work is generally referenced accurately with only a

1327405

P a g e | 2

few errors.

Advice for future workIncrease the depth and breadth of analysisMake greater reference to reading and research against which to set your findings

Signed (first marker) Kate Shilvock Date 15th May 2014Second marker’s comments where applicableThis is an interesting study and you show a good level of engagement with the work and consideration of how this can be taken further. The opening section is good and you provide a well-supported rational for this study, demonstrating how you have reflected on MA1 and responded to feedback. Your section on methodology needs further development. You need to justify your decisions and support these with evidence from secondary sources. Similarly, with your analysis, your findings would have more validity if you could support them with other research. You tend to narrate rather than analyse the data. So much more could have been stated from your data. There needs to be more depth of analysis which, in turn, would provide better conclusions.Ensure that you reference correctly and try to avoid overusing commas.

Signed (second marker) Alison Morgan

Date 18.5.14

The Impact of Seating Arrangements on Behaviour for Low Attaining Students

RE-CONTEXTUALISING AND METHODOLOGY. The principle focus of this study

was to discover whether seating arrangements had an impact on behaviour in the classroom.

Although pupil behaviour at this Academy was awarded outstanding by Ofsted in 2013, there

was no in-depth discussion about the classroom environment and whether the Academy’s

policy of boy/girl seating contributed to the overall behaviour of the pupils. The Academy’s

policy, of boy/girl seating, was introduced after the Academy, in its previous life, was put

into special measures due to it failing on all counts. The new senior leadership team visited

other schools who had been awarded ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted to find out how they achieved

that status. One aspect they chose to introduce to the Academy was the policy of boy/girl

1327405

P a g e | 3

seating, which they had witnessed in action, as a positive measure towards the behaviour of

pupils in the classroom. They felt that once they had introduced boy/girl seating the impact

on behaviour would be a positive one, therefore resulting in more engagement in lessons and

more progress being made in pupil learning. This policy has been in place ever since and as

new teachers arrive at the Academy they enforce the same policy. This mini-research study

examined the existing policy of boy/girl seating and then experimented with alternative

seating arrangements to gauge whether seating arrangements did indeed impact upon

behaviour or whether other factors resulted in changes in behaviour.

The literature review and school-based observations previously carried out have helped to

guide and inform the findings before, during and after the study. Marx et al, 1999 pointed out

that educational critics ignore[d] the fundamentals of the classroom environment…as a

physical entity and how that physical entity…influence[d] the behaviour of pupils who use

the classroom. This one piece of research, supported by other researchers and numerous

classroom observations, helped develop my research question of looking at the classroom

environment; how pupils were seated within that environment and the impact on pupil’s

behaviour and learning when not enforcing the school’s policy of boy/girl seating. However

Gump and Marx et al, 1999 based their research findings on classroom environments where

pupils and furniture within the classroom could move, or be moved. The difficulty facing this

study was that in the classroom chosen to carry out the research, all desks had a computer and

were fixed to the floor and the interactive whiteboard was fixed at the front of classroom,

making it impossible to move desks and, for health and safety reasons, difficult for pupils to

move around safely.

1327405

P a g e | 4

Although the focus of the research question is the impact of seating arrangements on

behaviour, the literature review feedback uncovered the need to relate learning outcomes to

behaviour and not to confuse the two. Therefore while behaviour remains the focus, there is

naturally a link to learning outcomes and this will be reflected if any conclusions are drawn.

Also as a result of the study, there will be more focus on critiquing previous researchers’

findings, using the data from the numerous observations, interviews and questions which took

place before, during and after the study. This will ensure a balanced analysis of the research

project will be presented along with comparisons to previous findings related to seating

arrangements and the impact on behaviour and learning.

REFLECTING ON THE INTERVENTION. How behaviour in the classroom is affected

by seating arrangements is a particularly contentious subject with some teachers in schools.

Some schools enforce the boy/girl seating policy, where others, especially in older year

groups, allow pupils to choose where they sit. Marx et al, 1999, quoting Weinstein, 1985

found evidence to suggest that when pupils selected their own seat, motivation, personality

variables and participation in class, including behaviour, altered considerably and teachers

would need to keep this in mind when considering how they controlled their classroom

environment, especially where pupils sat. In this Academy, all teachers are requested to

follow the boy/girl policy unless they have a specific reason for not doing so. The reason for

focussing on seating arrangements for this study was to be able to present to the senior

leadership team, in this Academy, real evidence regarding how a pupil behaves is associated

with where a pupil sits. It was also hoped the study would show that perhaps a ‘one size fits

all’ seating policy is not right for every pupil and classroom. In this particular study I wanted

to look at how behaviour is affected when enforcing the Academy’s policy of boy/girl

seating; how behaviour was affected when seating all pupils according to ability within the

1327405

P a g e | 5

classroom group; and what would happen to behaviour when I allowed the pupils free reign

to sit wherever they liked and next to whoever they wanted to. The added complication to this

study was the classroom the lessons took place in. The classroom has fixed desks and fixed

computers. Most of the desks are laid out in rows facing the interactive white board, however

eight of the desks are positioned so that pupils have their back to the rest of the class and one

desk is positioned right at the front of the room almost underneath the interactive white

board. When I first started teaching in this classroom, it was easier to enforce the boy/girl

seating arrangement ensuring, where possible, that the desks where pupils had their backs to

the rest of the class were not used.

