Exploring Norwegian teachers’ perceptions of shy students at recess and their strategic responses

ABSTRACT

Recess (break times) during the school day offers children opportunities for peer interactions which enrich social development. For shy children, however, these periods can produce anxiety, leading to withdrawal and onlooker behaviour. The analysis reported here is from a national study of how Norwegian elementary school teachers support the engagement of shy children in school life. Nineteen teachers with recognised success with shy students were interviewed to elicit their interpretations of shy children’s behaviour and their strategies with them. Qualitative analyses found that these teachers recognised that recess was integral to creating inclusive schools, took the perspectives of shy children, and ascribed anxiety-related emotions to them. Teachers also mentioned that asking other children to include them in activities left shy children feeling pitied. However, giving designated roles to the child; allowing them to stay inside with friends to build real friendships; and starting playful activities with the child that attracted other children were all described as successful strategies.

KEYWORDS:

• Elementary-school
• shy students
• recess
• teacher strategies

Introduction

From childhood to adolescence, children spend increasing amounts of their time in the company of peers (Lam, McHale, and Crouter 2014), which represents an important and unique context for children’s development (Rubin, Bukowski, and Bowker 2015). For most children, schools provide regular opportunities for peer experiences, both in more structured settings like the classroom, as well as during less regulated periods like recess (Blatchford, Pellegrini, and Baines 2016). For shy students, who are prone to social fears and anxieties (Rubin, Coplan, and Bowker 2009), recess may represent a particularly challenging context. In the current study, we explored Norwegian elementary school teachers’ beliefs about shy students’ experiences at recess, with a particular focus on the ameliorative strategies that may increase social interactions for shy students in this context.

Recess as a context for socio-emotional development

Results from decades of research support the notion that children who experience a lesser quantity and quality of peer relations are at increased risk for a wide range of negative adjustment outcomes (Rubin, Bukowski, and Bowker 2015). Primary school children spend about 25% of their time in an unstructured setting with peers, before class and during scheduled breaks, henceforth referred to as recess (Blatchford and Baines 2006). In Norwegian primary schools, children typically have two or three 15-30-minute recess periods each day. According to the Norwegian Educational Chapter 9A (1998), all pupils are entitled to a safe and positive school environment that promotes health, well-being and learning. As such, schools and teachers are obligated by law to monitor students’ psychological and social environment – and this also applies to recess. Notwithstanding, there have only been a handful of previous studies that have focused on recess in Norway, with most studies focused on how time spent in an outdoor environment can promote increased physical activity among students (Haug et al. 2010; Kvalø and Natlandsmyr 2021).

Recess is considered to be an influential context for studying children’s social and emotional development (Mulryan-Kyne 2014). Children’s experiences during recess also appear to impact children’s academic achievement and other aspects of school adjustment (Blatchford and Baines 2006). During recess, students are typically afforded the opportunity to act under limited surveillance and with more freedom as compared to time spent in class (Baines and Blatchford 2011). Children report that recess provides them with opportunities for socialising with peers, personal choice of activities and decisions, as well as a forum for creativity and personal expression (Blatchford and Baines 2006; Prompona, Papoudi, and Papadopoulou 2020). Accordingly, it is perhaps not surprising that most children consider the school playground as their favourite place (Darmody, Smyth, and Doherty 2010). Nevertheless, the school yard is also often a context where peer aggression and bullying take place (Craig, Pepler, and Atlas 2000). Although most children report enjoying recess, between 5-10% of elementary school children also indicate that they ‘don’t like’ or ‘hate’ recess (Mroz and Woolner 2019).

Shy children at recess

Shyness is a temperamental trait characterised by wariness in novel social contexts and self-consciousness in situations of perceived social evaluation (Rubin, Coplan, and Bowker 2009). In elementary school, shy students are prone to academic difficulties, less close and more dependent teacher–child relationships, and other school adjustment difficulties (Arbeau, Coplan, and Weeks 2010; Crozier 2020; Hughes and Coplan 2010). However, social functioning in the peer group represents perhaps the primary challenge for shy students (Coplan and Arbeau 2008). When amongst peers, shy children tend to withdraw from opportunities for social interactions, watching other children without joining in and/or playing alone (Coplan et al. 2013; Coplan, Arbeau, and Armer 2008). When they do interact with peers, shy children display deficits in socio-communicative competence and tend to evoke negative responses from peers, including exclusion, rejections, and victimisation (Baardstu et al. 2020; Eggum-Wilkens et al. 2014; Sette et al. 2017). Notwithstanding, to date, we know relatively little about shy children’s specific experiences during recess.

