Abstract

This study aimed to find out the association between secondary school teachers' ways of interaction with students' and students' interpersonal skills, self-management skills, and academic behavior. A sample of 2764 students, peers, and teachers was taken from Punjab province. The survey method was used to collect data and analyzed through percentage, mean, and Pearson correlation. Results indicate that uncertainty in teachers having a strong correlation with student's interpersonal skills. Moreover, teachers admonishing style and freedom of students have a significant negative correlation with the self-management skills of students. Whereas, all eight factors about teacher-student interaction remained a positive correlation with the academic behavior of students.

Key Words

Teacher-Student Interaction, Secondary School Students, Peers and Teachers, Interpersonal Skills, Self-      Management Skills, Academic Behavior

Introduction

Interaction in the classroom refers to the process of delivering information from teachers to students. In other words, interaction takes place between teacher-Student, which, are developed in various ways i-e talking, questioning, and other activities with each other. (Jamil & Hussain 2017)

The teaching field faces a lot of challenges and opportunities. Now-a-day in the field of teaching involves new techniques, methods, beliefs, and behaviors (Nielson & Lorber, 2009; Davis, 2003). Classroom interaction between teacher-student has a significant role in school settings. It provides a basis to develop the motivation level of students might be positive or negative, and it starts as students enter the school i-e in a formal setting that helps students to adapt in learning environments both academic and social (Rubio,2009; Davis,2003).

In schools' healthy learning environment and student's relationships are based on student-teacher relationships (Nugents. 2009). It finally shapes students' characters and helps to increase the level of students' confidence (Hamre and Pianta,2001). In one development study by Nyboke (2015) viewed that this interaction enhances their level of achievement, cooperation, and academic motivation. In 2005, Brok & Levy viewed that this positive interaction between teacher-students decreases feelings that are negative for example, anger, impatience, unhappiness, frustration, and boredom among students and results in encouragement of positive feelings like autonomy assurance, academic and social levels of motivation. This interaction creates organization in the classroom and support based on emotions and learning (Lan & Lanthier, 2003). In 2002, Oord & Rossem further added healthy interaction between teacher-student ways to a unique chance to develop a healthy learning environment. Prior researches reported that positive interaction enhanced the academic motivation, behavior of students, and there exists a relationship between beliefs of teachers and patrons of interaction between teacher-student (Davis, 2003 and Hutchison, 2010). Hamre & Painta (2001) and Howe (1997) focused that this quality based on the environment of the classroom and student-teacher positive interactions is surely related to the behavior of teachers while teaching and learning process.          

The modern era estimated that students of both genders (male and female) should get equal attention during the teaching-learning process in the classroom on the part of their teachers. The role of the institute is to provide striking and equivalent rights to students of both genders. So, they can prepare themselves for better progress and future. Prior researchers found that teacher’ interaction is different in their classroom with male and female students (Holden,1993; Hopf and Hatzichristou,1999).

The classroom relationship between teacher and student builds a positive, supportive, healthy, and fruitful outcome/product in the academic activities of students (Nugents, 2009). The relationship based on a supportive, positive, safe and favourable environment enhances the confidence of students for learning free from pressure (Nielson and Lorber, 2009; Koplow, 2002; Hamre and Pianta,2001).

This interaction builds a healthy learning environment in the classroom and affects students' abilities based on the social, intellectual, emotional, academic, and behavioral skills of learners (Davis, 2003).

Behavior is the way in which an individual act towards people, society and objects. Moreover,  society tries to correct bad behaviors and try to bring abnormal behavior back to normal behavior (Sands & Wardle, 2003). Behavior is a description of the observable outcome of teacher and student performance in different activities of institutions. Behavior may be positive or negative and effective or ineffective. Effective behavior produces the requisite results. (Mehran, Oyama, & Shah, 2009).In view of Naz (2018) Social behavior encompasses a number of social terms. It includes psychological aspects of how humans relate and respond to each other. It also includes areas such as social interaction and influences that can be attained through types of social behavior. In the past two decades, children’s behavioral problems, including externalizing and internalizing, have received considerable attention from researchers (Cartwright?Hatton, McNally, White, & Verduyn, 2005). The internalization problems fall in the category of depression, physical complaints, and anxiety. Whereas, externalization problems come when rebelliousness, violence, and disobedience occur.

Good teaching practices indeed result in mold students toward healthy learning activities (Hadjerrouit, 2015). Consequently, these changes enhance positive teacher-student interaction, relationship, and academic skills (MaCartney, Dearing, and Taylor, 2007). In 2013 Allen, Gregory, Mikami, Hamre, and Pianta advocate that "improving the quality of teacher-student interactions within the classroom depends upon a solid understanding of the nature of effective teaching for adolescents."

The academic development of students and teachers is the contribution of interaction between the two. In various developmental studies (Gregory & Weinstein, 2004 and Murdoch, 2008) mentioned that if the content is accurate and compatible, that will motivate the students for learning as mentioned. In 2009, Rubio observed further academic motivation enhanced by the skills and methods of teacher and teaching play a very significant role. The teachers’ attention given to every student makes their decision power strong, and they can make proper and practical decisions in their lives (Nielson and Lorber, 2009).