The intervention for this mini-research project used a low ability year seven class over a six-

week period. The class consisted of sixteen pupils: nine girls, seven boys, two of which were

EAL pupils with low literacy levels in their first language, French, and one dyslexic pupil. A

Learning Mentor and a French speaking Teaching Assistant were assigned to the group. The

Learning Mentor and Teaching Assistant were aware of the main goal of the study and were

instructed to intervene as usual if behaviour changed within the lesson, but not to intervene if

pupils were not completing their work as instructed. The pupils were unaware of the reasons

for the changes in seating arrangements and were happy to comply when given instructions as

they entered the classroom.

All pupils prior to the intervention were aware of the rules of the classroom concerning e-

safety, eating and drinking policy and the behaviour expected of them in the learning

environment. At the start of the autumn term, each pupil reads and signs a contract relating to

behaviour and expectations. At the start of a new term each pupil is reminded of this contract

to ensure they have not forgotten the rules of the classroom.

1327405

P a g e | 6

The classroom used for the intervention was a second-floor, cone-shaped classroom. The

desks are benches fixed to the floor with computers, set out in four rows: row one has seven

computers; row two has six computers; row three has five computers and row four has three

computers. The bench along the side of the wall has eight computers and there is one stand-

alone desk at the front of the classroom with a computer (see appendix 1.) The entrance is at

the side of the classroom to left of the teacher’s desk and windows line the cone-shaped part

of the classroom behind the rows of computers.

The intervention took place over six weeks, observing twelve lessons. The lesson was a

Digital Studies lesson studying the Gothic genre. The scheme of work covered all aspects of

the gothic genre, studying key elements, reading various extracts of gothic novels and

working towards each pupil creating their own gothic eBook (see appendix 12.) At the start

of the intervention four lessons followed the Academy policy of boy/girl seating. This

involved all pupils being seated in the first three rows of desks. No pupil had their back to the

rest of the class and all pupils sat boy/girl where possible (see appendix 1.) During the

following four lessons pupils sat according to their ability: high ability students sat next to

high ability pupils and lower ability pupils sat next to lower ability pupils. For the last four

lessons pupils were told as they entered the classroom that they were allowed to sit wherever

they wanted.

The four lessons varied over the two week period. Each lesson lasted one hour, with no

double periods. Of the four lessons, one lesson took place before break at 11.05; two lessons

took place before lunch at 13.05 and one lesson took place after lunch at 13.40. Each lesson

contained the same structure: key word starter; extract from a Gothic novel; clip from a

1327405

P a g e | 7

Gothic film and then directions on how to use what they had learned in the lesson in their

own Gothic eBook.

The first four lessons strictly followed the Academy’s policy of boy/girl seating. This was to

ensure the research findings had a secure benchmark with which to analyse the data. The

pupils had been sitting in this arrangement since the autumn term, and with the exception of

three male pupils who moved out of the class to go to a lower ability set, all pupils were

comfortable with where they sat in their peer group, all worked hard and behaviour issues

were almost non-existent. The rationale for then moving them according to their ability, was

to judge whether seating pupils alongside similar ability pupils changed both behaviour and

work output. Instead of seating high ability next to low ability, I wanted to see if behaviour

and work output was affected when seating pupils together of similar ability. Finally, the

rationale for allowing pupils to sit wherever they chose, was to see the whether pupils were

capable of making the right choices regarding their education and whether the influence of

their ‘friends’ impacted on behaviour and subsequent learning.

There were three methods of collecting data from the intervention. Observations were made

by the Teacher, the Learning Mentor and Teaching Assistant. During each lesson it was

decided that when behaviour changed the usual routine would be followed to sanction poor

behaviour: 3-2-1; eye contact; use of pupil’s name, ticks on board; alert button for senior

leadership team; exclusion from lesson. The role was to observe and record our findings. The

second method was by asking the pupils questions about the lessons and, after each four

lesson session, a questionnaire was given to the pupils to fill in. It was anonymous and pupils

were instructed not to fill in their names anywhere on the sheet. The one dyslexic pupil, who

has everything printed on blue paper, was requested to work with the person sitting next to

1327405

P a g e | 8

them in order to be able to read the questions. The final method was a focus group after each

four-lesson session. Six pupils were selected based on their ability: high, average and low.

