The Frustration Regulation Journal: A Reflective Framework for Educators

Sam Morris, Kanda University of International Studies

Morris, S. (2019). The frustration regulation journal: A reflective framework for educators. Relay Journal, 2(2), 294-305. https://doi.org/10.37237/relay/020205

[Download paginated PDF version]

*This page reflects the original version of this document. Please see PDF for most recent and updated version.

Abstract

Teachers and advisors involved in the emotional business of language education feel frustrated from time to time, and if such emotions are not managed healthily, they may lead to negative outcomes such as stress and burnout. One important system for taking control of frustration is emotion regulation, the cognitive and behavioural strategies through which individuals manage their emotions. In this short article, I define frustration and discuss its negative impact on the language classroom. I then introduce a structured reflective journaling tool, built upon Gross’s Process model of emotion regulation (Gross, 2014, 2015) which may help teachers and advisors develop greater awareness and control over experiences of frustration.

Keywords: well-being, frustration, reflective practice, journal, language teaching

 

Language teachers and learning advisors experience a significant amount of positive and negative emotion (Cowie, 2011; Gkonou & Mercer, 2017; Gkonou & Miller, 2017; King, 2016; Morris & King, in press); yet, educational practitioners are given little formal training in managing difficult emotional experiences (see Morris & Mercer, this issue). Emotion regulation is an important system for taking control of negative emotions and has been observed to play an important mediating role in well-being (Gross & John, 2003; Haeussler, 2013). The purpose of this article is to introduce the frustration regulation journal, a tool developed to support teachers and learning advisors to reflect on frustrating incidents and to gain deeper control of their emotions. The article begins with a brief outline of frustration, its negative impact on teachers and how it may be regulated. In the second half of the paper, I introduce the frustration regulation journal, and illustrate its use with an example from my own practice.

 Emotions and Frustration

Contemporary theories view emotions to be whole-body phenomena that are initiated by cognitive appraisals of events in a person’s environment (e.g. Lazarus, 1991; Moors, Ellsworth, Scherer, & Frijda, 2013); when a situation is encountered, attention may be drawn to it, and the situation will be appraised as being good or bad for the individual, leading to an emotion. A typical classroom example of this situation-attention-appraisal-response process might be when a pair of students talking off topic at the back of the room (situation), are then noticed by the teacher (attention), who makes a quick assessment of the behaviour (appraisal) and feels an emotion they subjectively label as frustration (response).

In addition to this intra-personal perspective, emotions are shaped by diverse contextual factors such as an individual’s teaching history, language learning experiences, relationship with students, institutional pressures and larger sociocultural climates (Boiger & Mesquita, 2012). Any teacher experiencing frustration at off-topic conversation is therefore being informed by a variety of uniquely personal contextual factors, including their historically informed relationships with the individuals, the requirements of the teaching context, and the task the students are completing. There is, therefore, no one-size-fits-all solution to dealing with emotional issues.

Despite only limited attention, frustration appears to be a frequent experience in the language classroom, with teachers reporting it towards students’ silence, apathy, and misbehaviour, as well as towards the actions of colleagues and a lack of institutional support (Cowie, 2011; King, 2016; Morris & King, 2018). In language education it is somewhat of a forbidden emotion as teachers report a need to hide it from students (King, 2016; Morris & King, in press).

Frustration is associated with stress (Kyriacou, 2001) and burnout (Lewandowski, 2003). Burnout is a particularly frightening prospect for education, being linked to lowered academic outcomes (Arens & Morin, 2016; Klusmann, Richter, & Lüdtke, 2016), diminished job performance (Feuerhahn, Stamov-Roßnagel, Wolfram, Bellingrath, & Kudielka, 2013) and poor physical health (Feuerhahn et al., 2013). A salient factor of frustration is control, with teachers reporting a lack of efficacy in dealing with classroom issues as a driver for frustration (Chang, 2013); consequently, supporting teachers to better manage frustrating situations is an important goal.

It has been suggested that frustration may have some positive impact on teachers by catalysing them to make changes. Golombek and Klager (2015) for example, detail how one teacher’s frustrations at their failings in grammar instruction prompted them to act on the issue. While much more empirical evidence is needed to ascertain how any kind of facilitating frustration might function in practice, it is with this spirit in mind that I proceed in this article to describe a method of journaling which may be used by teachers and learning advisors to take control of frustration.

