Running

head: THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY 1

IN EDUCATION

The Elephant in the Classroom: Power and Authority in Education

Jessica L. Chitwood
James Madison University
Completed in partial fulfillment of the Masters degree
in Elementary Education at James Madison University

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 2

Abstract
Power relationships underlie every interaction in the classroom. Despite the negative
interactions and misbehavior that run rampant in many schools, power and teacher
authority are rarely a topic of common discussion among teachers and in teacher
education programs. This investigation addresses the existing research on power and
authority in education and outlines implications for teachers and scholars. Specifically,
teachers should strive to reflect on the presence of power in their interactions with
students as well as the presence of power in instruction and curriculum. Additionally,
teachers need to take steps to minimize the fear that surrounds maintaining control in the
classroom. To fully understand power and authority in our schools, it is critical that
researchers continue to explore these concepts and that professional discussion of the
presence of power in schools become a priority for teachers, administrators, scholars, and
pre-service teachers.

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 3

A second grader walked into her elementary school library to turn in the
American Girl chapter book that she was proud of completing. The right
corner of the cover was missing and appeared as though a dog used the
book as a chew toy. When the young student handed the book to the
librarian full of pride from her reading accomplishment, the librarians
expression turned to a grimace of disgust, What did you do to this book?
The student responded, I didnt do anything. The librarian continued,
Look at this cover, you are lying. You need to tell me the truth. I
promise the book was like that when I checked it out, the girl sniffled as
tears began to fill her eyes. The student went home that afternoon and
cried because of the interaction with the librarian. The principal and the
students parents handled the situation; however, the sense of pride the
student felt before the interaction was gone and she avoided the librarian
for the remainder of her elementary school years. Unfortunately
interactions like these occur every day in schools.
Through volunteer experiences and practicum placements in schools as a preservice teacher, I witnessed too many interactions like the one described above. Teachers
and students encounter numerous toxic interactions that remain in their memories for
years. At the heart of the problem of toxic teacher/student interactions is the issue of
power relationships in the classroom. My pre-service peers and I have expressed concern
over our ability to manage our future classrooms and effectively implement the
instructional strategies that promote positive and effective learning environments for
students. The issue of power dynamics is one that undercuts these concerns and is an
issue not explicitly addressed in teacher education programs. I seek to explore the
presence of power in educational settings and how that power affects students learning
experience. My goal is to provide myself and my peers with more information about the
ways power dynamics between teachers and students affect our insecurities as pre-service
teachers and to identify power dynamics as a critical issue requiring more research
attention.
The Traditional Balance of Power in the Classroom

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 4

The traditional balance of power in classrooms consists of the teacher maintaining
power or control over the students in order to make them behave and complete the work
the teacher plans to do. Teachers hold content and process authority in that they own the
content to be learned and choose the process through which students will learn the
content (Tzuo & Chen, 2011). In this power dynamic, students have very little
opportunity to direct their own learning or voice their opinions. Societally, this control is
an expectation for teachers and many teachers grew up in school settings that perpetuated
this power imbalance. While not all teachers take on the most severe version of this
traditional power dynamic, many teachers fear loss of control and feel the need to hold on
to their power in order to keep the classroom from slipping into chaos (Wegwert, 2014).
The presence of traditional power dynamics often facilitates negative teacherstudent interactions that have been documented across time and cultures. West (1994)
asked elementary and secondary students to describe their most positive and negative
experiences with teachers. Analysis of the negative experiences revealed that
embarrassment, unjustifiable discipline, unwanted aggression, inappropriate affection,
and unrealistic expectations characterized students negative experiences with teachers
(West, 1994). Echoes of the traditional power dynamic are present in the student
responses and in the categories identified. One student explained that the teacher shared
individual grades with the class, using embarrassment as a way to exert power over
academic performance (West, 1994). Another student described that his teacher forced
him to sit out of recess without justification, an outright display of teacher power over the
student (West, 1994). A more recent study reinforces and adds to the negative
experiences identified by West (1994). Lyles (2014) completed a study involving