DATA ANALYSIS, FINDINGS AND EVALUATION. For ease of analysis the results,

from the twelve lessons during the intervention, have been divided into the four-session

lessons when seating options were the same. The data analysis offered is both quantitative

and qualitative and resulting findings and evaluation is based on results shown here.

During the first four lessons all pupils sat in the allocated seating arrangement that they had

sat in since September. After the four-lesson session had finished, all were given a

questionnaire to complete. The questions used the Likert Scale and a tick box system.

Appendix 2 shows the questionnaire used for the first four-lesson session. Of the sixteen

questionnaires handed out, all were completed. Results are shown in figure 1 regarding how

pupils felt about the existing seating arrangements.

Normal Seating Arrangment

0

2

4

6

8

10

Rating 1 - Like it

Rating 5 - Don't care

Rating 10 - Hate it

Figure 1. Feelings relating to the normal seating arrangement: boy/girl

When asked to rate their behaviour in these first four lessons, each pupil was given six

options to choose from. These were further broken down into two sections. In figure 2 results

1327405

P a g e | 9

shown relate purely to changes in behaviour; in figure 3 results relate to elements of

behaviour.

Normal Seating Arrangement

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Same as usual

Better than usual

Worse than usual

Figure 2. Changes in behaviour

Normal Seating Arrangements

02468

101214

More talkative

Less talkative

Able to concentrate more

Figure 3. Relating to aspects of behaviour

After the first four lessons had concluded, six pupils were invited back for an informal

discussion about the existing seating arrangements and how the pupils felt it impacted on the

way they behaved in lessons. The focus group contained both equal numbers of boys to girls.

Examples of the questions asked are shown in appendix 3. It was explained again to the

pupils that they could answer in whatever way they wanted to, and would not be judged on

their answers, as I wanted to get an honest perspective on how well the Academy’s policy of

boy/girl seating worked. The Learning Mentor was present to help record the answers. As it

was such a small group and short session, I felt there was no need to physically record the

answers and I also wanted to keep the pupils comfortable and their responses open.

1327405

P a g e | 10

The main question asked was ‘how did the pupils feel about sitting next to either a boy or

girl?’ The focus group contained both equal numbers of boys to girls. All said they did not

mind sitting next to either a boy or girl. One boy actually preferred sitting next to a girl as he

‘worked better.’ Another boy said he did not talk as much when he was sitting next to a girl.

He actually made a of point of ‘not talking to her.’ The girls were much more vocal. All

three said they did not mind sitting next to boys but would prefer to ‘sit by their friend.’ They

were almost pleading in the way they felt ‘they would work better sitting next to their friend’

and they would not talk as much. My next question related to the output of work in the

previous four lessons. All had completed the work to a good standard and within the

timescale. I asked whether they felt it was because they were sitting in their usual places and

knew what was expected of them. All agreed they were comfortable knowing at the start of

each lesson, where they were sitting and what was expected of them.

During the next four lessons, the seating arrangement changed according to the pupil’s

MELPs (minimum expected levels of progress). The pupils were not told the reasons they

were being seated in this specific way, so as not to create any animosity within the classroom.

High ability pupils within the group were seated sat next to each other on the second and

third rows of the classroom. The lower ability pupils, including the two EAL pupils and the

dyslexic pupils were seatedsat on the front row (see appendix 4.) There was confusion and

some reticence to sit in the new seating arrangement but, after it was explained it was

temporary, all pupils sat where they were asked to do so. Again after the second four-lesson

session, questionnaires were given out to all sixteen pupils and all sixteen were completed

and returned. To get an accurate measure of feelings and attitudes, the questions remained the

same (see figure 4.)

1327405

P a g e | 11

Seating according to ability

01234567

Rating 1 - Like it

Rating 5 - Don't care

Rating 10 - Hate it

Figure 4. Feelings relating to seating arrangement according to ability

It can be seen that pupil’s feelings changed when asked to sit according to ability. There was

a slight decrease in pupils who liked the seating arrangement, but a substantial increase in

pupils hating the new seating arrangement. These feelings were substantiated by the answers

given in the next part of the questionnaire, specifically related to changes in behaviour and

learning as a result of changes in behaviour (see figures 5 and 6 respectively).

Seating according to ability

02468

1012

Same as usual

Better than usual

Worse than usual

Figure 5. Changes in behaviour when seated according to ability

Seating according to ability

0

2

4

6

8

10

More talkative

Less talkative

Able to concentrate more

Figure 6. Relating to aspects of behaviour when seated according to ability

1327405

P a g e | 12

As before, after the four-lesson session, the same six pupils were asked to attend an informal

focus group. The rules were talked through again and it was explained that the questions

related to the previous four lessons only, when pupils were seated according to ability.

