Author: Pam

Eamonn Pugh: Education Faculty Partnership Tutor and part-time M.Phil/PhD candidate

Discourses on teaching with emotional intelligence:
Can they transform performance by student teachers and their school placement mentors?

This research is important

Teachers can connect with learners beyond transmission of ideas and facts, transforming the experience.
Not using emotional intelligence diminishes the value of subject knowledge and learning and teaching methods. (Mortiboys, 2005)

Subject knowledge

Teaching
and learning methods

Emotional intelligence

“Researchers know surprisingly little about the role of emotions in learning to teach” (Sutton & Wheatley, 2003)
“Teacher preparation programs need to support teacher candidates by scaffolding reflective abilities surrounding emotional intelligence, providing sufficient curriculum time to infuse this”(Kremenitzer, 2005).

Emotional Intelligence (EI)
Definition: Tuning into emotions and taking appropriate action. (derivative of Orme, 2000) / Conceptual Framework (Pugh 2008)
	Personal / (or Intrapersonal)	Social / (or Interpersonal)
Awareness of feelings	Recognise our own feelings	Recognise the feelings of others
Behavioural response to feelings	Manage our own feelings effectively	Take account of the feelings of others.

Some critics label the EI concept as “old wine in a new bottle” (Matthews, 2002) and challenge its validity as a measurable construct.. This research though considers, not whether EI is new, but what importance it has for effective student teacher performance.

Mixed methods so far

A Pilot study was completed with student teacher and mentor participants during final placements with pass or fail QTS outcomes. (Pugh and Tyson, 2008)
‘Before and after’ joint lesson observations (researcher assessing emotional intelligence; mentor assessing against QTS standards), followed by semi-structured interviews.
The pilot findings were:
There were linked improvements in emotional intelligence and the professional standards (‘before and after’ assessments
Mentor/student teacher/researcher relationships need to be effective if this approach used
Mentor modelling of emotional intelligence for student teachers is integral to the process
Socially-desirable responses from student teachers (seeking approval) and mentors (aware of researcher purpose to find EI and performance links)

Power and emotions
Five forms of power held, consciously or unconsciously (French & Raven, in Garvey, 2009): coercive, reward, legitimate, referent, expert
Researcher as partnership tutor over student - reward, legitimate, expert?
Mentor over student - reward, legitimate, referent , expert?
Governments over schools-pupils and teachers through personal and social education programmes—SEL (USA) and SEAL (England) - coercive, legitimate?
Both programmes are underpinned by Goleman’s populist model of emotional intelligence (1995, 1998). Arguably set in amoral, value-free context, unlike Aristotle's schooling of emotions e.g. emotionally-intelligent drug baron. (Kristjánsson 2006, Burman 2009) Same for my chosen model?
Coding my pilot interview data did not identify moral as an ethical issue, but should have (design limitation?)
“Emotional pupils and teachers could share a common discourse. But this will be managed and monitored formally as sets of competences and outcomes. There will be a clear market opportunity for those who offer.... the objective testing of the emotional intelligence of those within them” (Hartley, 2002)
Unethical? Emotional management standardised and made ready for audit?
But my pilot study did just that!

A change of approach
Aim:
Still to improve emotionally-intelligent teaching by student teachers, but seeking empowerment of student teacher and mentor (rather than through formative and external assessment of emotional intelligence)
Vocabulary:
‘Emotional intelligence’ is applied in the classroom as ‘emotional competence’ and discussed using ‘emotion literacy’.
Less scientific:
Valuing integrity seems so nebulous while numbers seem so solid; they appear to offer a buffer against our loss of confidence in our beliefs. The study must avoid the ‘arithmetisation trap’ (Conway, 2009).
It is ‘sufficient to recognise that understanding is of a higher order than accuracy’ (Lucaks, 2002)
Social construction of knowledge:
Invention of multiple social realities, validated by participants (Ovens, 2009)
Grounder theory:
Case studies rather than samples; create theory rather than apply it. Relationships crucial though – 5 or 8 week placements time constraint.
Creative research design needed!

Where from here?
Fit for purpose’ choices
Participants and setting
Track same mentors or same student teachers?
If student teachers ....
Undergraduate or postgraduates?
Teaching experience: beginning, developing or extending placements?
If mentors .....
Beginners, experienced, very experienced?
Which researcher paradigm....
Social researcher or action research?
Outside or within my familiar partnership tutoring schools?
Data collection tools:
Focus on EI in lessons taught - purely to stimulate discourse.
Video-recorded by student teacher or peer partner (if paired placement)?
Written appraisal by mentor or peer partner?
Access to those records?
Discussions or interviews?
Between student and mentor, student and researcher or all three?
Audio/video-recorded?
What about contribution by peer partners and/or pupils in class?
Reflective log by student teacher and/or mentor)
Blog format (PebblePad or Blackboard) allowing researcher access comments?
Data collection time constraint : 24 months.
Next? Revised methodology integrating conceptual thinking about EI.

Selected References (see accompanying paper for complete list)
Burman, E (2009) Beyond ‘emotional literacy’ in feminist and educational literature; BERJ, Vol. 35 (1)	Goleman, D. (1995). Emotional intelligence: Why it can matter more than IQ. New York: Bantam.	Kristjánsson, K (2006) Emotional Intelligence in the Classroom? An Aristotelian Critique, Educational Theory, Vol. 56 (1)	Orme, G. (2001) Emotionally Intelligent Living, Crown Publishing House.
.Cherniss, C (2000) EI: What it is and Why it Matters, http://www.eiconsortium.org/reports (accessed 3/7/09)	Hartley, D. (2003) The instrumentalisation of the expressive in education, British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol. 51 (1)	Matthews, G.; Zeidner, M.; Roberts, R. D. (2002) Emotional Intelligence: Science and Myth; Cambridge, Mass. MIT Press.	Pugh, E (2008) If emotionally-intelligence teaching isn’t on our standards agenda, is the ladder leaning against the wrong wall? Practitioner Research in HE’, Vol. 2 (1),UniPress Cumbria
Gardner, H. (1993) Multiple Intelligence: The Theory in Practice. New York: Basic	Kremenitzer, J (2005) Emotional Intelligence in Teacher Education, Focus on Teacher Education Vol. 5 (4)	Mayer, J. and Salovey, P. (1989) Emotional Intelligence, Baywood Publishing Inc.	Pugh, E and Tyson, E (2008) Formative assessment of student teacher emotional intelligence, BERA Conference paper; British Ed. Index
Garvey, R, Stokes, P and Megginson, D (2009) Coaching and Mentoring: Theory and Practice , Sage	Lucaks, 2002; cited by Conway, J (2009) Negotiating Trick Corners: Becoming a Researcher in Education; ESCalate Conference, B’ham. http://escalate.ac.uk/5843 accessed 6/7/09	Mortiboys, A. (2005) Teaching with Emotional Intelligence, Routledge.	Sutton and Wheatley (2003) Teachers’ Emotions and Teaching: A review of the literature and directions for future research, Educational Psychology Review, Vol. 15 (4)

06/12/2010