Ullah & Abbas (2017) highlights with reference to Hamre and Pianta (2013) that the student’s confidence level towards their problems is positive and based on the relationship between teacher-student. Mashburn, Hamre, and Pianta (2008) had viewed that the personality of teachers influences the relationship between teacher- student. Jones & Dindia (2004) added that gender, age, and the behavior of students influenced classroom interactions.

Hadjerrouit (2015) viewed that methods and the strategies opt for teaching significantly affected the students’ learning outcomes. Teachers can develop a healthy classroom learning environment through positive communication and interaction styles (Ryan & Deci, 2002). It means the quality of classroom learning not only helps and enhanced the significant level of learning but also their behaviors.




Study Objectives

As interaction builds a healthy learning environment in the classroom and affects students' abilities based on the social, intellectual, emotional, academic, and behavioral skills of learners. Therefore, main objective of this study was: 

1. To trace out male and female student’s perception about teacher’s interacting ways in the classroom.

2. To measure male and female student’s levels of interpersonal skills, self-management skills and academic behavior in a secondary school classroom.

3. To examine the association between teacher’s interacting ways and students’ interpersonal skills, self-management skills and academic behavior.

Research Methodology

The research was descriptive by nature, and the survey approach was used for data collection. Although the study aimed at developing an association between the teacher’s interactional ways (SSTs) and student’s interpersonal skills (in terms of peer relation), self-management, and academic behavior. So, the essence of the study was also co-relational.

A survey was conducted to find out the association between the teacher’s interactional ways and students interpersonal, self-management skills and academic behavior in secondary classes. A number of 2764 secondary school teachers, students and peers were carefully chosen as the sample. These secondary school teacher’s students and peers were chosen through purposive samplings. 

Questionnaires were used as a tool to collect quantitative data from the selected sample. Two research tools were used named QTI and SBSS (Urdu version). The QTI was used to measure the interactional ways of teachers in secondary classes, and SBSS was used to measure the students interpersonal, self-management skills and academic behavior.  Both instruments were adopted and based on a five-point Likert scale from never to always. A total number of statements in the tool was 80 out of which 48 were related to teacher’s interactional ways (QTI), 14 statements were constructed on interpersonal skills, 10 statements were on self-management skills, and 8 statements were on academic behavior. Both tools contained good value of validity and reliability. 

To complete the research work, 144 secondary schools were personally visited belonging to different tehsils and districts of the Punjab provinces of the country. The data was collected by a personal visit of the researcher in secondary schools of Punjab. The teachers, students and peer of the concerned schools were asked to fill out the questionnaire. In order to interpret the statement results on the five-point Likert scale, the mean score 3.00 and above was taken as a criterion for acknowledging the agreement of the participants on the statement.

Results

Findings of Objective-1

Table 1. Perception of Teacher’s Leadership Style

> > > > > > >

S. No width="194"> Item Depiction width="53"> Factor-1 width="71"> Male Mean width="82"> Female Mean width="88"> Combine Mean

01 width="194"> Enthusiastic Talk width="53" rowspan="6"> Leadership width="71"> 4.10 width="82"> 4.14 width="88"> 4.12

02 width="194"> Explaining things width="71"> 4.13 width="82"> 4.15 width="88"> 4.14

03 width="194"> Holding attention width="71"> 4.01 width="82"> 4.04 width="88"> 4.02

04 width="194"> Knowing everything happening in class width="71"> 4.03 width="82"> 4.07 width="88"> 4.05

05 width="194"> Leading abilities width="71"> 3.79 width="82"> 3.80 width="88"> 3.79

06 width="194"> Act with Confidence width="71"> 4.09 width="82"> 4.13 width="88"> 4.11

Combine width="71"> 4.02 width="82"> 4.05 width="88"> 4.03

 

Table 1 indicates the highest mean score (M=4.15) regarding an explanation about the subject matter in secondary classes as compared to other statements. The support of female students more than male students. The least mean score (M=3.79) regarding the leading capabilities of the teacher. This least statement support of male students in this regard is more than female students.  Inclusive mean (M=4.03) exposed the satisfaction of students about the leadership styles of their teacher in secondary school classes.