The regulation of frustration

Emotion regulation describes the act of modifying one’s emotions (Gross, 2014, 2015) and this represents a very broad concept. Teachers and learning advisors can influence the length, valence, power and type of emotions they experience. They can generate emotions, prevent them from occurring, or modify the symptoms of emotions, such as their facial expressions.

Emotion regulation is typically performed in aid of higher-order emotion regulation goals. Within language teaching, such goals include performance goals pertaining to classroom and social outcomes, epistemic goals pertaining to the perceived responsibilities of teaching, and hedonic goals relating to a practitioner’s well-being (Morris & King, in press). Thus, when a teacher or learning advisor regulates an experience of frustration, it could be for multiple, and perhaps conflicting, higher-order reasons; they might do it to prevent a negative classroom atmosphere (performance), because they feel it is their duty to hide their frustration (epistemic) or because they don’t enjoy experiencing this negative emotion (hedonic).

To achieve these higher order goals, individuals employ emotion regulation strategies. These cognitive and behavioural actions have been codified in various heuristic models, the most influential being the process model of emotion regulation (Gross, 2014, 2015). This model is built upon the four-stage situation-attention-appraisal-response process of emotion initiation described above, and taxonomises emotion regulation strategies for each of the four stages of an emotion.

According to the model, situational strategies target the external environment, and refer to strategies that practitioners employ in order to prevent a situation from occurring or to modify an ongoing situation. An example of a situational strategy might be when a teacher stops an activity in class which is causing them to feel frustration, or when a teacher chooses to proactively discipline a student about a behavioural issue to prevent that problem from reoccurring. Attention deployment strategies target the attentional systems, and typically refer to individuals choosing to attend to or ignore sources of emotions. When two students are talking off topic, a teacher may choose to distract their attention away from such behaviour to reduce frustration. The third category of emotion regulation strategies is known as cognitive change and targets the appraisal mechanisms of the emotion. Here, individuals attempt to change their cognition about a stressor. Consequently, they might reinterpret a student’s behaviour in light of background information they have about them. Teachers may well feel their frustration is reduced if they reflect on the reasons behind a student’s behaviour, particularly if the reasons are found to be out of the students’ control (see Reyna & Weiner, 2001), or if the teacher is able to empathise with the student’s circumstances. The final category of strategy is response modulation, which targets the symptoms of an emotion after it has occurred. These strategies typically focus on the facial expressions or physiological symptoms of emotions, and deep breathing or walking away are commonly cited examples. Typically, teachers employ response modulation strategies to hide feelings of frustration from students (Morris & King, 2018; Morris & King, in press).

It has been suggested that certain emotion regulation strategies are healthier than others. Cognitive change strategies have been shown to be very healthy (Gross & John, 2003) and may be a potent way for teachers to develop a more empathetic outlook on their students. Typically speaking, laboratory studies have positioned response modulation strategies as the unhealthiest choice, suggesting that the adage of prevention being better than cure applies to our emotions too. Yet, as was previously noted, teachers and advisors not only employ emotion regulation in aid of their well-being, but also to meet job responsibilities and perform effective instruction; consequently, it may not be maladaptive for teachers and advisors to use response modulation strategies in aid of higher-order epistemic emotion regulation goals (Morris & King, in press).

 The Frustration Regulation Journal

To support and empower practitioners in their regulation of frustration, I will now give an outline of the frustration regulation journal, a structured tool which can be used to reflect on, and take more control over, critical incidents of frustration.

The purpose of the journal is to encourage teachers and learning advisors to write about experiences of frustration after they occur, and then to support them in considering what emotion regulation strategies might be available to more effectively manage such situations in the future. The tool is a work in progress, and remains empirically untested, yet it is built upon the sound theoretical foundations of the process model of emotion regulation.

