Teacher Power Bases: Czech Adaptation of Teacher Power Use Scale

Vol.22,No.1(2017)
Studia paedagogica

Kateřina Vlčková Jan Mareš Stanislav Ježek Zuzana Šalamounová

https://doi.org/10.5817/SP2017-1-6

PDF (Czech)
Abstract
Even though the establishment of power relations among teachers and students is a precondition for successful realization of didactical and educational aims in instructional settings, the concept of teacher power was only lately stabilized within Czech educational theory and has been investigated only qualitatively through interviews, observations, and reflective texts (e.g. Makovská, 2010, 2011; Šeďová, 2011, 2015). Our aim is to present a Czech adaptation of the Teacher Power Use Scale (Schrodt, Witt, & Turman, 2007), which measures relational power traditionally differentiated into five power bases (expert, reference, legitimate, coercive, and reward) according to French and Raven's theory (1959). The benefit of this quantitative approach is its relatively fast estimation of the five teacher power bases even with a high number of respondents and the comparability of the resultant findings. The adaptation focused on extending the instrument's applicability to a larger variety of respondents (younger learners at ISCED 2A and their teachers) and Czech educational conditions. The five factor/bases model was reduced by confirmatory factor analysis, item analysis, and reliability analysis to a four-factor solution because Czech students in lower secondary education perceived legitimate and coercive power bases as a single factor. High correlations between these bases have also been reported in other international studies. The reliability coefficients for all power bases were higher than 0.70. The Czech version of the instrument (Báze moci: verze pro učitele) can be used further in research or instructional practice – by teachers and teacher educators, where it can broaden their views on their own educational work.

Keywords:
classroom interaction; power; power bases; reflected teacher power; adaptation of Teacher Power Use Scale; confirmatory factor analysis
References

[1] Bernstein, B. (1996). Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. London: Taylor and Francis.

[2] Buzzelli, C., & Johnston, B. (2001). Authority, power, and morality in classroom discourse. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(8), 873–884. | DOI 10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00037-3

[3] Elias, S. M., & Mace, B. L. (2005). Social power in the classroom: Student power in the classroom: Student attribution for compliance. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 35(8), 1738–1754. | DOI 10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02193.x

[4] Erchul, W. P., Raven, B. H., & Ray, A. G. (2001). School psychologists' perceptions of social power bases in teacher consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 12(1), 1–23. | DOI 10.1207/S1532768XJEPC1201_01

[5] Erchul, W. P., Raven, B. H., & Whichard, S. M. (2001). School psychologists' and teachers' perceptions of social power bases in school consultation. Journal of School Psychology, 39(6), 483–497. | DOI 10.1016/S0022-4405(01)00085-1

[6] Foucault, M. (2000). Dohlížet a trestat. Praha: Dauphin.

[7] French, J. R. P., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright & A. Zander, Group dynamics (s. 259–269). New York: Harper & Row.

[8] Geldhof, G. J., Preacher, K. J., & Zyphur, M. J. (2014). Reliability estimation in a multilevel confirmatory factor analysis framework. Psychological Methods, 19(1), 72–91. | DOI 10.1037/a0032138

[9] Jacobs, G. E. (2012). Models of power and the deletion of participation in a classroom literacy event. Journal of Research in Reading, 35(4), 353–371. | DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9817.2010.01470.x

[10] Jamieson, D. W., & Thomas, K. W. (1974). Power and conflict in the student-teacher relationship. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 10(3), 321–336. | DOI 10.1177/002188637401000304

[11] Kaščák, O. (2006). Moc školy: O formatívnej sile organizácie. Trnava: Typi Universitatis Tyrnaviensis.

[12] Lojdová, K., & Lukas, J. (2015). Scénáře donucovací moci u studentů učitelství na praxi: Studentka Alice. Studia paedagogica, 20(3), 113–130. | DOI 10.5817/SP2015-3-7

[13] Lojdová, K., Šalamounová, Z., & Bradová, J. (2015). Fenomén moci a jeho souvislost se školním prostředím. In K. Vlčková et al., Z posluchárny za katedru: Mocenské vztahy ve výuce studentů učitelství (s. 22–47). Brno: Munipress.

[14] Makovská, Z. (2010). Pojetí moci v žákovských vyprávěních. Studia paedagogica, 15(2), 141–151.

[15] Makovská, Z. (2011). Techniky změny chování a jejich využití ze strany žáků. Pedagogická orientace, 21(1), 85–103.

[16] McCroskey, J. C., & Richmond, V. P. (1983). Power in the classroom I. Communication Education, 32(2), 175–218. | DOI 10.1080/03634528309378527

[17] McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, L. L. (2006). An introduction to communication in the classroom: The role of communication in teaching and training. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

[18] Moscovici, H. (2007). Mirror, mirrors on the wall, who is the most powerful of all? A selfstudy analysis of power relationships in science methods courses. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9), 1370–1388. | DOI 10.1002/tea.20204

[19] Muthén, B. O. (1994). Multilevel covariance structure analysis. Sociological Methods and Research, 22(3), 376–398. | DOI 10.1177/0049124194022003006

[20] Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user's guide. (6. vyd.). Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.

[21] Pace, J. L., & Hemmings, A. (2006). Classroom authority: Theory, research, and practice. New York: Mahwah.

[22] Raven, B. H. (1992). A power/interaction model of interpersonal influence: French and Raven thirty years later. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 7(2), 217–244.

[23] Roach, K. D. (1995). Teaching assistant argumentativeness: Effects of affective learning and student perception on power use. Communication Education, 44(1), 259–276. | DOI 10.1080/03634529509378994

[24] Schrodt, P., Witt, P. L, & Turman, P. D. (2007). Reconsidering the measurement of teacher power use in the college classroom. Communication Education, 56(3), 308–323. | DOI 10.1080/03634520701256062

[25] Šalamounová, Z., Bradová, J., & Lojdová, K. (2014). Mocenské vztahy mezi začínajícími učiteli a jejich žáky. Pedagogická orientace, 24(3), 375–393. | DOI 10.5817/PedOr2014-3-375

[26] Šeďová, K. (2011). Mocenské konstelace ve výukové komunikaci. Studia paedagogica, 16(1), 89–118.

[27] Šeďová, K. (2012). Vztahová rovina výukové komunikace: Mocenské konstelace ve školní třídě. In K. Šeďová, R. Švaříček, & Z. Šalamounová, Komunikace ve školní třídě (s. 231–263). Praha: Portál.

[28] Šeďová, K. (2015). Moc v dialogickém vyučování. Pedagogická orientace, 25(1), 32–62. | DOI 10.5817/PedOr2015-1-32

[29] Vališová, A., & Kasíková, H. (2011). Pedagogika pro učitele. Praha: Grada.

[30] Vlčková, K., Lojdová, K., Lukas, J., Mareš, J., Šalamounová, Z., Kohoutek, T., Bradová, J., & Ježek, S. (2015). Z posluchárny za katedru: Mocenské vztahy ve výuce studentů učitelství. Brno: Munipress. Dostupné z https://munispace.muni.cz/index.php/munispace/catalog/book/800

[31] Vlčková, K., Mareš, J., & Ježek, S. (2015). Adaptation of Teacher Power Use Scale to lower secondary students and student teachers. Pedagogická orientace, 25(6), 798–821. | DOI 10.5817/PedOr2015-6-798

Metrics

1

Crossref logo

0

149

Views

69

PDF (Czech) views

Copyright © 2017 Studia paedagogica

PDF (Czech)