Recess may represent a particular challenge for shy children because of its more chaotic nature. The unpredictability of this context, coupled with the presence of many peers (including potentially less well-known children from different classrooms) would serve as acute stressors for shy students (Coplan and Arbeau 2008; Crozier 2020; Evans 2010). There have been few observational studies of shy elementary-school children’s behaviours during recess, but there is evidence to suggest that shyness is associated with social withdrawal in this context (Spangler and Gazelle 2009).

However, it should also be noted that children may withdraw from opportunities for social interaction during recess for different reasons (Coplan and Bowker 2021). For example, shy children may withdraw due to social fears and socio-evaluative concerns, despite a desire for social engagement (Coplan and Arbeau 2008). However, other children may simply enjoy engaging in solitary activities at recess. In this regard, such unsociable children may also appear socially withdrawn but are not experiencing anxiety or other forms of negative affect (Coplan et al. 2013).

Of note, interacting with other children in the schoolyard (for whatever reason) may be particularly problematic in the later elementary school years. During this developmental period, children are observed to spend over 90% of their time in the school yard during recess/lunch engaging with peers (Coplan, Ooi, and Rose-Krasnor 2015). This age is also the peak for peer pressure and the desire for conformity (Ngee Sim and Fen Koh 2003; Steinberg and Monahan 2007). As such, children who withdraw from opportunities for peer interaction are violating age-related social norms and become targets for negative peer responses (e.g. exclusion, victimisation). In support of this notion, Coplan et al. (2013) reported that self-reported shyness among children in grades 4-5 predicted non-social play (i.e. social withdrawal) in the schoolyard, which in turn predicted peer difficulties (e.g. victimisation and loneliness).

Role of teachers

In recent years, there has been increasing interest in examining teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding shy students at school (e.g. Mjelve et al. 2019; Nadiv and Ricon 2020; Nyborg et al. 2023; 2020). Results from these studies confirm that teachers view shyness as a potential problem and seek to assist shy students in a number of ways. Frequently mentioned strategies include praise/verbal encouragement, offering support, and (gently) encouraging activities with peers (Bosacki, Rose-Krasnor, and Coplan 2014; Coplan et al. 2011; Nadiv and Ricon 2020). However, to date, there have been no studies specifically focusing on how teachers might best promote positive social experiences for shy students at recess.

Nelson and Evans-Stout (2019) provided pre-school and elementary school teachers with vignettes of hypothetical children displaying different social behaviours in the school yard (e.g. social withdrawal and aggression). Results indicated that teachers did view specific types of withdrawn behaviours (e.g. watching others but not joining in) as potentially problematic for students. As mentioned earlier, onlooking is a behaviour frequently associated with shyness in peer group settings (Coplan, Arbeau, and Armer 2008). Thus, it might be expected that teachers would potentially be concerned about shy students at recess – and seek to intervene to assist them. Of note, not all shy students experience significant socio-emotional problems at school (Coplan, Baldwin, and Wood 2020) – and teachers appear to be well aware of the diversity of shy students’ characteristics and behaviours at school (Mjelve et al. 2019; Mjelve et al. 2023; Nyborg et al. 2022). Notwithstanding, after keeping them safe, children next most frequently report that the role of adults should be to promote social behaviours during recess to ‘help children who don’t have friends make friends’ (Mroz and Woolner 2019, 7).

The current study

Inclusion is based on the belief that education is a fundamental human right and essential in building a more just society. Inclusion involves a particular focus on groups of students who risk marginalisation, exclusion or underachievement (Ainscow 2020; Ainscow and Sandill 2010). In Norway, inclusion is embedded in the Educational Act (1998) § 1.3, and in the national curriculum (Bjørnsrud and Nilsen 2021; Ministry of Education & Research 2017). Shy students rarely meet the threshold for special educational provision and as such, their needs will typically be addressed by teachers who provide adapted support to all students. Shy students may still require quite specific adaptations (Solberg, Edwards, and Nyborg 2020). Providing shy students with an inclusive experience can potentially demand the adaption of the organisational, academic, and social dimensions of the school environment (Nilsen 2018). In terms of the social dimension, recess is an arena that can be challenging for shy students.