 

Table 2. Perception of Teacher’s Understanding Nature 

> > > > > > >

S.No width="204"> Item Depiction width="54"> Factor-2 width="66"> Male Mean width="90"> Female Mean width="90"> Combine Mean

01 width="204"> Trusts on students width="54">   width="66"> 4.14 width="90"> 4.18 width="90"> 4.16

02 width="204"> Conversation with teacher when disagreeing width="54" rowspan="5"> Understanding width="66"> 4.08 width="90"> 4.04 width="90"> 4.06

03 width="204"> Willing to explain things gain width="66"> 4.23 width="90"> 4.19 width="90"> 4.21

04 width="204"> Listening to students width="66"> 3.96 width="90"> 3.97 width="90"> 3.96

05 width="204"> Teacher realize when students don't understand width="66"> 4.06 width="90"> 4.10 width="90"> 4.08

06 width="204"> Patient of Teacher width="66"> 4.09 width="90"> 4.04 width="90"> 4.07

Combine width="66"> 4.09 width="90"> 4.08 width="90"> 4.09

               

Table 2 specifies the highest mean score (M=4.23) regarding willingly explain the subject matter again by a teacher in secondary classes as compared to other statements and support of male students in this regard is more than female students. The least mean score (M=3.96) regarding listening to the student by the teacher and supports by male students than female students. Overall mean (M=4.09) exposed the satisfaction of students about understanding the styles of their teacher in secondary school classes.  

 

Table 3. Perception of Teacher’s Uncertainty  

> > > > > > >

S.No width="108"> Item Depiction width="60"> Factor-3 width="114"> Male Mean width="102"> Female Mean width="108"> Combine Mean

01 width="108"> Uncertainty width="60" rowspan="6"> Uncertain width="114"> 4.08 width="102"> 4.16 width="108"> 4.12

02 width="108"> Hesitation width="114"> 3.70 width="102"> 3.69 width="108"> 3.69

03 width="108"> Difficult situation width="114"> 3.62 width="102"> 3.62 width="108"> 3.62

04 width="108"> Taking charge width="114"> 3.85 width="102"> 3.95 width="108"> 3.90

05 width="108"> Fool width="114"> 3.67 width="102"> 3.75 width="108"> 3.71

06 width="108"> Appear unsure width="114"> 3.77 width="102"> 3.76 width="108"> 3.77

Combine width="114"> 3.78 width="102"> 3.82 width="108"> 3.80

 

Table 3 depicts the highest mean score (M=4.23) regarding uncertainty as compare to other statements and support that female teacher remain more uncertain than male teachers. The least mean score (M=3.62) regarding handling the difficult situation by the teacher. This statement equally supports male and female students. Overall mean (M=3.80) revealed the satisfaction level of students about uncertainty in their teacher at secondary school classes of Punjab.

 

Table 4. Perception of Teacher’s Admonishing Nature 

> > > > > > >

S.No width="108"> Item Depiction width="72"> Factor-4 width="96"> Male Mean width="108"> Female Mean width="114"> Combine Mean

01 width="108"> Unexpectedly anger width="72" rowspan="6"> Admonishing width="96"> 3.92 width="108"> 3.96 width="114"> 3.94

02 width="108"> Quickly angriness width="96"> 3.60 width="108"> 3.63 width="114"> 3.61

03 width="108"> Breaking rules. width="96"> 3.76 width="108"> 3.85 width="114"> 3.80

04 width="108"> Impatient. width="96"> 3.70 width="108"> 3.75 width="114"> 3.72

05 width="108"> Argument width="96"> 3.68 width="108"> 3.83 width="114"> 3.76

06 width="108"> Mocking remarks width="96"> 3.62 width="108"> 3.71 width="114"> 3.67

Combine width="96"> 3.71 width="108" valign="top"> 3.78 width="114" valign="top"> 3.75

 

Table 4 specifies the highest mean score (M=3.96) regarding teacher unexpectedly angriness as compare to other statements and support of female students in this regard is more than male students. The least mean score (M=3.60) regarding quick angriness towards students by the teacher. This least statement supports male students than female students. Overall mean (M=3.75) exposed the satisfaction of students about admonishing styles of their teacher in secondary school classes.

Table 5 below refer to the highest mean score (M=4.03) relating to the pleasant environment in class in which female students express their class environment more pleasant to male students. The least mean score (M=3.75) regarding helped students in work by the class teacher and supports by male students than female students. Overall mean (M=3.91) revealed that the teacher plays a significant role to help and behave friendly with their students in different situations.

 

Table 5. Perception of Teacher’s helping or Friendly Nature 

> > > > > > >

S.No width="144"> Item Depiction width="90"> Factor-5 width="84"> Male Mean width="84"> Female Mean width="96"> Combine Mean

01 width="144"> Helping student in work width="90" rowspan="6"> Helpful/Friendly width="84"> 3.76 width="84"> 3.73 width="96"> 3.75

02 width="144"> Friendly teacher width="84"> 3.90 width="84"> 3.87 width="96"> 3.89

03 width="144"> Students depend on teacher width="84"> 3.97 width="84"> 3.97 width="96"> 3.97

04 width="144"> Sense of humor width="84"> 3.99 width="84"> 4.00 width="96"> 4.00

05 width="144"> Talking jokes width="84"> 3.86 width="84"> 3.85 width="96"> 3.86

06 width="144"> Pleasant class width="84"> 4.02 width="84"> 4.05 width="96"> 4.03

Combine width="84"> 3.91 width="84"> 3.91 width="96"> 3.91

 

Table 6. Perception of student freedom given by Teacher

> > > > > > >

S.No width="174"> Item Depiction width="60"> Factor-6 width="78"> Male Mean width="84"> Female Mean width="102"> Combine Mean

