Quality in Classroom Transaction
Quality in Classroom Transaction
Quality in Classroom Transaction
Abstract
Classroom transactional practice includes teacher, content, environment, assessment, mode, style etc. For effective classroom
practices quality relationships should be built. Building quality relationships takes time; developing students ability to make
appropriate choices take time; fostering and maintaining harmonious classroom environments takes time; allowing students to
learn from their mistakes and develop strategies for restitution takes time. Within any classroom there is a constant dynamic
transactional process developing. As a result, it is increasingly likely that as the children become older, a parental stimulus directed
at a child ego state will result in an adult to adult response. Even though the response is perfectly reasonable, and indeed would be
sought in most circumstances, in this case it leads to a crossed transaction and the potential for a negative conversation.
Transactional Analysis is an exceptionally useful tool for helping colleagues to understand their interaction with students, as it
explains clearly why some negative transaction which we all have from time to time result in negative responses. However, it also
helps us to develop strategies which we can practice and mature, which will help with longer term relationships with students,
bring more positive relationships to all concerned, and help in developing (as opposed to managing) behavior.
31
International Journal of Multidisciplinary Education and Research
Respecting
Feeling and showing honor or esteem for others in the
learning environment; showing consideration for the different
qualities they bring to it. Without mutual respect, creativity is
limited, people avoid risks, and the likelihood of inducing
quality collaboration lessens.
Committing to other
Pledging one to work for the well-being and success not only
of oneself but of others in the learning environment. This is
often done formally with all parties completing and signing a
pledge or contract outlining the details of their commitment,
listing the actions they will take.
Valuing process
Valuing the methods used to do something, as opposed to
merely valuing the accomplishment itself. In other words,
unless students actually see the value of the methodologies
used (such as sharing, collaborating, and assessing their own
work) and openly engage in using them, it will be difficult for
authentic learning to occur.
Effective classroom teaching needs good planning on the part
of teacher. Teaching effectiveness is measured by the lasting
quality of instruction, the impression, recollections and the
habits of thinking. Quality comes from people who care and
who are committed. In educational field, it is the teacher who
shoulders the responsibility of quality in classroom
transactions. It needs good planning, good personality of
teacher that is voice, gesture, posture, interaction with
students and good communication. To make the teaching
more effective, immediate feedback should be provided and
followed by demonstration of appropriate behavior. Teacher
and students need to know each other well to create the
bonding that helps the classroom environment.
References
1. Roland G Tharp, Louis A. Yamaunchi. Knowledge
instructional conversation in native American classroom
Educational Practice Report: 10 (USA), 1984.
www.neela.gwu.edu
2. Kallen D. Curriculum reform in the secondary education:
Planning, Development, and implementation. European
journal of education. 1996; 31(1):43-56.
3. Eisner E. From episteme to phronesis to artistry in the
study and improvement of teaching. Teaching and
teacher education. 2002; 18:375-385.
4. Eisner E. The satisfaction of teaching. Educational
leadership. 2006; 63(6):44-46.
5. International journal of teaching and learning in higher
education 2007; 19(2):130-139.
http://www.isetl.org/ijtlhe/ISSN 1812-9129 Barrell.
(1991). Classroom artistry. The educational forum, 55,
333-342.
6. Kreber C. Reflection on teaching and the scholarship of
teaching: focus on science instructors. Higher education.
2005; 50:323-359.
32