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 5

Virginia school psychologists to determine their experience with and conceptions of
mistreatment of students by teachers. Lyles (2014) found that 98% of the school
psychologists surveyed indicated knowledge of situations in which teachers exhibited
negative behaviors including yelling, sarcasm, put downs, negative comparison,
humiliation, isolation, and ignoring.
In a 2011 study completed in Finland with predominantly adult respondents, Uitto
analyzed students negative experiences with teachers. One woman recalled the coercion
used to threaten students into completing homework. Her teacher interrogated the
students by requiring that they recall specific information from the reading; incorrect
responses were harshly punished. The woman recalled that even though she read her
homework, she was shy and when the teacher called on her she became anxious and
couldnt remember what she read. The teacher publicly scolded her for absentmindedness
(Uitto, 2011). Humiliation was the means through which this womans teacher controlled
her class. This instance is a classic example of a severe version of the traditional balance
of power in classrooms.
Beyond the negative emotional implications encouraged by the traditional power
dynamic, there are also other repercussions that impact students development. Coy
(2014) documents his use of learning agreements with college students. These learning
agreements involve student created expectations for the class. When aggregate data from
multiple years of learning agreements were analyzed, Coy found that less than one
quarter of the terms set by students addressed their own responsibilities. This indicates
that our current education system creates students who are dependent on teacher control
and expectations for their learning (Coy, 2014). Students in our schools have developed

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 6

the learned expectation that teachers control their learning. It has also been established
that teachers who adhere to more traditional power relations in the classroom tend to
focus more on academics and less on social and emotional development that is critical for
students (Uibu & Kikas, 2014).
Even in traditional power settings, students have ways of exhibiting their own
control and power over their lives. One participant from Uittos 2011 study indicated that
following her teachers humiliation of the poor condition of her skis, she took on an
increased sense of determination and pride in her skis and refused her parents offer to
replace them. Uitto (2011) analyzes that this is one of the many ways students can exert
their own authority or power. The next section concerns the ways in which teachers
derive their authority and breaks from the traditional model of power relations by
considering students as power holders in the classroom as well.
The Many Lenses of Authority
The authority of the teacher is a necessary component of effective and productive
learning environments. Students consent to this authority; however, can come from
respect for the teacher or from fear of the teacher. Each of these options relates closely to
the power teachers share with students or the power they hold over students. Harjunen
(2012) describes pedagogical authority as authority that evolves from personal
relationships and shared experiences, from which students consent to the authority of the
teacher. Pedagogical authority comes not from power over the students but from trust and
love of the teacher. Students have the power to construct or deconstruct the authority the
teacher needs to provide a positive and productive learning environment for students
(Harjunen, 2011). Through interactions with the teacher, the students have certain needs

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 7

or demands that need to be met in order for them to consent to the authority of the
teacher.
Harjunen (2011) interviewed students about the authority of their teachers and
analyzed the responses to create a typology of student demands. The term demand is a
harsh, but functional term for the needs students have to trust a teacher with their learning
and attention. Many student comments from the interviews related to teacher likability
and reasonable nature that made the children feel amicable toward the teacher (Harjunen,
2011). Beyond this initial likability, Harjunen identified that students want a teacher to
listen to them, they want to learn in an open and safe learning environment, they want to
work with each other and with their teacher, they want encouragement, and they also
want to know that their learning is relevant (Harjunen, 2011).
These are the prerequisites of consent to a teachers pedagogical authority and
teachers obtain this authority from the respect of their students and the relationships they
establish; however, when the prerequisites for authority are not met, students may rebel
against the teachers authority. Elliot (2009) suggests that, Authority only exists in so far
as subordinates accept its legitimacy and consent to do what is required of them (p.
198). Yariv (2009) explored this concept through a study in which he examined the
circumstances and boundaries under which students rejected teacher authority. Yariv
(2009) found that 81% of the respondents indicated that teachers should be obeyed on the
grounds of respect for the position of the teacher and the benefit of their individual
learning. A smaller number of students indicated that they obeyed their teachers
authority in order to avoid punishment, reflecting a power structure that places an
imbalanced amount of power with the teacher (Yariv, 2009). Yariv (2009) also

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 8

discovered that students are willing to use strategies ranging from ignoring the teacher to
involving the principal and parents when a teacher crosses the boundary of making
illegitimate demands or fails to meet their needs.
Graca, Calheiros, and Barata (2011) approached the topic of teacher authority
from a psychological perspective. Based on the psychological need for autonomy or a
degree of independence, the authors surveyed students to determine their respect for and
consent to authority figures. They further examined the degree to which the respected
authority figures supported student autonomy. Students who perceived a high degree of
autonomy support from their teachers also indicated that they viewed the given authority
figure as a legitimate. This study complements Harjunens suggestion that students have
prerequisite needs that must be met in order to consent to a teachers authority. The idea
of this pedagogical authority, derived from students consent, diverges from the
traditional power relationship among teachers and students, in which the power of the
teacher is used to force or coerce control of the classroom.
William H. Kitchen (2014) also contributes to the discussion concerning what
authority is and how it is legitimized. Whereas Harjunen approaches the issue of teacher
authority based on the needs of students, Kitchen approaches the issue of teacher
authority from a philosophical and sociological perspective. Kitchen suggests that teacher
authority is legitimized by tradition and values in society and largely neglects students
personal backgrounds and needs in his analysis. With this argument, Kitchen provides an
alternative that still recognizes the importance of legitimacy of teachers authority, but
differs from Harjunens pedagogical authority in that he posits that legitimate authority is
established in culture and tradition. In short, Kitchen suggests that authority be