Examples of the questions asked are in appendix 5. Again the Learning Mentor was present

to help facilitate the group and again as the session was small and short, there was no need to

record the session. The session started off with the question ‘How did you feel when you

were told you had to sit somewhere else?’ This session was much more animated with four

out of the six asking why they had to sit where they did. The lower ability pupils hated being

put at the front of the classroom, as did the average ability pupils. Only the high achievers

actually voiced that they were quite happy with where they were sitting and who they were

sitting next to. The lower ability pupils felt they were being penalised for something and

decided they were not going to engage in the lesson. One female low ability pupil actually

felt close to tears and could not understand why she could not sit where she usually sat. When

it was, again, explained to her that it was temporary, she still felt she had talked more and

‘had not learned as much because of the behaviour of the boys around her.’ When the other

members of the focus group were asked whether they had managed to work well in the

lessons, achieve all the lesson objectives, they all agreed they had been able to. However, all

expressed the opinion that they were not as comfortable in the new seating arrangement and

would prefer to be seated in their original seats.

During the final four-lesson sessions, there was no formal seating arrangement in place. Due

to the classroom setup, the desks had to remain in the same place. On entering the classroom,

the pupils were all instructed they were able to choose who they wanted to sit by as well as

choosing where they sat in the classroom (see appendix 6). Not surprisingly all pupils

1327405

P a g e | 13

cheered at the prospect of not being forced to sit where they were told. It took them

approximately eleven minutes to select where they were sitting and who they were sitting

next to. Again after these four lessons were concluded, questionnaires were given out to all

sixteen pupils and sixteen questionnaires were completed and returned. The questions

remained the same as the previous two questionnaires (see figures 7, 8 and 9 respectively.)

No seating ar-rangement

0

2

4

6

8

10

Rating 1 - Like it

Rating 5 - Don't care

Rating 10 - Hate it

Figure 7. Feelings relating to no seating arrangement

No seating ar-rangement

02468

101214

Same as usual

Better than usual

Worse than usual

Figure 8. Changes in behaviour with no seating arrangement

No seating arrangement

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

More talkative

Less talkative

Able to concentrate more

Figure 9. Relating to aspects of behaviour when seated according to ability

1327405

P a g e | 14

After the final four-lesson session, the same six pupils were asked to attend an informal focus

group. Same rules applied and pupils were reminded that these questions related to the

previous four lessons only, when pupils were allowed to sit where they wanted. Examples of

the questions asked are in appendix 7. The Learning Mentor was present to help facilitate the

group and again as the session was small and short, there was no need to record the session.

The session started off with the question ‘How did you feel when you were told you could sit

where you wanted?’ All pupils agreed they were surprised, but pleased they were given the

option to sit where they wanted. All ability pupils enjoyed being able to choose who they sat

by. However, three of the four pupils felt the start of the lesson was confused and noisy as

some pupils were getting very excited and over-enthusiastic. They also felt they were unable

to concentrate as much with the noise level so high. One high ability pupil actually decided

to move himself during the lesson as he was unable to concentrate with so much noise and

distractions around him. He felt he had talked more and not learned as much because of ‘the

behaviour of the pupils around him.’ When the other members of the focus group were asked

whether they had managed to work well in the lessons, achieve all the lesson objectives, they

all said that although they had talked more, they had been able to get more work done,

because they were happy with where they were sitting. With the exception of one pupil, they

all expressed the desire to remain in these seats rather than reverting to the original seating

plan.

The final method used for this intervention was teacher observations. Over the twelve

lessons, three adults were in the room to observe changes in behaviour as a result of where

the pupils sat. Each adult was told to intervene as usual in any behaviour issues, but not to

intervene if pupils were not working or learning as a result of behaviour in the classroom.

1327405

P a g e | 15

This decision was made in order to get as true a picture as possible of behaviour changes

during the intervention.

After the first four-lesson session, where pupils sat in the original seating arrangement, we sat

down to discuss behaviour in the classroom. Without exception, all agreed behaviour was

excellent, with pupils focussed on learning and the lesson objectives. Low level disruption,

such as talking, was at a minimum and the lesson was able to start immediately. Marking of

the pupil’s written and eBook, corroborated our observations (see appendix 8.)

After the second four-lesson session, where pupils were seatedsat according to their ability,

we agreed there had been a significant change in behaviour. With the exception of five

pupils, three boys and two girls, behaviour worsened. The lesson was disrupted several times

with pupils asking to be moved ‘because they did not like who they were sitting next to’ and

talking between pupils increased. One male pupil walked out of the lesson, only to return five

minutes later to continue to disrupt the lesson with silly behaviour and mild verbal abuse to

those around him. The five pupils, whose behaviour remained constant, were higher ability

pupils, who were able to ignore distractions around them. It was agreed by all three observers

that learning had been stilted, due to the poor behaviour of others in the classroom. The

changes in seating arrangements and marking of the pupil’s written and eBook corroborated

these observations (see appendix 9.)