01 width="174"> Decision in class width="60" rowspan="6"> Student freedom/ align="center">Responsibility width="78"> 3.76 width="84"> 3.78 width="102"> 3.77

02 width="174"> Influence of student on teacher width="78"> 3.80 width="84"> 3.79 width="102"> 3.79

03 width="174"> Students decision about doing work width="78"> 3.66 width="84"> 3.67 width="102"> 3.66

04 width="174"> Getting away with a lot in class width="78"> 3.72 width="84"> 3.71 width="102"> 3.71

05 width="174"> Free time width="78"> 3.86 width="84"> 3.86 width="102"> 3.86

06 width="174"> lenient width="78"> 3.75 width="84"> 3.73 width="102"> 3.74

Combine width="78"> 3.75 width="84"> 3.75 width="102"> 3.75

 

Table 6 enlightens the maximum mean score (M=3.86) in free time in secondary classrooms during the lecture. Male and female students show their same views in this regard. The least mean score (M=3.66) regarding students’ decisions at work. This least statement supports female students than male students with a 0.1 per cent difference. The Overall mean (M=3.75) explained participants’ views about students’ freedom in classes.

 

Table 7. Perception of Teacher’s Dissatisfying Nature 

> > > > > > >

S.No width="138"> Item Depiction width="60"> Factor-7 width="84"> Male Mean width="96"> Female Mean width="120"> Combine Mean

01 width="138"> Cheating width="60" rowspan="6"> Dissatisfying width="84"> 4.21 width="96"> 4.34 width="120"> 4.27

02 width="138"> Knowledge of student width="84"> 4.42 width="96"> 4.42 width="120"> 4.42

03 width="138"> Putting students down width="84"> 4.24 width="96"> 4.25 width="120"> 4.25

04 width="138"> Students can't do things well width="84"> 4.02 width="96"> 4.21 width="120"> 4.11

05 width="138"> Dissatisfaction width="84"> 4.35 width="96"> 4.30 width="120"> 4.32

06 width="138"> Suspiciousness width="84"> 4.26 width="96"> 4.39 width="120"> 4.32

Combine width="84"> 4.25 width="96"> 4.31 width="120"> 4.28

 

Table 7 clarifies the maximum mean score (M=4.42) about the knowledge of students in secondary classes. Male and female students show their same views in this regard. The least mean score (M=4.11) regarding students unable to do things well. This least statement supports male students than male students.  Overall mean (M=4.28) enunciated participants’ views on the dissatisfying nature of teachers in classes.

Below table 8 enlightens the maximum mean score (M=3.92) about silent in secondary classrooms during the lecture. Male and female students explicate their same views in this regard. The least mean score (M=3.68) regarding strictness. This least statement supports male students than female students with a 0.04 per cent difference. Overall mean (M=3.80) explained participants’ views about teacher strict’ nature in classes.

 

Table 8. Perception of Teacher’s Strictness 

> > > > > > >

S. No width="144"> Item Depiction width="66"> Factor-8 width="96"> Male Mean width="90"> Female Mean width="96"> Combine Mean

01 width="144"> Strictness width="66" rowspan="6"> Strict width="96"> 3.70 width="90"> 3.66 width="96"> 3.68

02 width="144"> Silent in the class width="96"> 3.92 width="90"> 3.92 width="96"> 3.92

03 width="144"> Difficult tests width="96"> 3.72 width="90"> 3.66 width="96"> 3.69

04 width="144"> High standards width="96"> 2.79 width="90"> 3.82 width="96"> 3.81

05 width="144"> Paper marking. width="96"> 3.90 width="90"> 3.90 width="96"> 3.90

06 width="144"> Afraid of the teacher width="96"> 3.85 width="90"> 3.83 width="96"> 3.84

Combine width="96"> 3.64 width="90"> 3.79 width="96"> 3.80

 

Findings of Objective -2

Table 9. Perception about Student’s Interpersonal Skills (Peer Relation)

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

S. No width="216"> Item Description width="54"> Factor-9 width="66"> Male Mean width="78"> Female Mean width="90"> Combine Mean

01 width="216"> Offering help to other width="54" rowspan="14"> Interpersonal skills (peer relation) width="66"> 3.94 width="78"> 4.03 width="90"> 3.98

02 width="216"> Participation in activities width="66"> 3.61 width="78"> 3.64 width="90"> 3.62

03 width="216"> Understanding the needs of other students width="66"> 3.79 width="78"> 3.94 width="90"> 3.86

04 width="216"> Inviting others for participation width="66"> 3.65 width="78"> 3.70 width="90"> 3.68

05 width="216"> Admiration by peers width="66"> 3.72 width="78"> 3.82 width="90"> 3.77

06 width="216"> Interaction with a variety of peers width="66"> 3.62 width="78"> 3.64 width="90"> 3.63

07 width="216"> Good initiator /join conversation with peers width="66"> 3.82 width="78"> 3.90 width="90"> 3.86