Accordingly, the primary aim of the present study was to explore Norwegian elementary school teachers’ beliefs about shy students’ experiences at recess, with a particular focus on the ameliorative strategies that may increase social interactions for shy students in this context. This study fills a notable gap in the extant literature by specifically considering how teachers can promote social inclusion among shy students in a social context that they are likely to find particularly stressful and challenging.

Research questions

RQ1: In what ways do teachers perceive the experiences of shy children during recess?

RQ2: How do teachers try to assist shy students with their peer interactions during recess?

Method

Participants

This study is part of a research project aimed at identifying the strategies used by Norwegian elementary school teachers in their work with shy students (Mjelve et al. 2019). Purposeful sampling (Patton 2002) was used to recruit teachers, as we sought teachers who had a record of success in engaging shy students. Sampling was therefore guided by recommendations from higher education colleagues who worked with teachers, elementary-school principals and the Educational Psychological Counselling Service. To identify the teacher sample, we gave the following criteria to our sources: the teachers should be experienced, interested in teaching shy students, and recognised for high-quality teaching by their school leaders or other professionals. To avoid disclosure of personal information and unintended pressure from the research team, and in order to secure voluntary participation our sources made initial contact and gained approval of a teacher’s willingness to participate.

The teachers comprised two sub-samples, the first (n = 8) was currently working with a shy child, and the second (n = 11) had recent experience with shy children. The schools were a mix of large and small, and located in both urban and rural settings.

Procedure

Data from the first sub-sample were collected through post-observation stimulated recall interviews (Dempsey 2010). Teachers in the second subsample were interviewed in three focus group sessions (n’s = 4, 4, and 3). The observations with individual teachers involved two of the authors jointly observing for one two-hour period in a teacher’s class. One researcher focused on the teacher’s actions and wrote field notes, the other made iPad video recordings of a targeted shy child and the learning environment. The aim of the observations was to capture the teachers’ approaches that appeared to offer positive support for their students’ learning, as well as the shy student’s responses to these strategies and the surroundings. The notes and the recordings were used as resources to inform a stimulated recall interview, held within a week of each observation, and tailored to each teacher. Both researchers took part in the interviews, with one leading the questioning. The open semi-structured characteristic of the interviews allowed the researchers to follow up on the teachers’ responses. Alongside the focus on classroom activities, the teachers discussed recess as problematic for their shy students and described the strategies they employed to ameliorate the children’s difficulties. The teachers were therefore also encouraged to elaborate on this topic during the interviews. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed producing a total of 503 min of recordings.

The focus group sessions were located at the university and led by the two researchers who conducted the individual interviews. The sessions used a semi-structured interview guide informed by the prior individual interviews and included questions about shy students’ experiences with recess and teachers’ responses to these. The guide was used in a relaxed manner, mainly to ensure that salient topics from analyses of the individual interviews were addressed in the ensuing discussions. During the sessions, the communication among participants became increasingly conversational with teachers responding to and building on each other’s utterances to provide a rich set of data.

We selected a focus group method (rather than individual interviews) because although these teachers had recent experience with shy students, they were not teaching any shy students in their current classes. Therefore, stimulated recall interviews could not be used with them. The purpose of focus group interviews was to supplement and elaborate the stimulated recall interviews employed with the first sub-sample. The team was heartened by the quality of the data arising from discussions in the initial focus group and therefore continued with that method with two more. The sessions were audiotaped and transcribed producing a total of 260 min of recording.

Data analyses

The process of the data analyses involved two steps. First, one of the authors involved in the data collection took an open approach to study the transcripts and identified all teacher utterances that contained elaborations of shy students and recess. Utterances were then sorted to address the two research questions, according to similarities in content. These groupings of utterances were given broad descriptive category labels. This initial sorting was read by the whole team and discussed in a team meeting, where it was agreed that the data could be recategorised in the way they are now presented. The recategorisation allowed us to go beyond simply describing what had been said, to enable us to discern, for example, clearer patterns in the data and connections between perceptions of shy students’ experiences at recess and strategies to help them.

In the second step, another of the authors reanalysed the data that had been extracted from the interviews in line with the categorisation that was agreed upon by the team. Another team member checked the categorisation process and its outcomes. The whole team then commented on the final categorisation. This back-and-forth process of renaming and reviewing the categories followed a hermeneutic iteration between the whole and parts and between the emerging theoretical framing and the data (Kvale and Brinkmann 2018).