Finally, after the four-lesson session where pupils sat wherever they chose, the behaviour and

subsequent learning of every pupil worsened. Even the higher ability pupils struggled with

the informal approach to seating arrangements and they struggled to keep focussed in the

lesson and were drawn into poor behaviour and general disruption. All observers noted that

1327405

P a g e | 16

talking became a huge problem within the lessons, as did silly behaviour, such as throwing

pens and inappropriate verbal dialogue. Not one pupil achieved the lesson objectives after the

hour lesson and subsequent marking of written and online work showed a huge decrease in

output (see appendix 10.)

From the data and evidence produced during the intervention, it was clear to see that seating

arrangements within a classroom did impact not only on the behaviour of pupils but also on

their learning outcomes. Of the twelve lessons during the intervention, only four produced the

right classroom environment for learning to take place and where behaviour was not an issue.

These were the four lessons where the Academy’s policy of boy/girl seating were followed

and where the pupils were used to sitting. The data from the questionnaires also showed that

56% of pupils were quite happy being told where to sit and 88% of pupils felt they could

concentrate more. 75% of pupils felt their behaviour was the same as usual and 88% felt they

were less talkative. 19% of pupils hated sitting in the original seating arrangement, with 6%

of pupils saying their behaviour was worse than usual and 12% of pupils saying they were

more talkative.

After the four-lesson session where pupils were sat according to ability, behaviour patterns

altered and work output decreased. Results from the questionnaires showed that 44% of

pupils were quite happy being moved to sit according to ability and 50% of pupils felt they

could concentrate more. 6% of pupils felt their behaviour was the same as usual and 62% felt

they were less talkative. 25% of pupils hated sitting in the new seating arrangement, with

69% of pupils saying their behaviour was worse than usual and 38% of pupils saying they

were more talkative.

1327405

P a g e | 17

After the four-lesson session where pupils were allowed to sit wherever they chose,

behaviour patterns and work output decreased significantly. However, results from the

questionnaires showed that 62% of pupils were very happy being allowed to sit where they

wanted and 75% of pupils felt they could concentrate more. 0% of pupils felt their behaviour

was the same as usual and 25% felt they were less talkative. 25% of pupils hated sitting in the

new seating arrangement, with 25% of pupils saying their behaviour was worse than usual

and 75% of pupils saying they were more talkative.

The outcome from the focus groups, along with the data from the questionnaires did not truly

reflect what actually occurred within the classroom during the study. Although 75% of

pupils felt they concentrate more when being allowed to sit wherever they chose, 75% also

said they were more talkative. I struggled to get to the end of the lesson and was unable to

show pupil progress. Some books showed less than one line of text being written in a whole

hour (see appendix 11), computers were unplugged, noise levels were too loud and silly

behaviour increased. Pupils had forgotten the classroom rules and felt it was acceptable to

behave in an immature manner.

When seated according to ability, pupil’s behaviour also worsened. However, there was a

definite split regarding whose behaviour changed. From observations, we could see which

pupils were disrupting the class. The higher ability pupils were able to stay focussed, and

although a few became distracted with talking, it was the lower ability pupils who struggled

with this new arrangement. They were easily distracted by those they were seated next to.

Although the questionnaires were anonymous, 69% of pupils agreed their behaviour was

worse and 38% of pupils said they were more talkative.

1327405

P a g e | 18

In light of the classroom intervention which took place over twelve lessons looking at seating

arrangements, the qualitative and quantitative data corroborates the findings of Fernandes et

al., 2011, who cited Hastings & Schwieso, 1995 and Wannarka & Ruhl, 2008 in showing

that ‘good seating arrangements can help control disruptive and easily distracted students’

(p.70.) Not only that, but it also supports the view of Foucault, 1972, cited by Fernandes et

al., 2011, p. 70, that seating plans are put in place in order to ‘control and manipulate

behaviour.’ The eight lessons which changed seating arrangements from the standard boy/girl

seating pattern saw easily distracted pupils become disengaged with learning and,

subsequently, their behaviour deteriorated.

Interestingly the findings from the questionnaires and the focus groups see contrasting

opinions from both the adults and the pupils within the classroom. Pupils felt they

concentrated more when given the opportunity to select their own seat. They agreed they

talked more, but did not associate this with low-level disruption or indeed the lack of work

during the lesson. The adults saw the benefit of instructing pupils where to sit, knowing that

children of all ages are unlikely to disassociate themselves from poor behaviour going on

around them. The seating arrangements do not just serve to control behaviour, but also to

ensure optimum learning conditions for each pupil. Some pupils however, see where they sit

as a type of punishment and object because they are intent on disrupting lessons regardless of

where they sit.