08 width="216"> Sensitive feelings for others width="66"> 3.82 width="78"> 3.93 width="90"> 3.87

09 width="216"> Ongoing activates with peers width="66"> 3.57 width="78"> 3.68 width="90"> 3.62

10 width="216"> Good leadership skills width="66"> 3.75 width="78"> 3.87 width="90"> 3.80

11 width="216"> Compliments. width="66"> 3.68 width="78"> 3.76 width="90"> 3.72

12 width="216"> Assertiveness width="66"> 3.73 width="78"> 3.84 width="90"> 3.79

13 width="216"> Invited by peers to join in activities width="66"> 3.73 width="78"> 3.84 width="90"> 3.76

14 width="216"> Respected by peers width="66"> 3.73 width="78"> 3.79 width="90"> 3.97

Combine width="66"> 3.72 width="78"> 3.81 width="90"> 3.78

 

Table 9 demonstrates the respondents’ viewpoints on students’ interpersonal skills with their peers. The above table clarifies the maximum mean score (M=3.98) about helps to other classmates. Female (M=4.03) students present more helping hands for their fellows than male students (M=3.94). While the least mean score (M=3.63) found in two statements. The first one is related to student’s participation in activities where female students show more mean value than male students. The second one is related to participation in ongoing activities where again, female students presented more mean value than male students.  Overall mean (M=3.78) explained participants’ opinions about the interpersonal skills of students in classes.

 

Table 10. Perception of Student’s Self-Management Skills

> > > > > > > > > > >

S. No width="180"> Item Description width="60"> Factor-10 width="72"> Male Mean width="84"> Female Mean width="102"> Combine Mean

01 width="180"> Cooperation with students width="60" rowspan="10"> Self-management skills width="72"> 3.86 width="84"> 3.96 width="102"> 3.91

02 width="180"> Remain calm when problems arise width="72"> 3.68 width="84"> 3.66 width="102"> 3.67

03 width="180"> Acceptance of others width="72"> 3.81 width="84"> 3.90 width="102"> 3.85

04 width="180"> Compromising nature width="72"> 3.85 width="84"> 3.87 width="102"> 3.86

05 width="180"> Follow the rules (school and class) width="72"> 3.83 width="84"> 3.90 width="102"> 3.86

06 width="180"> Appropriate behavior in school width="72"> 3.91 width="84"> 3.97 width="102"> 3.94

07 width="180"> Appropriate respond when corrected by teacher width="72"> 3.72 width="84"> 3.88 width="102"> 3.8

08 width="180"> Controlling tamper in anger width="72"> 3.56 width="84"> 3.70 width="102"> 3.63

09 width="180"> Adjust in different behavioral expectation width="72"> 3.78 width="84"> 3.88 width="102"> 3.83

10 width="180"> Self- control width="72"> 3.84 width="84"> 3.96 width="102"> 3.90

Combine width="72"> 3.78 width="84"> 3.86 width="102"> 3.83

 

Table 10 demonstrates the respondents’ perceptions of students’ self-management skills. The above table clarifies the maximum mean score (M=3.94) about appropriate behavior at school and other classmates. Female (M=3.97) students express more appropriate behavior for their fellows than male students (M=3.91). Whereas, the least mean score (M=3.67) was about in male (M= 3.68) students show more mean value than female (M.68) students.  Overall mean (M=3.83) articulated participants’ judgments about self-management of students.

 

Table 11. Perception about Student’s Academic Behavior

> > > > > > > > >

S. No width="213"> Item Description width="59"> Factor-11 width="71"> Male Mean width="71"> Female Mean width="89"> Combine Mean

01 width="213"> Transitions among activities width="59" rowspan="8"> Academic skills align="center">Self Management Skills width="71"> 3.74 width="71"> 3.78 width="89"> 3.76

02 width="213"> Task Completion without a reminder width="71"> 3.89 width="71"> 3.92 width="89"> 3.90

03 width="213"> Listen to and carries out directions from teachers width="71"> 3.98 width="71"> 4.06 width="89"> 4.02

04 width="213"> Ask appropriately for clarification of the instruction width="71"> 3.89 width="71"> 3.96 width="89"> 3.92

05 width="213"> Complete school assignments independently width="71"> 3.99 width="71"> 3.98 width="89"> 3.98

06 width="213"> Complete school assignments on time width="71"> 4.03 width="71"> 4.06 width="89"> 4.04

07 width="213"> Ask for help in an appropriate manner width="71"> 3.96 width="71"> 4.00 width="89"> 3.98

08 width="213"> Produce work of acceptable quality width="71"> 3.87 width="71"> 3.94 width="89"> 3.90

Combine width="71"> 3.91 width="71"> 3.96 width="89"> 3.94

 

Table 11 demonstrates the respondents’ perspectives on students’ academic behavior. The above table clarifies the maximum mean score (M=4.04) about on-time Completion of school assignments. Female (M=4.06) students confer more results than male students (M=4.03) While the least mean score (M=3.76) was about transitions between different activities. Female (M= 3.78) students show more mean value than male (M=3.74) students.  Overall mean (M=3.94) articulated participants’ views about the academic skills of students.