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 9

legitimized for authoritys sake. Teachers have the job of passing on their adult
knowledge to future generations and their authority should be legitimate for that purpose.
As is evident from the discussion of Harjunen, Gracas et al, and Kitchen, the
academic discourse surrounding teacher authority can be approached from a variety of
perspectives (child/learning centered, psychological, and societal). Let this variety of
perspectives serve as an example of how power and authority in education are treated in
academic literature. Scholars from a variety of fields have addressed the topic of power
relationships and authority, but there is very little sense of continuity among the research.
The studies and literature surrounding this topic stand alone, reflecting that concern and
understanding of power and authority in education are still in the early stages of
development. It is important to take this slight detour from the discussion of authority to
illustrate the necessity for consistency in future research and literature published on this
topic.
The Continuum of Control
Teachers do not operate purely from pedagogical authority or purely from
traditional power dominance; teachers fluctuate along a continuum of control. This
dominance continuum ranges from environments of high student control to high teacher
control and all the space in between where the power struggle between teachers and
students is established in a given classroom. From this continuum, three patterns emerge:
teacher domination, empowerment, and student domination (Harjunen, 2012). Teacher
domination is reflected by a high degree of teacher control and little use of pedagogical
authority. Empowerment is characterized by a high degree of pedagogical authority and a
balance between teacher and student control. There is enough control to provide needed

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 10

structure for students, but students are empowered to take ownership of their learning and
their learning environment to work with teachers and peers towards desired goals.
Student domination is characterized by a high degree of student control that is oftentimes
considered chaotic. Students do not typically consent to the teachers authority in the
student-dominated environment (Harjunen, 2012).
When one of these forms of control continues over a period of time, a
corresponding, somewhat stable environment of power is established (Harjunen, 2012).
After prolonged interaction with a high degree of teacher dominance, an environment of
order is created. In this environment, students adhere to strict teacher expectations and
have little voice or engagement in the classroom or their learning. Negative feelings such
as fear or embarrassment are common. The most severe of these environments are
dictatorial and the less severe are a mild version of the traditional power structure
described previously. The class is predictable and repetitive and focuses predominantly
on academic development (Harjunen, 2012).
When a balance of teacher and student power exists in the empowerment range of
the dominance continuum, an environment at the edge of chaos emerges. While the name
of this environment might suggest a negative connotation, these are the environments
where student engagement and use of empowering teaching strategies can occur.
Teachers and students listen to each other out of mutual respect. Students have the voice
to discuss their learning, ideas, and concerns, but the teacher has the pedagogical
authority necessary to provide the structure and safety required for learning. So, the
classroom environment is not rigid or chaotic, but a mix between the two that avoids

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 11

slipping into an environment of order or an environment of chaos because of the shared
power between the teacher and the students (Harjunen, 2012).
The third type of environment emerges from prolonged exposure to a high degree
of student control, this is the environment of chaos. In this type of environment the
teacher lacks the authority or power to provide structure for the students and the students
refuse or do not care about teachers efforts or lack thereof to provide a structured
learning environment. Very little learning can occur in environments of chaos (Harjunen,
2012). Harjunens dominance continuum provides an essential piece of our
conceptualization of power structures in classrooms and teachers derived authority. The
framework provides teachers with a useful tool to reflect on their own practice, a critical
component of fostering positive learning environments where students feel empowered to
consent to the teachers authority.
Harjunens framework is not the only framework for classifying teachers in
relation to the power they exert over students. One branch of the literature relating to
power dynamics borrows the parental classification of authoritarian, authoritative, and
permissive parents to describe teachers power and dominance or lack thereof.
Authoritative teachers exhibit a high degree of affection and guidance of students in the
sense that they create limits and clear expectations for behavior, but allow students to be
independent psychologically. These teachers goals focus on academics and social
development of students, helping them develop in a well-rounded manner (Uibu & Kikas,
2014). Authoritarian teachers exhibit a high degree of behavioral and psychological
control. Students autonomy is restricted to a high degree and the goals of these teachers
are predominantly academic in nature with little consideration for students social