During my six-week complementary school placement, I was able to look at the seating

arrangements of the classes I was teaching, look at their MELPs and experiment using the

same methodology strategy as my base primary placement school. The Academy, situated in

Handsworth, is in a deprived area of Birmingham, with a high proportion of children living in

1327405

P a g e | 19

poverty. The World Bank Organisation defines poverty as ‘a person is considered poor if his

or her income level falls below some minimum level necessary to meet basic needs. This

minimum level is usually called the "poverty line". What is necessary to satisfy basic needs

varies across time and societies. Therefore, poverty lines vary in time and place, and each

country uses lines which are appropriate to its level of development, societal norms and

values.’(BBC Online, 2014.) The minority ethnic population is made up 89.2% (27,726) of

the ward population, compared with 42.1% for Birmingham. These numbers exclude people

with a White Irish background (Lozells and East Handsworth Census of Population, 2011)

therefore the proportion of students from minority ethnic backgrounds is well above the

national average, as is those who speak English as an additional language.

At this Academy, there was no standard policy for seating arrangements however the teacher

I exchanged places with had introduced a seating plan based on ability. I taught five different

year groups in eight different classrooms and introduced new seating arrangements. The

layouts of the classrooms varied with some desks in groups of four or six, some on hexagonal

desks and then one classroom with rows of desks. The students here were less tolerant of

change and very suspicious as to the reasons for change. They objected to the boy/girl seating

plan, stating ‘our other teacher lets us sit where we want’ and ‘we don’t sit next to girls.’ The

seating arrangements were explained as temporary and all pupils were told it was in order for

me to get to know them and their names.

The boy/girl seating arrangement did not work as well in this community. A number of pupils

became belligerent, with the senior leadership team being called to remove pupils from the

class. After two weeks, the Head of English asked for me to revert to the seating plan left by

the original teacher in order to get behaviour and learning back on track. When my findings

1327405

P a g e | 20

from my primary placement were presented, showing how behaviour could be controlled

using the boy/girl policy, I was told that this had been tried at this Academy before and had

been unsuccessful. Unfortunately without this prior knowledge and without the backing of

the senior leadership team or the Head of English, I was unable to go further with the study.

With this in mind, it showed seating arrangements to be more than just teacher prerogative.

What might work in one school might be inappropriate in another. Seating arrangements can

have a detrimental effect on behaviour because every pupil is different, as are teaching styles,

classroom environments and attitudes to learning which supports Weinstein’s, 1985, research

(in Marx et al., 1999, p. 251.) However, as the results from the study showed, to not have a

seating arrangement in place, however informal, can impact upon the behaviour and learning

of not just one pupil, but all the pupils in the class.

To re-iterate, this was a small-scale study focussing on only one low ability year group over a

short period of time. The methodology chosen was for ease of analysis and for the fact it was

less intrusive than other methods: the questionnaires were easy to create and to glean

statistical results from; focus groups were used as a more informal approach to one-to-one

interviews; and observations by staff in the classroom were used as pupils were already used

to the adults being in the classroom and it was a good way to get unbiased results. The

limitations of this study in particular were numerous: a non-standard classroom with fixed

desks; small sample to work with; pupils not reading the questions properly or understanding

the Likert scale; questionnaires given out at end of lesson resulting in answers being rushed;

focus group contained leading questions; and once part of a focus group, pupils may answer

in a certain manner because they ‘may be influenced by the social nature of the exercise’

(Taylor et al, 2006, p. 38.) For the study to have more impact on the Academy’s policy of

1327405

P a g e | 21

boy/girl seating, then the intervention needs to be all encompassing and look at the effects of

seating arrangements on behaviour in all year groups and with all ability classes. Using only a

Year 7 group, where behaviour is more easily controlled due to patterns of behaviour not

being formed at such an early phase, can give skewed results. For behaviour patterns to be

studied fully, then all year and ability groups should be included in the study as well as

interventions taking place in alternative classrooms and during other subject lessons.

Moving forward, although restricted by the physical layout of my classroom, it has become

clear from this small-scale study, that following the Academy’s policy of boy/girl seating is

the best approach to control behaviour with this particular class, in this particular classroom.

However, this will not be strictly adhered to as I will need to tailor the seating arrangements

within each class and year group in order to get the best behaviour and learning outcomes

from the pupils. This may result in boys sitting next to girls and vice versa. This will be an

evolving piece of work, depending on the nature of the class and the individuals involved.

What works from one class will not necessarily work for another and therefore there may be a

period of transition where the seating arrangements change until the best solution is found.