The journal itself has been produced on a single A4 sheet of paper (see Appendix) but can be modified to suit the needs of individual practitioners. The top half of the page contains a single box entitled ‘critical incident’. In this box, a teacher or advisor can write freely about their frustrating experience, including the actions they took and the emotions they felt and displayed. The bottom half of the tool contains space and questions for teachers to reflect on the four different kinds of emotion regulation strategy defined by the process model of emotion regulation: situational strategies, attention deployment strategies, cognitive change strategies, and response modulation strategies. These questions can be seen in Table 1. The questions highlight some of the important issues that individuals should consider with regards to employing effective emotion regulation. For example, one of the attentional deployment strategy questions that practitioners should consider is “are there any negative consequences of ignoring this problem?” Ignoring a problem can be an effective way to reduce frustration providing that there are no negative consequences. Unfortunately, it is often the case that ignoring issues can be a short-sighted approach which results in more significant issues for practitioners later.

Table 1. Reflection questions for journaling about emotion regulation

Emotion regulation strategy category	Reflection questions
Situation	Are there any changes I can make to avoid this situation from happening? If this happened again, how could I change the situation to make it less frustrating?
Attention deployment	If I ignore this situation will it go away? Are there going to be any negative consequences of ignoring this problem?
Cognitive change	Can I think about this issue in a different way? Is there something going on in the student’s life that might be causing this issue? Are there any positives in this situation?
Response modulation	If this happens again and I feel frustrated, what can I do to minimise the negative effects? What do I need to remember to do next time I feel frustrated by this?

 An example in action

To Illustrate how the frustration reflection journal might be utilised, I include here an example from my own teaching journal. As a language teacher interested in the emotional dimension of the profession, I have kept a journal since 2016 in which I regularly write about my classroom experiences from an affective perspective. The incident I have selected occurred during the 2018 academic year (in Japan the academic year runs from April until March). I have chosen this example not only because it represents a rather common scenario for teachers, but also because my distance from the incident is sufficient that I can look at it with reasonable objectivity. To begin, I include some of my journal writing describing the background to the problem I encountered:

Compared to last year, I’m frustrated a little with my class. Last year, I thought that the students were so positive and supportive, and this year, I feel far less motivation from the students. I feel that they are not here primarily to study English (some of them anyway). I realise that I am making unfair comparisons, and that I, of course need to take responsibility for some of their actions – I have been busier this year, and perhaps this has taken a toll. Certainly, I feel that it has been harder to develop positive working relationships with this class than in previous years. (May 2018).

 The class in question were a group of 20 university students. They were a very energetic class majoring in English communication who got on well together. The students were at CEFR A2/B1 level, with TOEFL scores averaging around 450. The class were generally hard working, completing assigned tasks on time, but one of the issues I faced was that they frequently spoke over me and engaged in off-topic conversation. Although this issue is common around the world, it was not something that I had experienced to such a visible degree before, and this is what caused me to feel increased stress and frustration in the classroom. I would regularly expend energy bringing a small group of the students to order, and often found myself competing for their attention when giving instructions. The following excerpt describes a salient critical incident from my journal.

 All morning the class were tired and quiet. They were not interacting in a positive manner, and I was particularly upset when I was explaining something as two of the students, who until that point had not really contributed to the class, were talking about something totally off topic in Japanese.

I called them out by name and asked them to listen. I then spoke to the whole class and told them I was disappointed because they had not been listening or putting enough effort into today’s class, and although I know they are tired, they have a presentation next week and they have to try to concentrate.

I’m really disappointed. It was a bad way to deal with the issue, and I can’t think that I have improved the situation (June 2018).

 Immediately after the class I felt a range of negative emotions. Frustration at the situation, guilt at my own actions, and anxiety about future classes. I decided to use the frustration regulation framework, which at that point I had been testing regularly, to help me make sense of the situation. The following excerpts indicate the thoughts I wrote down after class pertaining to the four categories of emotion regulation strategies. The extracts have been somewhat edited for length and readability, but they exemplify the kinds of reflections that the frustration regulation journal elicits.

Situation strategies – Are there any changes I can make to avoid this situation from happening? I’m going to try to talk one-on-one with the students after their test next week. During that time, I want to have a positive experience with the students to try and build a better relationship with them. Also – I’ll have a discussion with the whole class again on the benefits for them of trying to speak out in English.

Attention deployment strategies – Are there any negative consequences from ignoring this situation? I think the problem might get worse. For now, I think I want to try and get the students back on board – it’s still early in the semester. I think perhaps if they were only speaking off topic on occasion I wouldn’t mind, but it’s multiple times in every class.