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 12

development (Uibu & Kikas, 2014). At the other end of the spectrum are permissive
teachers who exhibit little control over anything in the classroom. Permissive teachers
expectations are often inconsistent and chaos abounds in the classroom (Uibu & Kikas,
2014). Harjunens framework and the authoritarian-authoritative -permissive framework
are quite similar. At one end of the spectrum are the authoritarians and classrooms of
order, with the authoritative and empowering classrooms in the middle, followed by the
permissive teachers and chaotic classrooms at the other end of the spectrum.
The commonalities between these two frameworks indicate the utility of using a
spectrum or continuum to reflect on teacher power and control in the classroom.
However, Uibu and Kikas (2014) do go beyond the primary focus on power to consider
the learning goals associated with each type of classroom. In a study completed with
Estonian teachers, Uibu and Kikas (2014) analyzed the style of the teacher according to
their framework and considered the learning goals of teachers across the authoritarian and
authoritative teachers identified. The authors determined that in general, all teachers
valued cognitive goals more highly than social goals, but authoritative teachers
emphasized social skills and development to a comparatively greater degree than the
authoritarian teachers (Uibu &Kikas, 2014).
With the frameworks for understanding power dynamics in the classroom in mind
it is possible to examine the elements of the classroom environment through which
teacher and student power are negotiated. Classrooms are complex constructs that
incorporate the physicality of the environment and the people in it as well as the activities
completed and the cultural messages communicated. The power teachers and students

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 13

hold in each aspect of the classroom has critical implications for the creation of a
productive learning environment.
The Presence of Power in the Classroom Environment
Power relationships dictate how the general organization of the classroom
learning environment is created. The teachers pedagogical authority or traditional
control of the classroom greatly impacts how students behave and respond to learning
throughout the learning process. Alderman and Green (2011) highlight how teachers use
social powers to manage behavior in the classroom environment. The social powers
include coercion, manipulation, expertness, and likability. Coercion involves controlling
or changing student behavior; when using coercion the idea for the altered behavior
comes from the teacher. Manipulation is similar to coercion, but entails a students
perceived ownership of the changed behavior. Expertness involves teacher assistance in
situations in which the students cannot solve a problem on their own, as a result the
students perceive the teacher as a problem solver. Finally, likability involves capitalizing
on the teachers positive traits in order to reinforce students subjection to the teacher
(Alderman & Green, 2011). Alderman and Green (2011) suggest that a balanced
approach to using the social powers helps teachers create an effectively managed
classroom environment.
Alderman and Greens work suggests that the social powers model brings about
changes or compliance in student behavior, consistent with traditional power relations in
classrooms or classrooms of order. Students experience limited empowerment in the
learning environment and the potential to bring about change or compliance lies
predominantly with the teacher. Alderman and Greens work focused on students with

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 14

behavioral and learning disabilities and in certain circumstances these students might
need a classroom environment in which teachers have more power to provide the
necessary structure for learning. The social powers model does point out some ways
teachers can use their power to bring about student compliance in more equitable ways;
however, the model is limited in that it does not address the critical issue that students
need empowerment to consent to a teachers authority. To the contrary of the social
powers model, students experience positive effects when they are empowered to control
their own behavior and work with teachers toward a learning goal.
Effectively managing the classroom environment is a challenge for many
teachers. A foundation of positive student-teacher relationships is critical to the
management of the classroom environment and serves as the basis for derived
pedagogical authority. Hughes (2002) examined the effects of positive teacher-student
relationships as protective factors for at-risk students and found that positive teacherstudent relationships had lasting effects on behavioral improvement for these students.
This finding implies that there is a potential opportunity for students to make positive
changes or improvements to their behavior when they have an amicable relationship with
their teacher. Not all classrooms that operate as environments of order are characterized
by negative relationships, but in classrooms aligned with the empowerment of students,
positive interactions and relationships grow out of empowerment as opposed to the
control of students. Furthermore, Butland and Beebe (1992) found that students in their
study indicated that teachers who used positive methods to gain compliance in the
classroom were considered more effective. The positive student perceptions of teachers
who base their classroom management strategies in personal relationships and positive