Research ethics

Ethical aspects of the study were discussed within the research team and presented to the Department leadership team at the University of Oslo who approved the study. This study was funded by The Research Council of Norway, which also considered ethical issues as part of the evaluation of the project application. Participants were recruited in line with the standards of Sikt – The Norwegian Agency for Shared Services in Education and Research. Sikt is delegated to provide counselling on ethical aspects of research projects within the knowledge sector in Norway. The teachers and the parents signed informed consent forms. For the parents the consent forms contained information about their children’s participation in i-Pad video recordings and in individual interviews. Parents’ permissions were thus obtained in advance. The data were anonymised after collection. The video recordings were watched only by the research team and the individual teacher. The research team collaborated closely on the process, including reviewing literature, shaping the research questions, discussing process, undertaking analyses and presenting findings.

Findings

Research question 1

We address the first research question by examining teachers’ perceptions of shy students’ experiences during recess. Four categories arose from the analysis: (1) shy children’s behaviours that concern teachers; (2) teachers’ assumptions about shy students’ internal processes; (3) recognising context-based demands on shy students; and (4) noting how these demands can be ameliorated by close friends.

There was considerable commonality in the behaviours that triggered teachers’ continuing concern. These were described by different teachers as ‘she becomes a bit invisible’; ‘he was a lot by himself in the school yard’; ‘Many of the teachers have come to me expressing concern because she spends so much time alone during the breaks’; and ‘she is more like an observer’. These descriptions accord with previous research on the solitary and onlooker behaviour of shy children (Coplan, Arbeau, and Armer 2008).

As we shall see, teachers had encouraged all students to ensure that no one is alone during recess; but several of the shy students rejected overtures and discouraged efforts from peers. One teacher summarised as follows: ‘she is not together with them; they are keeping an eye on her. Normally … if they ask her she says no’. An unwillingness to join in had repercussions. Another teacher recounted ‘She told me she found it difficult to take part in the game with others and that she wasn’t allowed to join any more, and no one asked her to join … ’ Another teacher noted that shyness meant that a student might have difficulty joining in ‘they let her sit there but they are not seeking contact with her either because she often doesn’t say anything’. Again, these observations are in line with previous research on the difficulties shy children experience when trying to join activities (Coplan, Arbeau, and Armer 2008).

These teachers ascribed feelings associated with anxiety to these behaviours. Different teachers said: ‘she acts this way because she is extremely insecure’.; ‘she is uncomfortable … I believe she is afraid of big groups’; ‘they don’t have much initiative themselves, often it is not these children who initiate a fabulous game, because they don’t dare’; ‘It is a bit tiring being social when you are not a very social person. It can wear you out, so at the end of the day it’s a bit like ‘Phew’, completely empty’.; ‘If you are very shy … having your hands full coping outside with others in the class … there is too much pressure [to play games]’. A distinctive feature of shyness is an approach-avoidance conflict, which distinguishes it from other characteristics related to preferring time alone such as introversion, affinity for aloneness, and unsociability (Coplan, Ooi, and Rose-Krasnor 2015). As Crozier (2020) explains, shyness involves continual monitoring of the self as an actor in the situation.

These ascriptions linked closely with how teachers recognised the demands placed on shy children during recess due to a lack of formal structures: ‘She doesn’t seem happy during breaks because there are a lot of children, a lot of stir’.; ‘Yes [he is] sensitive to noise, chaos, losing perspective’. Teachers were also cautious about pressuring students to socialise: ‘ … you must give them space to calm down a bit … and not always push them into social situations’. In one case a child explained to a teacher:

 … for everybody else the break is time off in a way, time away from what is hard in class. But to me it is quite the opposite. That is when I can’t relax … when I spend all my energy figuring out where to go and what to do.

Despite comments from other students about the lack of responses to their attempts to engage shy students, teachers noted that close friendships could mitigate the difficulties faced by shy students in these social situations. ‘She plays very well with the friends she knows’. It seems that the closeness of relationships is important. One teacher explained ‘She plays well with the friends she knows … but if her friends join a different game with students she doesn’t know, she stands observing … ’. These views are in line with the findings of Rubin and colleagues (2015), who highlighted the particular importance of friendships in the school adjustment of shy children.

In summary, these teachers felt that their concerns for their shy students extended beyond the classroom. They observed them during recess and noted what other students and other teachers told them about the shy children. In doing so, they ascribed feelings associated with anxiety to those students who remained alone outside the networks of friendships that structured recess for most students.