 

Findings of Objective-3

Table 12. Association between Teacher-Student Interaction and Students’ Interpersonal Skill.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Variables/Factors width="55"> IPR width="41"> DC width="41"> CS width="41"> SO width="41"> OD width="49"> CD width="41"> SC width="41"> OS width="41"> DO

IPRs width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> 1 width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

Sig. width="55">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

DC>  width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> .023 width="41"> 1 width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

Sig. width="55"> .232 width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

CS>  width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> .017 width="41"> .454** width="41"> 1 width="41">   width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

Sig. width="55"> .378 width="41"> .000 width="41">   width="41">   width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

SOs>  width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> .043* width="41"> -.155** width="41"> -.083** width="41"> 1 width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

Sig. width="55"> .023 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41">   width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

>OD width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> -.011 width="41"> .194** width="41"> .374** width="41"> .300** width="41"> 1 width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

Sig. width="55"> .573 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41">   width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

CD>  width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> .007 width="41"> .496** width="41"> .429** width="41"> .010 width="41"> .390** width="49"> 1 width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

Sig. width="55"> .724 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .616 width="41"> .000 width="49">   width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

SC width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> .013 width="41"> .209** width="41"> .348** width="41"> .221** width="41"> .493** width="49"> .368** width="41"> 1 width="41">   width="41">

Sig. width="55"> .506 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="49"> .000 width="41">   width="41">   width="41">

OS>  width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> .018 width="41"> -.128** width="41"> -.024 width="41"> .389** width="41"> .363** width="49"> .055** width="41"> .280** width="41"> 1 width="41">

Sig. width="55"> .354 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .202 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="49"> .004 width="41"> .000 width="41">   width="41">

DO>  width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="55"> .030 width="41"> .293** width="41"> .377** width="41"> .162** width="41"> .431** width="49"> .399** width="41"> .655** width="41"> .235** width="41"> 1

Sig. width="55"> .113 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="49"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41"> .000 width="41">

DC=(Leadership), CS=(Understanding), SO =(Uncertain), OD=(Admonishing) CD=(Helpful/Friendly), SC = (Student Responsibility), OS =(Dissatisfied), DO = (Strict)

 

Table 12 reveals the association between the teachers’ interactional ways and students’ interpersonal skills in terms of their peer relationships. The study outcomes divulge that teachers’ uncertain behavior is significantly associated with students’ interpersonal skills (r = .043*) in Punjab. Moreover, results are evident about the positive correlation. Remaining factors DC (r = .023), CS (r = 0.17), CD (r = 0.007), CS (r = 0.13), OS (r = 0.18) and DO (r = 0.30) remained positive but insignificant relation with students’ interpersonal skills. Only one factor OD (r = -0.17) remained negative and insignificant about students’ interpersonal behavior. Hence, uncertainty in teacher’s significant positive relationship between a student’s peer relationships.

 

Table 13. Association between Teacher-Student Interaction and Students’ Self-Management Skills.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Variables /Factors width="47"> SM width="47"> DC width="47"> CS width="42"> SO width="42"> OD width="42"> CD width="42"> SC width="36"> OS width="34"> DO

SM-Skills width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> 1 width="47">   width="47">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

Sig. width="47">   width="47">   width="47">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

DC width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> .032 width="47"> 1 width="47">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

Sig. width="47"> .089 width="47">   width="47">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

CS width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> .013 width="47"> .454** width="47"> 1 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

Sig. width="47"> .496 width="47"> .000 width="47">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

SO width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> -.035 width="47"> -.155** width="47"> -.083** width="42"> 1 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

Sig. width="47"> .065 width="47"> .000 width="47"> .000 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

OD width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> -.063** width="47"> .194** width="47"> .374** width="42"> .300** width="42"> 1 width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

Sig width="47"> .001 width="47"> .000 width="47"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

CD width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> -.018 width="47"> .496** width="47"> .429** width="42"> .010 width="42"> .390** width="42"> 1 width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

Sig. width="47"> .332 width="47"> .000 width="47"> .000 width="42"> .616 width="42"> .000 width="42">   width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

SC width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> -.043* width="47"> .209** width="47"> .348** width="42"> .221** width="42"> .493** width="42"> .368** width="42"> 1 width="36">   width="34">

Sig. width="47"> .025 width="47"> .000 width="47"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42">   width="36">   width="34">

OS width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> -.032 width="47"> -.128** width="47"> -.024 width="42"> .389** width="42"> .363** width="42"> .055** width="42"> .280** width="36"> 1 width="34">

Sig. width="47"> .090 width="47"> .000 width="47"> .202 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .004 width="42"> .000 width="36">   width="34">

DO width="108"> Pearson Correlation width="47"> -.037 width="47"> .293** width="47"> .377** width="42"> .162** width="42"> .431** width="42"> .399** width="42"> .655** width="36"> .235** width="34"> 1