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 15

direction illustrate that these factors are tantamount to creating an environment in which
students are empowered to comply with activities and behavior expectations.
One particularly impactful approach to the management of the classroom
environment is established by considering the classroom environment as a complex and
interrelated structure dependent on students willingness to work with a teacher toward
the goal of meaningful learning (Doyle, 2009). Doyle (2009) emphasizes the importance
of considering all aspects of the classroom environment or ecology in relation to and
connection with one another. The classroom environment incorporates interactions
among classroom members, the physicality of the classroom, and the structures of action
in classrooms. All of these factors influence students willingness to join forces with the
teacher to work towards learning goals and participate appropriately in activities (Doyle,
2009). Thus, it is necessary to reflect on the classroom environment as an interconnected
structure in order to make choices that empower students to consent to the pedagogical
authority of the teacher.
While Doyle (2009) points out the importance of considering the specific
classroom ecology, it is also important to consider the factors outside the classroom that
influence students ideas about consenting to authority and teachers need to control
students. Students in American schools today represent a variety of cultural backgrounds.
Some cultures value teachers as authority figures and parents consequently expect their
children to respect teachers. Other cultures promote an alternative point of view,
particularly in relation to female authority figures. Consequently, students backgrounds
can play a critical role in a teachers quest to gain students consent to his or her authority
(Pace & Hemmings, 2006). Additionally, teachers are subject to a variety of mandates

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 16

passed down to them by their schools, their communities, and their state standards. It may
seem that the teacher has absolute control over the degree to which they establish
pedagogical authority; however, teachers are under a tremendous amount of pressure in
the standards based culture of our education system to make their students perform (Pace
& Hemmings, 2006). Many schools are forced to implement scripted curriculum and
behavior plans that limit the teachers ability to empower students to learn and behave
appropriately in the classroom. Furthermore, communities and American culture in
general value strong authority figures and accountability, thus teachers who diverge from
strong authoritarian roles seem soft and ineffective in the eyes of many (Pace &
Hemmings, 2006).
Even with the copious amounts of control teachers are subjected to by the
education system and society at large, the power of an individual teacher to make an
impact, through the choices they do have control over, should never be underestimated.
Teachers make countless choices each day that affect all parts of the interconnected web
that is the classroom learning environment. Manke (1997) completed an ethnographical
study of three elementary classrooms that, among other power related topics, explored
how teachers use their decision-making powers to promote or demand behavioral
compliance in their classrooms. Manke (1997) suggests, that in many regards, teachers
make the choices for the learning environment based on the need to control student
behavior. Manke (1997) found that the predetermined choices teachers make for their
students learning, serve the purpose of maintaining the functionality of the classroom
environment, be it through a strict routine in which students have little choice or a nearly
free range classroom where students comply behaviorally because they make choices that

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 17

are desirable to them. Thus, some teachers maintain a productive environment by giving
students no alternative to appropriate behavior, while others create more flexible
environments that empower students to make the decision to cooperate and behave.
The underlying importance of student empowerment is critical to work together
with students in creating appropriate order in a classroom. Doyle (2009) suggests that
empowerment begins with the protection of students dignity and integrity on the part of
the teacher. There is no one answer or strategy that will ensure the integrity of students as
participants in the classroom environment. In order to create durable and constructive
classroom contexts with students, students need to feel they are respected and valued by
their teachers in order to willingly engage in a productive partnership (Doyle, 2009).
Helping students feel valued is the foundation for an equitable and productive learning
environment.
As human beings, we have a basic need to feel empowered and important among
our peers and in our relationships with others. In the classroom learning environment,
both the students and the teacher need to fulfill this most basic need for power.
Unfortunately, students are oftentimes minimized as important members of the classroom
community and are subjected to the almost dictatorial power of the teacher. Many
teachers feel the need to control their students by taking an authoritarian approach to their
classroom; however, by empowering students, teachers can benefit from the students
willing consent to his or her authority and an overall positive classroom environment
(Erwin, 2004). Empowering students and making them feel valued among the classroom
community is an important step to debunking the adversarial power struggle that is too
common among teachers and students. When teachers empower students by listening to