Research question 2

The analysis produced five categories of teachers’ strategies for promoting the participation of shy students during recess: (1) setting ground rules for the whole class; (2) asking other students to support the shy child; (3) one-to-one work with the shy student for developing strategies and training; (4) creating structured opportunities for shy children’s engagement with others; and (5) teachers’ interventions during recess.

School and classroom ground rules could relate to inclusive behaviour between students. These teachers explained: ‘we have quite a few rules in our school regarding the social matters … if someone asks [to join you] you are not allowed to say no’.; ‘Every day we read the class rules … and I ask if everyone has someone to be with at recess’. Inclusion also led to discussions of difference and how ‘some of them need help to join in the game … ’. Several teachers tried to ease the transition into recess through peer-on-peer discussions. One teacher ‘let the students talk to one another before recess so it might be easier to approach someone and find someone to play with … ’. Others mentioned what they termed ‘play groups’: groups where students agreed to play with each other during recess. One teacher explained how these groups had added benefits for a shy child’s social development:

I have let the quiet ones decide who they want to be with and additionally they learn to choose. Because it is a problem that they hang around in the schoolyard not knowing who to approach. They have to learn to choose … daring to state who you want to be together with when we have groups.

Predictability was also important with teachers enhancing it through rules and structures with these groups: ‘I have made rules for them to follow … ’; ‘they have to agree on two games they are going to play … and perhaps discuss the rules … in order for it to be safe and predictable’. Play groups, however, were not always successful ‘it depends on the student, but it has worked out in some cases at least’.

As already explained, simply asking other students to involve the shy student was not always successful. Nonetheless, teachers did persist with asking children to include a shy student in their games. It could be successful:

For instance in the case where someone feels lonely during recess, we have actually told them [other students] before we break that this and this person feels a bit lonely these days, does anyone fancy playing with them, and that actually works out pretty well. It sort of gives the others an opportunity to say ‘yes, I can help’.

Also, specific children were targeted to offer help: ‘okay, in this recess you are going to be together with this and this, and I involved some of the other boys as well’. But the lack of reciprocity from shy children tended to make this a less successful strategy.

Teachers also talked with students about their shyness and how it might be overcome in different settings. Here we can see most clearly how their observations and ascriptions informed how they worked with shy students. Several teachers mentioned training the students in the social skills needed for reciprocity with peers: ‘She can’t smile, she doesn’t manage to have an open face … I am working on those things now’. Another made a similar comment: ‘We practise smiling. So, every time I see her, I smile, and she smiles’. Another talked of having the shy student practise approaching a group and asking if they could join in. Others talked explicitly about training students. Discussing the difficulties of approaching other children one explained ‘They actually need to train for situations like that … ’. This training aimed at helping shy students to recognise that other students needed encouragement if shy students were not to be rejected. As one other teacher explained to her student: ‘ … because you always turn them [other students] down when they ask, they can feel rejected as well’. The teachers also emphasised that their conversations with students were not enough, there had to be action: ‘something must happen’. Examples of actions arising directly from one-on-one conversations included asking a shy student what were two things ‘they most fancy doing during recess … and then try to make it happen once or twice a week’. In another case, after a student reported the stresses of recess for him ‘we actually created a [recess] plan for the week’.

The predictability arising from this kind of planning was enhanced by giving shy students specific roles during recess. Two teachers in separate sessions discussed how being a ‘welfare leader’ during recess allowed shy students to overcome the difficulties of approaching other students. The role involves being in charge of break time activities. Consequently, they are approached by other students who want access to resources for games, rather than needing to approach others. It also gave these students a sense of responsibility which helped their emotional well-being. Other similar roles included being a library assistant and a ‘helpmate’ with younger students. These roles gave structure to how they interacted with peers. For example, the helpmate student, who consistently rejected overtures from her peers, ‘often interacts with some of the other girls, they go up there together playing with the first graders and come back down together’. In other cases, teachers responded to the needs of shy students by creating small groups which ‘provide a safe environment’ and enable shy students to ‘build relationships’ and ‘become confident’. Efforts included group sessions with ten girls across two 5th grade classes.; a play group that was allowed to stay inside in the school gym, with an adult, during recess and a small group invited by a shy student to stay inside one lunchtime a week with the teacher. In the girls’ groups for example

they talked a lot about how it feels being left out, and how to make everyone feel included, not just when they play, but in the group as well … we also, due to the problems in recess, tried to teach them a few games everyone could play together.

