Positive Greetings? There must be more…Part 1

2 November, 2019 —

Positive Greetings? There must be more…Part 1

Luke Swift explores an evaluation of a low-cost, high-yield proactive classroom management strategy

Share on:

by Bradford Research School
on the 2nd November 2019

Friday 7^th June, 2019: International Donut Day, Eden Hazard signed for Real Madrid, Nigel Farage’s Brexit party failed to win a seat in parliament, a special extended episode of Love Island due to a particularly explosive recoupling (apparently) and my dad celebrated his 64^th birthday.

It was also the day that the Education Endowment Foundation’s (EEF) Improving Behaviour in Schools was published and, as you may remember, one small part of it grabbed most of the edu-headlines: ‘Greeting pupils at the door improves behaviour’. Commentary ranged, predictably, from the outright cynical to the, thankfully, more considered. After the dust settled, I decided to have a closer look for myself.

So the study from the 52-page EEF guidance report that received so much attention is mentioned here:

Recent research conducted with 11-14 year-olds suggests that greeting students positively at the classroom door is not only very low cost but has a high yield in terms of improving pupil behaviour in the classroom. Misbehaviour often occurs in schools around the start and end of lessons and when moving around the school building. By intentionally promoting and practising successful transitions into the classroom, teachers are empowered to help their students to be ready to learn. When delivered consistently, greeting pupils at the classroom door can help teachers to positively and personally connect with each student, deliver ‘pre-corrective’ statements to remind students of class expectations, and deliver behaviour-specific praise.

The study referenced was ‘Positive Greetings at the Door: Evaluation of a Low-Cost, High-Yield Proactive Classroom Management Strategy’ Cook, et al. (2018). I was personally interested in this particular study as greeting pupils at the door is one of several routines that has been embedded in the school I teach at in order to maximise academic engaged time.

It is not my intention here to critique the paper and document its validity to my particular context – although I did do this as it is important be a critical consumer of available research. But one thing that really did stand out, and perhaps wasn’t made explicit in either the EEF’s report nor even in the title of the Cook et al’s 2018 study, was that the positive greeting at the door was only one aspect of the intervention evaluated.

I would like to point out here that, as EEF CEO Sir Kevan Collins comments in the introduction to another guidance report, “As with all our guidance reports, this publication is just the start… for schools to review their current approaches.” I am criticising neither the authors of the guidance report nor the positive greetings study here, I am merely pointing out that, as alluded to, it is definitely worth taking the time to investigate a little further, anything that piques your interest or feels particularly relevant to your context when reading something like a guidance report.

So the three components were:

As was well documented: “Teachers greet students positively as they enter the classroom.” (This was done with the aim of increasing social belonging, and includes specific and general pre-corrective statements – much more than just a ‘hello’, but more on this in part 2)
Instruct pupils towards a clear and available ‘Do-Now’ activity: “Teachers prepared a structured learning activity that was ready for students as they transitioned into the classroom.”
Targeted, positive praise: “Teachers strategically provide behaviour-specific praise statements to reinforce desired behaviour and capitalise on social learning.”

The link between components 1 and 2 is described here, “Teachers deliver preplanned, precorrective statements to increase the likelihood of students transitioning successfully into the classroom and engaging as quickly as possible in the planned learning activity” see Colvin et al (1997) for further information.

On reading this, I was (perhaps naively) a little surprised, reflecting on some of the more click-bait‑y and sensationalised headlines, focussing exclusively on only the greeting at the door aspect of the intervention. I did wonder how many people had written and commented on the subject without even reading the original Cook et al (2018) study.

At this point, I was more than a little curious and felt compelled to dig a little deeper. I had plenty of questions that I wanted answers to, but none more so than this: how do we know which of the components led to the positive impact on pupils?

The answer was not to be found in either the EEF’s guidance report or immediately evident in the Positive Greetings at the Door study. So my next step in the search for answers was to contact the researchers (Cook et al) directly.

Would anyone respond? They did.

Would I get answers? I did, kind of…

What insights would they share? And what were the implications for my class? Find out in part 2.

Luke is a class teacher and English coordinator at Dixons Manningham Primary. He is a Research Lead for Bradford Research School.