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 18

them, valuing the skills students have, and appreciating the work students do, teachers
gain allies in the journey toward reaching classroom goals.
The Presence of Power in Curriculum and Instruction
Power is an issue that permeates all aspects of education because it is the root of
teacher-student interactions. The presence of power relationships in curriculum and
instruction has major implications for the theories and approaches that are accepted as
beneficial to student learning at this time. One such example is constructivist theory,
created by Jean Piaget. Constructivism posits that students build their own knowledge by
learning from their experiences. Through making connections to their prior knowledge,
students construct or build new knowledge. This theory necessitates the valuing of
students prior experiences and background, meaning that teachers must share the power
to own knowledge jointly with students. Inquiry-based instruction is another domain in
which it is absolutely essential for teachers to share power and ownership of ideas with
students as inquiry entails developing problem solving and research skills. From these
examples it is clear that teachers must give students a degree of authority as owners of
knowledge and give them the necessary power and freedom to explore content.
In many ways, it seems that teacher power is a negative component of the
classroom that stifles student creativity and scares students away from pursuing their own
thoughts, however, power is present in all social relationships and is in fact a necessary
component for productive learning environments (Donnelly, McGarr & OReilly, 2014).
The interplay of power relations as they relate to learning specific content and designing
curriculum can take on a positive or negative role in the classroom. It is entirely up to the
teacher to use his or her power in a positive way in order to benefit student learning.

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 19

The Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) initiatives that
promote inquiry based learning bring forth a wealth of information about the ways
traditional and more evenly distributed power relations affect student learning and
thinking. An important part of inquiry-based learning relies on student creation and
ownership of their own knowledge. Cornelius and Herrenkohl (2004) suggest that in
order for students to pursue knowledge in disciplinary specific ways, they must have their
own motives and ideas about what they are learning. Traditionally teachers control the
knowledge in science and students learn what the teacher evaluates as the right answer. In
this sense, learning and knowledge are teacher owned and are given to the students by the
teacher (Cornelius & Herrenkohl, 2004).
Donnelly, McGarr and OReilly (2014) reveal some important examples of
student perspectives on this matter in a study they carried out with high school chemistry
classes. When students were asked about their role in the classroom they responded with
the following, Just to follow what Im told and to just try and understand things.
Pretty much just prepare for the exam and Just shut up and listen. Just be quiet and
listen to exactly what hes saying. (Donnelly, McGarr, & OReilly, 2014, p. 2042).
These students thoughts about the role they play in their classroom shows no indication
that they have ownership of the content they are learning about, which we know is critical
to the type of inquiry-based learning promoted for science instruction today.
In another study, Cornelius and Herrenkohl (2009) examined how students
participated and involved themselves in a classroom where teacher and student power
were relatively equal in comparison. The authors found that students really ran with their
own ideas when they were encouraged to create their own understanding and the teacher

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 20

was not seen as the source of the final answer. The students participated in argumentation
and used supporting evidence from experiments to create their ideas about the concept of
buoyancy. This learning process closely resembled the process real scientists go through
when they seek to solve a problem or learn something new. Interviews with the students a
year later revealed that the students specifically remembered the experience, suggesting a
correlation between student ownership of their ideas and retention of knowledge. This
further supports Cornelius and Herrenkohls assertion that students understanding and
connection with a given idea is affected by the person students identify as the owner of
that idea (2004).
In addition to the concept of ownership of ideas, it is also important to consider
how teachers and students communicate and participate during learning experiences.
Nussbaum (1992) suggests that education is as much content as it is communication.
Teachers have a variety of communicator styles ranging from dominant to relaxed and
everything in between. Each of these styles sends students messages about the authority
and power the teacher holds. Despite what a teachers given communicator style might
be, effective teachers communicate actively by making eye contact, using gestures and
humor as well as incorporating self-disclosure and narratives when communicating
content. Nussbaum also posits that teachers can change their communication skills and
style to be more effective and meet the learning needs of students through
communication training. Furthermore, when teachers do make positive changes to their
communication patterns, their students display increased behavioral and affective
learning gains (Nussbaum, 1992). Thus, the importance of communication to student
learning and the power communicated in the classroom should not be underestimated.

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 21

Reinsvold and Cochran (2012) found that in a series of recorded lessons, teachers
made two-thirds of the total comments; they also found that of the one-third of the
comments belonging to the students, a majority were direct and simple answers to closed
ended questions. Inquiry-based learning, especially in the science fields is supposed to be
student-centered, meaning that students are doing the thinking, questioning, and
reasoning as they learn. Reinsvold and Cochrans data reveal an alarming unequal
distribution that places the teacher at the center of classroom discourse. Paulo Freire
(1974) suggests that one-sided communication in the classroom encourages acceptance
instead of critical thought and can serve to oppress certain societal groups to accept what
they are told instead of questioning what they learn. It is evident that two-way teacher
and student dialogue is important for learning as well as student empowerment.
One useful framework for studying how students and teachers communicate is
through the concept of participant structures. The traditional participant structure is
characterized by initiation on the part of the teacher, response on the part of the student,
and evaluation of the response by the teacher; this traditional structure is often referred to
as IRE. Within this structure, the teacher often asks a question, followed by a response
from the students and concluding with a teacher controlled evaluation of the correctness
of a given response (Reinsvold & Cochran, 2012). In this type of participant structure, the
gross majority of the power lies with the teacher who initiates participation and evaluates
the appropriateness of student responses. This IRE participant structure places small
value on the students thoughts and contributions; however, the evaluation segment of the
basic IRE participant structure provides teachers with an opportunity to share ownership
of the content with students and place value on what students have to contribute.