All of these initiatives involved providing the structures that were missing during the rough and tumble of elementary school recess and importantly encouraged open trust-building relationships between children.

Another strategy for reducing the challenges faced by shy students in this potentially chaotic environment was for teachers to engage in play with the shy students. It was not always successful.

I have asked her if she wants to be with me, help me with the [skipping] rope, for example, in order for her not to have to participate, but then she also says ‘No’, and that she doesn’t want to.

But there could be success: One teacher explains:

On Monday, a girl was sitting on a bench alone, and we started collecting sticks, and we started building a house, and we gathered moss, and all of a sudden there were five children and the fact that it was a grown-up there, starting up the game attracts more children.

Another teacher reported how his involvement also encouraged the engagement of a shy student: ‘We played tag, and I joined them, and she was going to help me look for the others, and it was a bit on her own initiative as well, that she participated a bit more after a while’. Another teacher in a different session reflected concerns about how difficult it is for shy students to enter games and what teachers can do: ‘It is about helping them to enter those situations and then pull out afterwards. Because it is obvious that what they really want is to play with the other children, they don’t want to play with the teacher’.

In summary, these teachers built on the relationships they had established in the process of creating inclusive classrooms to offer enhanced support to shy students during recess. This support, far from encouraging children’s dependence on adults, aimed at developing the sociability of those shy students who tended to be outsiders during recess.

Discussion

We explored experienced Norwegian elementary school teachers’ perceptions of shy children’s experiences during recess and their strategies for promoting their social interaction in this stressful context. Our findings indicated that teachers were acutely aware of the anxiety-provoking nature of recess for shy students, and how it often led to social withdrawal and isolation. Teachers also described how they could build upon their personal relationships with shy students to offer appropriate support aimed towards mitigating their anxiety and promoting social interaction. These results add to the growing literature indicating that teachers appear to be increasingly aware of the potential struggles that shy students may experience in different domains and across different contexts at school – and tend to employ a variety of strategies to mitigate these difficulties and ameliorate shy students’ peer engagement (Mjelve et al. 2019; Nadiv and Ricon 2020; Nyborg et al. 2020).

Teachers in the current sample were selected because of their previous experience and success in working with shy students. Our findings suggested that teachers’ overall aim with these children, as with their classmates, was that they should develop as effective learners, be able to approach challenges and find ways forward. This is consistent with the primary focus on inclusion in the Norwegian national curriculum (Bjørnsrud and Nilsen 2021). Moreover, it seems clear from teachers’ reported beliefs and practices regarding shy students that attempts to promote inclusion extend beyond the classroom and into the context of recess.

Results from previous research suggest that, in the classroom, teachers are vigilant and empathetically aware of the socio-emotional development of their shy students as it impacts their ability to engage with classroom life and become successful learners (Bosacki, Rose-Krasnor, and Coplan 2014; Coplan et al. 2011; Nadiv and Ricon 2020). The analyses presented here reveal how this careful vigilance continued in preparation for and during recess. The teachers were all concerned that their shy students were not taking up the opportunities for social development afforded during these periods and saw it as their responsibility to help the child. Their concerned observations during recess were addressed by strategies that focused in part on creating environments that were conducive to children’s social development and in part on helping the child learn social skills. This bodes well for shy children’s development, as social skills appear to be a critical determinant of shy children’s psychological and school adjustment (Coplan, Baldwin, and Wood 2020).

These teachers knew their shy students very well and aimed at understanding the experience of recess from the child’s perspective, not merely describing the children’s actions, but also ascribing emotions to them. The teachers did the same when the children were in class, but in the classroom, the professionals were in control and could make adaptations in the environment to help reduce children’s anxiety and wariness. However, recess presented different challenges to teachers concerned about shy children. Recess is a time for children to be imaginative, creative, try out roles and at times be transgressive. The teachers’ strategies to create environments that would support the shy child were therefore mainly at arms’ length – which have proven to be effective means of support (Coplan et al. 2011).