Sig. width="47"> .052 width="47"> .000 width="47"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="36"> .000 width="34">

DC=(Leadership), CS=(Understanding), SO =(Uncertain), OD=(Admonishing) CD=(Helpful/Friendly), SC = (Student Responsibility), OS =(Dissatisfied), DO = (Strict)

 

Table 13 illustrates the correlation coefficient between all the sub-factors of teacher’s international ways (TIWs) and student’s self-management skills (SSMSs).  The first and second factor of TIWs in terms of teacher’s leadership and understanding nature depicts that there is an insignificant correlation with SSMSs. The third factor relates to the teacher’s uncertainty. The study results indicate that there was a negative and insignificant correlation was found with SSMSs. The fourth factor of TIWs in terms of teacher’s admonishing style explains negative (r=-.63, p=.001) but significant association with SSMSs. The fifth, sixth, factor of TIWs regarding teacher’s helpful nature (r=-.018, p=.332) towards students and student freedom clarifies negative and insignificant association with SSMSs. The seventh and eighth factors of TIWs both have a negative and insignificant correlation with SSMSs. Overall results indicate that only admonishing style and student freedom in have a significant negative correlation on SSMSs.

Table 14. Association between Teacher-Student Interaction and Students’ Academic Behavior.

> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Variables /Factors width="42"> AB width="36"> DC width="42"> CS width="42"> SO width="42"> OD width="42"> CD width="42"> SC width="38"> OS width="32"> DO

Academic Skills width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> 1 width="36">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

Sig. width="42">   width="36">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

DC width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .186** width="36"> 1 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

Sig. width="42"> .000 width="36">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

CS width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .238** width="36"> .454** width="42"> 1 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

Sig. width="42"> .000 width="36"> .000 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

SO width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .045* width="36"> -.155** width="42"> -.083** width="42"> 1 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

Sig. width="42"> .018 width="36"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

OD width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .394** width="36"> .194** width="42"> .374** width="42"> .300** width="42"> 1 width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

Sig. width="42"> .000 width="36"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42">   width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

CD width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .211** width="36"> .496** width="42"> .429** width="42"> .010 width="42"> .390** width="42"> 1 width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

Sig. width="42"> .000 width="36"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .616 width="42"> .000 width="42">   width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

SC width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .201** width="36"> .209** width="42"> .348** width="42"> .221** width="42"> .493** width="42"> .368** width="42"> 1 width="38">   width="32">

Sig. width="42"> .000 width="36"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42">   width="38">   width="32">

OS width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .063** width="36"> -.128** width="42"> -.024 width="42"> .389** width="42"> .363** width="42"> .055** width="42"> .280** width="38"> 1 width="32">

Sig. width="42"> .001 width="36"> .000 width="42"> .202 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .004 width="42"> .000 width="38">   width="32">

DO width="102"> Pearson Correlation width="42"> .182** width="36"> .293** width="42"> .377** width="42"> .162** width="42"> .431** width="42"> .399** width="42"> .655** width="38"> .235** width="32"> 1

Sig. width="42"> .000 width="36"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="42"> .000 width="38"> .000 width="32">

DC=(Leadership), CS=(Understanding), SO =(Uncertain), OD=(Admonishing) CD=(Helpful/Friendly), SC = (Student Responsibility), OS =(Dissatisfied), DO = (Strict)

 

Table 14 illustrates the correlation coefficient between all the sub-factors of teacher’s international ways (TIWs) and student’s academic behavior (SAB).  The first factor of TIWs in terms of leadership style depicts that there is a significant correlation with SAB. The second factor of TIWs in terms of teacher’s understanding nature of the teacher highlights a positive and significant correlation with SAB. The third factor relates to the teacher’s uncertainty; the study results indicate that there was a significant correlation with SAB. The fourth factor of TIWs in terms of teacher’s admonishing style explains positive (r= .394, p=.000) and significant association with SAB. The fifth factor of TIWs in terms of teacher’s helpful nature towards students clarifies significant (r=.211 p=.000) association with SAB. Whereas, the sixth factor of TIWs (student freedom) also remains a significant correlation with SAB. The seventh and eighth factors of TIWs both also have a significant correlation with SAB. Overall results indicate all eight sub-factors of QTI have Significant relation with student academic behavior.

Conclusion

The above results conclude that the teacher's ways of interaction with students were found high among female teachers, in terms of leadership, uncertainty, admonishing, dissatisfying, and strictness. On the other hand, only understanding the nature of teachers was found more in males. The remaining two factors about helpful and student freedom were the same in both males and females. The second objective of the study concludes that female students practice more interpersonal skills, self-management skills, and academic behavior than male students.

The third objective of the study outcomes discloses that teachers’ uncertain behavior has a significantly positive association with students’ interpersonal skills. The teacher’s admonishing style and student freedom have a negative but significant association with student’s self-management skills. Moreover, results indicated that all sub-factors of QTI have a positive correlation with student academic behavior. Admonishing styles of the teacher has the highest correlation while uncertainty in teacher remained the lowest correlation. Study result indicates that teacher-student interaction in Punjab province only has a significant association with students’ academic behavior.

