performance? Researchers have identified several possibilities. First, some
temperaments are probably more compatible with the requirements of thetypical classroom than others. In most classes, children who are attentive,
adaptable, and persistent are likely to do better than those who are low on
these temperament dimensions. Children with short attention spans and chil-
dren who are easily distracted may have difficulty completing assignments or
paying enough attention to learn their lessons the first time. Students who
take a long time to adapt to new situations often find themselves behind therest of the class. Moreover, children who fall behind or do poorly on assign-
ments may become discouraged or give up, thus adding to their academic
problems.
Second, students ’behavior evokes responses from the teacher. The stu-
dent who is attentive and seemingly eager to learn is going to draw a differentreaction from the typical elementary school teacher than the student who iseasily distracted and withdrawn. Working with the former student probably
will be pleasant and rewarding; working with the latter may be frustrating
and demanding. Perhaps quite unintentionally, teachers may pay more atten-tion to and work more closely with some students than with others. As a re-
sult, opportunities for learning and achievement may be shaped by the child’ s
temperament.
Third, teachers sometimes misinterpret temperamental differences in their
students (Keogh, 1989). Slow-to-warm-up children may be seen as unmoti-
vated when they fail to eagerly attack an assignment or as unintelligent when
they require several tries to master a new task. A highly active student might
be identified as a troublemaker. An easily distracted student might be seen as
uninterested in learning. These false impressions can then color the way a
teacher responds to the student. A large amount of research demonstrates that
teachers ’explanations for their students ’behavior often affect how the teacher
interacts with the student and subsequently how well the student does in
school (Cooper & Good, 1983).
This indirect impact of temperament on learning is illustrated in the real-
life case of an elementary school student who approached schoolwork with ahigh-intensity, high-persistence style (Chess & Thomas, 1986). This boy had
a long attention span and preferred to spend an extensive amount of time
absorbed in one lesson before moving on to the next. Unfortunately, the tea-cher’s schedule rarely allowed for this. The boy became upset whenever the
teacher interrupted his lessons. Initially, the teacher interpreted the boy ’s reac-
tion as an indication of some underlying behavior disorder. Fortunately, theproblem was resolved when the boy ’s parents transferred him to a school
that encouraged the kind of persistent and intense involvement that had beenlimited in the earlier class.
The “Goodness of Fit ”Model
It is tempting to ask, “What temperament characteristics contribute to better
school performance? ”However, this is probably not the right question. Most
researchers prefer to ask, “What kind of environment and procedures are
most conducive to learning for thisstudent, given his or her temperament? ”Application: Children’ s Temperaments and School 241