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 22

Reinsvold and Cochran (2012) suggest that teachers can make a conscious effort to use
the evaluation segment to extend students thinking and prompt further discussion.
The solution to the problem of limited student participation in learning may seem
simple; teachers should talk less and place expectations on students to control their own
learning. The complex nature of power relationships in the classroom and the fact that
students are likely unaccustomed to participating in their learning poses several
challenges. Reinsvold and Cochran (2012) found that student responses were more
involved when teachers asked open ended questions to prompt discussion, but they also
found that some open ended questions resulted in utter silence on the part of the students.
In Donnelly, McGarr, and OReillys 2014 study, interviews with the teachers and
recordings of lessons documented teacher frustration with the students preference to find
the right answer or create a result the teacher desired. Many students are not accustomed
to critical thinking or the concept that there can be multiple and complex answers to
problems or questions. Therefore, the shift to student centered discourse and ownership
of ideas is not as easy as a shift in the amount a teacher speaks or the types of questions
he or she asks. The concepts of inquiry-based and student centered learning are novel to
many teachers and students, both parties require preparation in order to be successful in
balancing the power relationships relating to learning in our schools today.
Power is present in curriculum in ways that go beyond participant structures and
questioning strategies. The curriculum we choose to teach or not to teach can deliver
messages to students about the power of certain groups and the power structure of society
in general. Adults can recognize that there are many sides to a story, but oftentimes in the
humanities content areas, only one perspective is prescribed in the curriculum. The

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 23

treatment of native people during the age of exploration provides one example of the way
in which one perspective is only part of a full story. European nations prospered in the
Americas, but over time this advancement came at a great cost to the Native Americans
who were killed and displaced. By teaching one side of this story, which is oftentimes the
European perspective, students learn that the Europeans are most important; they do not
have the opportunity to consider the cost at which the European prosperity came (Sharpe
& Curwen, 2012). Inadvertently, predetermined curriculums are taken at face value and
teachers communicate that certain groups or ideas are more important than others.
Freire (1974) addresses the interplay between education and the marginalization
of societal groups through the lens of Brazilian history in Education for a Critical
Consciousness. Freire argues that in the 1950s and 1960s Brazil faced great change as the
nation began to establish a uniquely Brazilian cultural identity for the first time. Freire
discusses how the elite marginalized the rural and lower classes by dictating their cultural
identity through oppression. This concept extends beyond history to current societal and
global power relations. Lovorn, Sunal, Christensen, Sunal, and Shwery (2012) carried out
a study of teacher perceptions of power in schools. The study included teachers from
Americanized schools in South American countries. The discussion that resulted from
this study revealed how parents valued the American way as the best way and how the
American schools were considered to be the best just because they were American.
Furthermore, the local culture and language of the South American countries were
sometimes seen as inferior according to teachers (Lovorn, Sunal, Christensen, Sunal, &
Shwery, 2012). Children in these schools learn that being American is superior and tied
to success, but for indigenous students this communicates that their culture is not as

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 24

important and students could feel pressure to minimize their ethnicity and culture to
conform.
Power messages communicated without the intent of teachers or schools can be
described as hidden curriculum. Sharpe and Curwen (2012) provide a useful analogy for
thinking about hidden curriculum. Everything that students learn at school can be thought
of as an iceberg. The intended learning that teachers set out to achieve is the ice above the
water that everyone can see and the things students learn that are not intentional are under
the water, but no less learned that the intended curriculum. Students learn in multifaceted
ways at school, through lessons, interactions with peers, and from their teachers
responses to questions and situations that arise. The hidden curriculum is vast and as
teachers consider power within the classroom, they must be aware of the messages about
power that are shared advertently as well as inadvertently (Lovorn, Sunal, Christensen,
Sunal, & Shwery, 2012).
Power and the structures it manifests can have great impact on student learning. It
is necessary for teachers to share ownership of ideas with students, encourage critical
thinking, and reflect on the presence of the hidden curriculum. In order to fully
implement many of the research based instructional strategies at this time it is necessary
to upend the balance of power as it relates to learning. Students need to own their
knowledge and teachers must develop the confidence to trust students with this
ownership.
Implications for Practice:
1. More qualitative and quantitative research studies are needed to fully understand
power and authority in the classroom. While there is a significant amount of literature