References

• Allen, J., Gregory, A., Mikami, A., Lun, J., Hamre, B., &Pianta, R. (2013). Observations of effective teacher-student interactions in secondary school classrooms: Predicting student achievement with the classroom assessment scoring system secondary. School Psychology Review, 42(1), 76-98
• Brok, P. D., & Levy, J. (2005). Teacher-student relationships in multicultural classes: Reviewing the past, preparing the future. International Journal of Educational Research, 43(1-2), 72-88
• Cartwright-hatton, S., McNally, D., White, C., & Verduyn, C. (2005). Parenting Skills Training: An Effective Intervention for Internalizing Symptoms in Younger Children? Journal of Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing 18(2), 45-52
• Davis, H. A. (2003). Conceptualizing the role and influence of student-teacher relationships on children's social and cognitive development. Educational Psychologist, 38(4), 207-234
• Gregory, A., & Weinstein, R. S. (2004). Connection and regulation at home and in school: Predicting growth in achievement for adolescents. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19(4), 405-427
• Hadjerrouit, S. (2015). Exploring the effect of teaching methods on students learning of school informatics. Proceedings of Informing Science & IT Education Conference (lnSITE)2015. (pp. 201-219
• Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2001). Early teacher-child relationships and the trajectory of children's school outcomes through eighth grade. Child Development,72(2), 625-638
• Holden, C. (1993). Giving girls a chance, patterns of talk in co-operative group Work gender and education. Gender and Education, 5, 179-189
• Hopf, D. & Hatzichristou, C. (1999). Teacher gender-related influence in Greek schools. British Journal of Educational Psychology69, 1-19
• Howe, C. (1997). Gender and Classroom Interaction: A Research Review. Edinburgh: Scottish Council for Research Publication
• Hutchison R. (2010). Can you come with me? The student in the student-teacher relationship. The Medical Journal of Australia, 141(12-13), 870-871 (PMID: 6503799).
• Jamil, A., & Hussain, M. A. (2017). Examining patterns of student-teacher interaction in secondary schools. Haripur Journal of Educational Research, 1(2), 1-10
• Jones, M. S. & Dindia, K. (2004). A Meta-Analytic Perspective on Sex Equity in the Classroom. Review of Educational Research, 74(4), 443-471
• Koplow, L. (2002). Creating schools that heal. New York: 'Teachers College Press
• Lan, W., & Lanthier, R. (2003). Changes in students' academic performance and perceptions of school and self before dropping out of schools. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8(3), 309-333
• McCartney, K., Dearing, E., Taylor, B., & Bub, K. (2007). Quality. childcare supports the achievement of low-income children direct and in-direct pathways through care giving and the home environment. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 28(5-6), 411-426
• Mehran, R., Oyama, A., & Shah, M. (2009). Abnormal crowd behavior detection using social force model.Paper presented at the IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR 2009), Miami, Florida, USA
• Murdoch, K. (2008). Creating a learner-cantred primary classroom: learner centered strategic learning. London; New York:Routledge
• Naz, M. (2018). Mothers parenting style and its impact on social behavior of children at Elementary level M. Phil Education, The Islamia university Bahawalpur, Bahawalpur
• Nielson, K. A., &Lorber, W. (2009). Enhanced post-learning memory consolidation is influenced by arousal predisposition and emotion regulation but not by stimulus valence or arousal (p.70-79). N.p.: Neurobiology of Learning & Memory, 92. Retrieved March 1, 2019 primary
• Nugents, T.T. (2009). The impact of student-teacher interaction on Students motivation and achievement (Online Doctoral Dissertation). Florida: University of Central Florida
• Nyboke, M. Z. (2015). Factors Influencing Teacher Student Interaction in Public and Private Schools in Matungulu Sub-County Machakos County, Kenya (Online Master Thesis). Kenya: University of Nairobi.
• Mashburn, A.J., Pianta, R. C., Hamre, B. K., Downer, J.T., Barbarin, O., Bryant,
• Howes, C. (2008). Measures of classroom quality in prekindergarten and children's development of academic, language, and social skills. Child Development, 79(3), 732-749
• Oord, E. J.C.G., & Rossem, R. V. (2002). Differences in first graders school adjustment: The role of classroom characteristics and social structure of the group. Journal of School Psychoogy, 40(5), 371-394
• Rubio, M.C. (2009). Effective teachers -Professional and personal skills. Ensayos,Revista de la Facultad de Educación de Albacete, 24, 35-40
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2002).An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In E. L. Deci & R. M. Ryan (Eds.), Handbook of self-determination research. p. 3-33. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press
• Sands, E. R., & Wardle, J. (2003). Internalization of ideal body shapes in 9-12-year-old girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 33(2), 193-204.
• Ullah, U. A., & Abbas, S. M. (2017). Secondary students' Perception about Teacher-Student Interaction: A Descriptive Induiry. Haripur Journal of Educational Research, 1(2), 11-22