Consistent with previous research in the classroom (Nadiv and Ricon 2020; Thijs, Koomen, and Van Der Leij 2006), these strategies included involving fellow students in the inclusion aims of the school by asking them to involve shy children in their activities and setting up play groups and discussions prior to recess. It should be noted that such strategies could ‘backfire’, placing the shy child as an object of pity in the eyes of their peers. One should ask whether the shy students’ rejection of such overtures from peers was in part an unwillingness to be seen to be in need. Those activities that gave the child a distinct role as welfare leader or helpmate seemed more in line with teachers’ classroom effort to place the student in a practice where student agency as an effective actor could be strengthened – and taking on these roles certainly helped some children.

Giving shy students some respite by removing them from the unpredictable environment of recess, and allowing them, together with small groups of friends, to remain indoors was also seen as a successful strategy in its own right. But, there were other potential advantages that were hinted at by some teachers, who observed that these groups could encourage the building of trusting relationships between children, that is, real friendships. As found in previous research (e.g. Burgess et al. 2006), and supported in our data, good quality friendships can help to mitigate the anxiety of shy students at school. The analysis points clearly to the value of reciprocal friendships for shy children, providing networks of support during recess (Sette et al. 2017).

The teachers’ observations also led them to offer direct help to the child. Playing with the child in ways that encouraged the child to be playful, while also inviting others into the game, appeared a way of supporting the agentic actions of the child during recess. Importantly, the teachers recognised that they should withdraw once the child was engaged with other children – mitigating the development of maladaptive overprotective relationships, which can exacerbate anxiety among shy children (Coplan, Arbeau, and Armer 2008). Discussing recess with the children was part of the regular discussions that these teachers had with each child. Again, they could be more direct in these situations, helping the child to develop behaviours, such as smiling or strategies for joining in activities, that might lead to stronger social integration, both during recess and in the classroom. It is notable that interventions that promote the development of these specific social skills have been demonstrated to increase subsequent peer interactions among shy young children (Coplan et al. 2010).

Limitations

Peer interactions during recess can be particularly stressful and challenging for shy students and teachers have an important role in assisting their students in this arena, hence the focus on teacher strategies in this study. We also recognise that other school-related contextual factors such as e.g. gender representation, ethnicity and socioeconomic environment may have an impact on shy students’ experiences of the school including recess. Further research and focus on these experiences in specific school types and climates could provide further insights to inform efforts at creating inclusive schools.

Conclusions

Results from the present study highlight why it is important for teachers to regard recess as an integral part of the school day that influences shy children’s overall experience of school. Such attention ought to go beyond managing over-boisterousness, bullying, dominance of playground space by particular groups to extend to students for whom recess is a source and context for anxiety. Teachers design strategies for helping shy children within the classroom by increasing their confidence in making oral presentations, volunteering answers to questions, and participating in group work (e.g. Coplan et al. 2011; Nyborg et al. 2020). Our research shows that teachers recognise that different kinds of strategies are needed to support shy children beyond the classroom.

The teachers elaborated on how shy students experienced recess and how they could support shy students engaging in peer interactions. The results indicate that although teachers have a set of strategies, the complexity of the context and the individuality of each student demands careful consideration and adaptations of strategies in each situation. Thus, when pursuing social inclusion of shy students during recess, it is a clear advantage that the teachers know the students well. An important implication of this is that class teachers of shy students should regularly be observing, supervising, and engaging in activities during recess. Of note, not all mentioned strategies were perceived as equally efficacious. For example, teachers may need to reflect on the relatively unsuccessful strategy of asking other children to include the shy child.

Finally, the follow up of a shy student during recess should not only be the responsibility of the class teacher. Other teachers or school staff are also involved during the supervision of recess. A class teacher’s role then might be to provide information about shy students’ needs to enable these professionals to contribute to a supporting environment for the shy student. Together, this network of support, whilst being mindful of being overprotective, can help shy students learn to navigate the unpredictability of recess.

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by Norges Forskningsråd: [grant number Project number 254982]; Research Council of Norway.: [grant number Project number 254982].

Notes on contributors

Geir Nyborg

Geir Nyberg is Professor of Special Education at the University of Oslo, Norway.

Liv H. Mjelve

Liv H. Mjelve is a former Senior Lecturer in Special Educational Needs at the University of Oslo.

Robert J. Coplan

Robert J. Coplan is Chancellor's Professor in the Department of Psychology at Carlton University, Canada.

Anne Edwards

Anne Edwards is Professor Emerita at the Department of Education, University of Oxford, UK.

W. Ray Crozier

W. Ray Crozier is Emeritus Professor at the School of Social Sciences, Cardiff University, UK.