Seating Arrangement and Academic Performance of Bachelor of Elementary Education Students

Cenby Eppie  Gaytos,

Seating Arrangement and Academic Performance of Bachelor of Elementary Education Students

Discipline: Education

Abstract:

This study investigates the relationship between seating arrangement and academic performance among Bachelor of Elementary Education (BEED) students at Eastern Samar State University - Guiuan Campus. Employing a descriptive-correlational research design, the study aims to explore natural associations between seating configurations and academic outcomes, utilizing a survey questionnaire adapted from previous research. Data collection involved administering the questionnaire to 121 BEED students across different academic levels. Statistical analysis, including frequency counts, percentages, and the Pearson Correlation Coefficient, was employed to interpret the data. Findings indicate that students perceive seating arrangements as influential on their academic engagement and performance, particularly highlighting psychological comfort as a significant factor. Results from the survey reveal an overall positive perception towards seating arrangements, with most students agreeing on the effectiveness of their current seating setups. Academic performance, measured through General Weighted Average (GWA), shows a majority of students achieving proficient and very good ratings. Statistical analysis confirms a moderate correlation (r = 0.498, p = 0.059) between seating arrangement and academic performance, suggesting a significant relationship. This implies that while seating arrangement is not the sole determinant of academic success, it plays a noteworthy role in student outcomes. In conclusion, the study underscores the importance of considering seating arrangements in enhancing classroom dynamics and improving educational outcomes. It provides valuable insights for educators and educational policymakers to optimize learning environments. Recommendations include empowering students in seat choice, designing learner-centered seating plans, and enhancing school infrastructure to foster conducive learning environments. Future research directions are proposed to further explore experimental approaches and refine strategies for improving learning quality and processes.

References:

Benedict, M. E., & Hoag, J. (2014). Seating location in large lectures: Are seating preferences or location related to course performance? The Journal of Economic Education, 45(3), 207-221.
Bonus, M., & Riordan, L. (1998). Increasing student on-task behavior through the use of specific seating arrangements. Teaching and Change, 5(3-4), 329-344.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. Pearson Education ESL.
Corkin, D. M., Horn, C. L., & Pattison, D. A. (2017). The effects of seating arrangements on classroom community and academic performance. Journal of Classroom Interaction, 52(1), 4-16.
Cooperative Research Program. (1965). Classroom environments and their influence on student behavior. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.
Dykman, B., & Reis, H. T. (2014). Unpleasant classroom experiences and the role of student-teacher interactions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 739-753.
Eccles, J. S., Wigfield, A., & Schiefele, U. (1998). Motivation to succeed. In W. Damon & N. Eisenberg (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 1017-1095). Wiley.
Harvey, M., & Kenyon, M. (2014). Student preferences for seating arrangements. Journal of Learning Spaces, 3(2), 1-15.
Hawkins, J. (1997). A primer on seating arrangements for effective learning. Learning Environment Research, 10(2), 25-38.
Hudson, G. (2024, May 21). Does seating arrangement affect learning? https://classroomdirect.co.uk/blogs/blog/does-seating-arrangement-affect-learning#:~:text=Numerous%20studies%20have%20shown%20that,increased%20student%20engagement%20and%20motivation.
Jones, M. (2019). Classroom seating arrangements: Theory and practice. Educational Research Quarterly, 42(2), 29-45.
Kaya, N., & Burgess, B. (2007). Territoriality: Seat preferences in different types of classroom arrangements. Environment and Behavior, 39(6), 859-876.
McCorskey, J. C., & McVetta, R. W. (1978). Classroom seating arrangements: Instructional communication theory versus student preferences. Theory and Research in Education, 7(1), 95-102.
O’Hare, A. (2016). Classroom design and student engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(2), 182-193.
Patterson, M. L., Kelly, L., Keefe, J., & Giancola, M. (1979). The effects of seating arrangements on small-group behavior. Sociometry, 42(4), 471-476.
Rands, M. L., & Gansemer-Topf, A. M. (2017). The room itself is active: How classroom design impacts student engagement. Journal of Learning Spaces, 6(1), 26-33.
Sabulao, N. V., Martinez, R. G., & Cruz, C. F. (2007). Academic performance among students in the Philippines. Philippine Educational Journal, 49(1), 45-58.
Schunk, D. H. (2016). Learning theories: An educational perspective (7th ed.). Pearson.
Wannarka, R., & Ruhl, K. (2008). Seating arrangements that promote positive academic and behavioural outcomes: A review of empirical research. Support for Learning, 23(2), 89-93.