What is clear from this study and which supports the findings of Weinstein, 1985, cited in

Marx et al., 1999, p. 251, that when pupils select their own classroom positions, then

behaviour and learning outcomes are subject to that individual’s ‘motivation, personality

variables, and participation.’ Therefore teachers have to rely on their knowledge of the

individual and how they learn, in order to seat the pupil in the best possible position in the

classroom in order to control behaviour and achieve the best learning outcomes for every

pupil in the class. The boy/girl seating policy is a good place to start, but teachers need to

adapt this policy in order to control behaviour within the classroom and how this will impact

on positive learning outcomes for all pupils. What my complementary placement taught me

1327405

P a g e | 22

was that varied approaches to seating arrangements need to be managed in order to control

behaviour and not to assume a universal approach is necessarily the right one. It is hoped that

this study can begin again in the autumn term with a larger number of interventions with

other year groups and with pupils of all abilities to support or disprove the original data from

this study. Above all I hope to present my findings, regardless of outcomes, showing there is

a relationship between seating arrangements and the behaviour of pupils to the senior

leadership team and in turn help to improve learning outcomes within the Academy.

5795 Words

1327405

P a g e | 23

Appendices

Appendix 1

Original Seating Plan Following Academy’s Policy of Boy/Girl Seating

1327405

P a g e | 24

Appendix 2

Questionnaire Used Following Each Four-Lesson Session

1327405

P a g e | 25

Questionnaire

Look at this scale

1 5 10 I Like it a lot I don’t care I hate it

Use the above scale to answer the following questions. Put the number you think answers the question best in the box. You may need to write an answer for some of the questions. If you get stuck, raise your hand and I will help you interpret the question.

1. What do you think of the seating arrangement?

2. What effect does the seating arrangement have on class discussions?

3. What do you think about sitting next to a boy or girl?

4. How would you rate your behaviour in today’s lesson? (tick the box)

a) The same as usualb) Better than usualc) Worse than usuald) I was more talkativee) I was less talkativef) I was able to concentrate more

Appendix 3

Example of Questions Asked During Focus Group Following Original Academy Seating

Plan of Boy/Girl

1327405

P a g e | 26

How do you feel about sitting next to a boy or girl?

How do you think you work when sitting next to a boy or girl?

Do you talk more or less when sitting next to a boy or girl?

Do you like where you normally sit? If yes – why? If no – why?

What is expected of you when you enter the classroom?

Does the behaviour of others spoil the classroom environment?

What happens to your work when others misbehave around you?

Appendix 4

Seating Plan based on Pupil’s Ability

1327405

P a g e | 27

Appendix 5

1327405

P a g e | 28

Example of Questions Asked During Focus Group Following Seating Arrangement

Based on Ability

How did you feel when you were told to move to a different seat?

Were you able to get as much work done in the new seating arrangement?

Did you talk more or less in this new arrangement?

Did you like where yousat during these four lessons? If yes – why? If no – why?

What is expected of you when you enter the classroom?

Did the behaviour of others spoil the classroom environment?

Did you misbehave because of the new seating arrangement? If yes – why?

Appendix 6

1327405

P a g e | 29

No Seating Plan – Pupils Choose Where They Sit

Appendix 7

1327405

P a g e | 30

Example of Questions Asked During Focus Group Following Pupils Being Allowed to

Select Where They Sit

How did you feel when you were told you could sit where you wanted to?

How do you think you worked when sitting next to your friend ?

Do you talk more or less when sitting next to your friend?

Did you like being able to sit where you wanted to? If yes – why? If no – why?

What is expected of you when you enter the classroom?

Did the behaviour of others spoil the classroom environment?

What happened to your work when the noise levels within the classroom were so

high?

Appendix 8

1327405

P a g e | 31

Example of Pupil’s Work When Seated Following The Academy’s Policy of Boy/Girl

Seating

Appendix 9

1327405

P a g e | 32

Example of Pupil’s Work When Seated Based on Pupil’s Ability

Appendix 10

1327405

P a g e | 33

Example of Pupil’s Work When Allowed To Choose Where They Sit

Appendix 11

1327405

P a g e | 34

Example of Pupil’s Work When Allowed To Choose Where They Sit – One Line of Text

Appendix 12

1327405

P a g e | 35

Example Lesson from Gothic Scheme of Work

Bibliography

1327405

P a g e | 36

Fernandes, A, Jinyan, H, & Rinaldo, V 2011, 'Does Where A Student Sits Really Matter? -

The Impact of Seating Locations on Student Classroom Learning', International Journal Of

Applied Educational Studies, 10, 1, pp. 66-77, Education Research Complete, EBSCOhost,

[Accessed 9 December 2013].

Marx, A, Fuhrer, U, & Hartig, T 1999, 'Effects of Classroom Seating Arrangements on

Children's question-asking', Learning Environments Research, 2, 3, pp. 249-263, E-Journals,

EBSCOhost, [Accessed 9 December 2013].