Cognitive reappraisal – Can I think about this situation in a different way? I mustn’t forget, these students are only 18. They are new to university life, and it’s been a busy semester. The students are tired, but so am I. Maybe my reactions are coming from my tiredness rather than the students. I must remain aware – getting angry WILL NOT HELP the students or our relationship. Also, if the students speak over me, is it really going to be the end of the world?

Response modulation – If this happens again, what can I do? Next time I get frustrated, do not react in front of the class. Walk away and then approach the students calmly. (June 2018)

 As can be seen in my responses, the act of thinking through the questions produced a series of positive actions. These solutions empowered me with feelings of control, helping to reduce feelings of frustration long term. Of course, simply writing down steps is insufficient to enact change in a short period, but regularly journaling about the frustrations did indeed help me to reduce the impact these emotions were having on me as the semester went on. A journal entry that I made about 6 weeks later indicated this well.

My class has improved immensely. Though there are still some students and issues, I’m feeling much more positive about the class now. They’re speaking more English – certainly less Japanese (or they’re doing it quietly).

Perhaps most important – I’ve changed my attitude to the class. If I’m positive, they seem more positive and engaged. Yesterday’s class was jovial. From a time perspective, at the end of the week the students are busy and tired. Perhaps me being more positive and lightening up about the issue was useful.

I have, and must continue to remember to have, empathy for the students. Some of them are so busy, e.g. one student finished class at 6pm on Monday. Worked from 7 until midnight, and then was back at first class on Tuesday. (July 2018)

 ‘Empathy’ is the most important word that spoke to me from these excerpts as I reviewed my journal. It plays a crucial role in the relationships between teachers and learners, as well as in reducing frustrations (Mercer, 2016; Morris & King, in press), and my completion of the cognitive change section of the journal helped to remind me of this. Reflecting now, I was too worked up about the issue I was experiencing, but at the time it was something that really bothered me. Research has shown that teachers become more likely to ignore issues as the end of semesters approach (Morris & King, in press), and perhaps since the school year had only just started, that fed into my desire to take action over the incident and catalysed my frustration.

 Conclusion

Frustration is a common and worrying negative emotion that language teachers experience, and empowering teachers to take control of this feeling is an important goal. In this paper I have outlined the frustration regulation journal, which can be used to support teachers and learning advisors in their reflective writing by giving them a structured format to consider how they may take control of and reduce frustration.

As noted earlier, the tool remains a work in progress and is empirically untested, though it is based on theoretically sound foundations. I hope that through feedback over the upcoming months it will be possible to improve the tool and formally assess its viability to support teachers and learning advisors in the regulation of their experiences of frustration.

Notes on the contributor

Sam Morris is a lecturer in the English Language Institute at Kanda University of
International Studies (Japan). He is currently completing his PhD at the University of
Leicester, researching the situated emotion regulation that language teachers in Japan
employ during their work.

 References

Arens, A. K., & Morin, A. J. S. (2016). Relations between teachers’ emotional exhaustion and students’ educational outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(6), 800-813. doi:10.1037/edu000010510.1037/edu0000105.supp

Boiger, M., & Mesquita, B. (2012). The construction of emotion in interactions, relationships, and cultures. Emotion Review, 4(3), 221-229. doi:10.1177/1754073912439765

Burton, J. (2009). Reflective practice. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 298-308). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Chang, M.-L. (2013). Toward a theoretical model to understand teacher emotions and teacher burnout in the context of student misbehavior: Appraisal, regulation and coping. Motivation and Emotion, 37(4), 799-817. doi:10.1007/s11031-012-9335-0

Cowie, N. (2011). Emotions that experienced English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers feel about their students, their colleagues and their work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(1), 235-242. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.006

Feuerhahn, N., Stamov-Roßnagel, C., Wolfram, M., Bellingrath, S., & Kudielka, B. M. (2013). Emotional exhaustion and cognitive performance in apparently healthy teachers: A longitudinal multi-source study. Stress and Health, 29(4), 297-306. doi:10.1002/smi.2467

Gkonou, C., & Mercer, S. (2017). Understanding emotional and social intelligence among English language teachers. ELT Research Papers 17.03. London, UK: British Council. Retrieved from https://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/sites/default/files/attachments/g211_eltra_gkonou_and_mercer_paper_final_web.pdf