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 25

relating to power and authority in the classroom, there are a small number of studies that
focus specifically on the topic. Furthermore, there is professional interest in the subject as
there are a multitude of sources that provide commentary on the topic without carrying
out formal research. In order to ameliorate the power inequity between teachers and
students, professionals must first understand the problem and then have access to
evidence based strategies to improve the situation. For this to occur, the field requires
substantially more research relating to the existing power relationships in classrooms as
well as research concerning positive interventions.
2. Teachers must reflect on the presence of power in their interactions with students.
Power is present in every social relationship and interaction. In order for teachers to share
power more equitably and empower students to consent to pedagogical authority,
teachers must be aware that power exists in their interactions with students. Teachers
need to determine where they establish themselves on the continuum of control and
reflect on the appropriateness of the control or power they exert. Furthermore, reflecting
consciously on interactions with students can help teachers become more aware of what
they communicate to students and determine ways to improve teacher-student
relationships with the goal of creating a positive classroom environment. Some tools that
could aid in this reflection process might include taking anecdotal records, recording
teacher-student interactions, and journaling.
3. Teachers need to reflect on the presence of power in instruction and curriculum. In the
standards-based culture our schools exist in, it may seem counterintuitive to allow
students to take control of their own learning. However, I do not believe we can afford to
continue to deny students the ownership of their knowledge in the climate of

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 26

accountability. Students are more engaged and more likely to remember learning
experiences when they create their own knowledge instead of receiving knowledge from
a teacher. Therefore, it is critical for teachers to reflect on their personal roadblocks to
helping students own their learning in order to begin to transfer ownership of ideas to
students. Furthermore, teachers should reflect on the hidden curriculum they teach each
day. Teachers teach students far more than what is included in lesson plans and it is
important to reflect on whether or not these inadvertent messages are positive and benign
of discriminatory reinforcers. Some potential tools for collecting this data might include
journaling, grade level team discussion, and exit slips on which students report something
they learned that day.
4. Teachers must make an effort to minimize the fear surrounding control of the
classroom. I know the fear of losing control of a classroom all to well, the anxiety that
sets in when a classroom teeters at the brink of chaos. This is the subject of teacher
nightmares, and we oftentimes compensate by exerting inordinate amounts of control
over our students. However, this tendency is selfish on our part because we are denying
our students the opportunity to be responsible for their own behavior and learning. A
particularly useful tool to facilitate overcoming our control anxiety is vocalizing our
inhibitions to other teachers; there is strength and safety in numbers. Teachers cannot let
their fear of losing control keep students from reaching their full potential. It may be a
messy process, but with support, a classroom environment with appropriate amounts of
structure and student freedom can be established.
5. There is a need for professional discussion and collaboration among teachers,
administrators, scholars, and pre-service teachers to facilitate equitable power

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 27

relationships in our schools. The topic of power and authority in schools is truly an
elephant in our classrooms, imposing, but unaddressed. Power relationships influence
teacher student interactions, instruction, curriculum, and the learning environment at
large, but power is not a popular discussion topic among professionals in the way that
diversity, testing, and behavior are. Teachers build up their management of the classroom
environment to experience, but the positive and successful strategies and practices
teachers use need to be demystified because avoiding the topic creates the fear discussed
previously. Power relationships among teachers and students are underrated and until
professionals begin seriously discussing power as an influential determinant of student
learning, our students will continue to suffer negative interactions and a lack of
ownership of their learning.
Summary
Power relationships are present in teacher student interactions, curriculum and
instruction, as well as in the management and creation of the learning environment. The
dominance continuum is a useful tool for classifying and reflecting on the power a
teacher exerts in the classroom. Ideally, teachers derive their authority from the consent
of their students, the result of which is a pedagogical authority that enables a teacher to
create a structured learning environment with students while maximizing students
behavioral and academic independence. Creating environments based on pedagogical
authority and student empowerment has the potential to positively affect the functioning
of the learning environment as well as student ownership of learning and knowledge.
There is a critical need for more research to be carried out to better understand the
existing power relationships in classrooms. It is equally important for teachers to reflect

THE ELEPHANT IN THE CLASSROOM: POWER AND AUTHORITY IN EDUCATION 28

on their practice, interactions, and inhibitions in order to begin to address the presence of
power in the classroom and make positive changes to benefit student learning and well
being.