McCorskey, J.C, & McVetta, R.W, Classroom Seating Arrangements: Instructional

Communication Theory versus Student Preferences, Communication Education, Volume 27,

1978, Pages 99-111, [Accessed 9 December 2013].

Mohammad Moslemi Haghighi, Mahmud Mohd Jusan, ‘Exploring Students Behavior on

Seating Arrangements in Learning Environment: A Review’, Procedia - Social and

Behavioral Sciences, Volume 36, 2012, Pages 287-294, [Accessed 9 December 2013].

Parker, T, Hoopes, O, & Eggett, D 2011, 'The Effect of Seat Location and Movement or Permanence

on Student-Initiated Participation', College Teaching, 59, 2, pp. 79-84, Education Research Complete,

EBSCOhost, [Accessed 9 December 2013].

Taylor, C, Wilkie, M, & Baser, J 2006, ‘Doing Action Research: a guide for school support

staff’ [Accessed 29 January 2014].

Academy Curriculum Policy [Accessed 18 October 2013].

1327405

P a g e | 37

Academy SEN Policy (January 2012) [Accessed 18 October 2013].

Academy OFSTED Section 8 Report - 2012

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/provider/files/2010649/urn/136347.pdf

[Accessed 18 October 2013].

Academy OFSTED School Inspection Report - 2013

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/provider/files/2227553/urn/136347.pdf

[Accessed 18 October 2013].

For data on the school, see the DfE EduBase:

http://www.education.gov.uk/edubase/establishment/summary.xhtml?urn=136347

[Accessed 18 October 2013].

Chelmsley Wood crime stats:

http://www.ukcrimestats.com/Neighbourhood/West_Midlands_Police/Chelmsley_Wood#Lea

gue [Accessed 18 October 2013].

2011 Census of Population: Key Statistics

http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/handsworth [Accessed 27 February 2014].

BBC Online [Higher Still] Modern Studies: Definitions of Poverty

http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/education/int/ms/health/wealth/def_of_poverty/

definitions.shtml [Accessed 27 February 2014].

1327405

P a g e | 38

2013 Ward Profile: Chelmsley Wood (Solihull Council):

http://www.solihull.gov.uk/Attachments/Chelmsley_Wood_WP.pdf

[Accessed 18 October 2013].

A4 MA Intervention Planning Annex

1327405

P a g e | 39

Name: Julie Robinson Subject: English Date: 8th December 2013

Selected area of focus: In the table below, indicate in more detail the method(s) you will be using in your intervention:

Title or research question: The Impact of Seating Arrangements on Behaviour for Low Attaining Students

Pre-intervention observations of the target groupAbility level of the class

Organisation:(ie seating plan/group work/practical etc)

Topic: (the programme of study for the duration of the intervention)

Assessment: ( how will progress be assessed at the end of the PoS)

Year 7 set 4. Low level literacy and understanding.

Three variations of seating plan. Individual work creating eBook

The Gothic genre Quality and quantity of work completed. Teacher assessment

What method(s) of investigation will you use in your study? (Please tick)Questionnaires Interviews Observations Learning outcomes

(i.e. tests)

What is your justification for using this/these method(s)?For the pupils To ensure those who are uncomfortable with one method, are able to

participate in another to get a fuller studyFor the school To show quantative data rather than just qualitative when presenting

resultsFor the study To show quantative data rather than just qualitative when presenting

resultsWhat are the benefits of this method?For the pupils Closed questions within the questionnaire will help reduce the

possibility of not understanding or even the inability to understand what is being asked of them

For the study Questionnaires – by using questionnaires it is ‘easier to create statistical results’ (Cohen et al 2007, p 321)

For the data By obtaining statistical results, the data becomes more reliable

What are the potential risks when using this method?For the pupils For the questionnaires and interviews they give the answers they

think you want and do not act naturally when being observed.For the data May become skewed if answers are not given openly and honestly

For reliability For the reasons stated above, if the pupils do not respond openly and honestly, then the data will be unreliable

How have you addressed these risks?

The questionnaires will be confidential. No name or gender indication will be on the questionnaire. This may assist the pupils in giving more honest and open feedback. Only

1327405

P a g e | 40

those who are comfortable with the interview process and who understand the need to be open and honest will be invited to interview within the focus group. The neutral observer will only indicate gender when filling in the observation criteria.

What, if any, are the ethical considerations with this intervention?

There are no ethical considerations with this intervention. The pupils will be given an honest explanation of the intervention in order for them to understand what is happening. There are no conflicts of interest between the researcher (myself) and the researched (pupils). Using a neutral observer will ensure the researched are protected. All researched pupils will be made aware that they can withdraw from the intervention at any point should they feel uncomfortable.

1327405