Gkonou, C., & Miller, E. R. (2017). Caring and emotional labour: Language teachers’ engagement with anxious learners in private language school classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 23(3), doi:10.1177/1362168817728739

Golombek, P., & Klager, P. (2015). Play and imagination in developing language teacher identity-in-activity. Ilha do Desterro, 68(1), 017-032. doi:10.5007/2175-8026.2015v68n1p17

Gross, J. J. (2014). Emotion regulation: Conceptual and empirical foundations. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (2nd ed.) (pp. 3-22). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26(1), 1-26. doi:10.1080/1047840X.2014.940781

Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (2003). Individual differences in two emotion regulation processes: Implications for affect, relationships, and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(2), 348-362. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.2.348

Gyurak, A., & Etkin, A. (2014). A neurobiological model of implicit and explicit emotion regulation. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (2nd ed.) (pp. 76-92). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Gyurak, A., Gross, J. J., & Etkin, A. (2011). Explicit and implicit emotion regulation: A dual process framework. Cognition & Emotion, 25(3), 401-412.

Haeussler, S. (2013). Emotional regulation and resilience in educational organisations: A case of German school teachers. (Doctoral thesis, Northumbria University, Newcastle UK.) Retrieved from https://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/

Johnson, K. E., & Golombek, P. (2016). Mindful L2 teacher education. New York, NY: Routledge.

King, J. (2016). “It’s time, put on the smile, it’s time!”: The emotional labour of second language teaching within a Japanese university. In C. Gkonou, D. Tatzl, & S. Mercer (Eds.), New directions in language learning psychology (pp. 97-112). Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

Klusmann, U., Richter, D., & Lüdtke, O. (2016). Teachers’ emotional exhaustion is negatively related to students’ achievement: Evidence from a large-scale assessment study. Journal of Educational Psychology, 108(8), 1193-1203. doi:10.1037/edu0000125

Koole, S. L. (2009). The psychology of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Cognition and Emotion, 23(1), 4-41. doi:10.1080/02699930802619031

Koole, S. L., & Fockenberg, D. A. (2011). Implicit emotion regulation under demanding conditions: The moderating role of action versus state orientation. Cognition and Emotion, 25(3), 440-452.

Kyriacou, C. (2001). Teacher stress: Directions for future research. Educational Review, 53(1), 27-35. doi:10.1080/00131910120033628

Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and adaptation. Cary, US: Oxford University Press.

Lewandowski, C. A. (2003). Organizational factors contributing to worker frustration: the precursor to burnout. Journal of Sociology & Social Welfare, 30, 175-86. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/1619/1ade07e6e99df1c28621dd3d26cb28dd80fc.pdf

Mercer, S. (2016). Seeing the world through your eyes: empathy in language learning and teaching. In P. D. MacIntyre, T. Gregerson, & S. Mercer (Eds.), Positive psychology in SLA (pp. 91-111). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Moors, A., Ellsworth, P. C., Scherer, K. R., & Frijda, N. H. (2013). Appraisal theories of emotion: State of the art and future development. Emotion Review, 5(2), 119-124. doi:10.1177/1754073912468165

Morris, S., & King, J. (2018). Teacher frustration and emotion regulation in university language teaching. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 433-452. doi: 10.1515/cjal-2018-0032

Morris, S., & King, J. (in press). Emotion regulation amongst university EFL teachers in Japan: The dynamic interplay between context and emotional behaviour. In C. Gkonou, J-M. Dewaele & J. King, (Eds.) The emotional rollercoaster of language teaching. Oxon, UK.: Multilingual Matters.

Morris, S. & Mercer, S. (2019). An interview with Sarah Mercer on language learner and teacher well-being. Relay Journal, 2(2).

Reyna, C., & Weiner, B. (2001). Justice and utility in the classroom: An attributional analysis of the goals of teachers’ punishment and intervention strategies. Journal of Educational Psychology, 93(2), 309-319. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.93.2.309

Roberts, J. (1998). Language teacher education. London, UK: Arnold.

Scherer, K. R. (2009). The dynamic architecture of emotion: Evidence for the component process model. Cognition & Emotion, 23(7), 1307-1351. doi:10.1080/02699930902928969

[Appendices]