Abstract

One of the main challenges that teachers face in nearly every classroom is students

misbehaving. Student misbehaviour has been shown to negatively impact on student

learning, academic achievements and the wider school environment (Miller,

Ferguson & Byrne, 2000). There has been a lot of research and theories developed

that attempt to explain why student misbehaviour occurs. This report outlines

through the use of interviews, the different views people from a vast range of

backgrounds and demographics have as to why young students misbehave at school.

Six people were interviewed through an informal conversation and asked what they

believe to be the cause of student misbehaviour in school. Responders outlined

parental engagement, teacher and classroom management skills, positive teacher-

student relationships and socio-economic factors.

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

Literature review

There are a number of factors that contribute to students misbehaving at school.

These factors include; parental engagement, parental level of education,

socioeconomic status (SES), classroom engagement, students relationship with the

teacher. Harris & Goodall (2008) conducted a study that showed that parental

engagement in their childrens schooling had a direct and positive effect on a

students behaviour. Data collected from the students themselves revealed that if

they misbehaved at school and there were no consequences at home then the

behaviour would continue. Student responses clearly showed that the coordination

between school and home consequences for poor behaviour had a direct impact on

how they behaved at school (Harris & Goodall, 2008). This study supported the

findings of the 1987 study by Hoover-Dempsey, Bassler and Brissie. Parental

engagement in students education is determined by a number of factors such as

parental level of education and socioeconomic status (SES). Students from families

with lower SES backgrounds were found to have parents with lower levels of

education who were less engaged in their childrens learning and placed less value

on education (Harris & Goodall, 2008). Harris & Goodall (2008) as well as Hill,

Castellino, Lansford, Nowlin, Dodge, Bates, & Pettit (2004) also state that these

factors were found to have a direct, negative impact students behaviour and

achievement.

Another important factor that contributes to young people misbehaving at school is

students relationship with their teachers. Guttmann (1982) found that the

relationship between students and teachers directly influenced student

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

misbehaviour. In the study students stated that they believed that their relationship

with their teacher was crucial and placed a great deal of importance on it as being a

factor of misbehaviour. While students were able to identify relationships as a

determining factor in misbehaviour teachers in the 1982 study rated this factor quite

low in possible causes. These findings demonstrate the importance of understanding

the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers particularly standard 1.2: Know

your students and how they learn. Knowing students and how they learn is can

assist teachers in understanding the root causes for student misbehaviour (Charles

et al., 2014). Misbehaviour may not just be a result of the school environment but

other factors such as SES, relationships with parents and other personal

relationships outside of school (Charles et al., 2014).

Studies conducted by Marks (2000) and Ryan and Patrik (2001) showed that some

students can become more disengaged as their school life goes on. These findings

highlight another issue for teachers as disengagement can lead to student

misbehaviour (Bowman & Plourde, 2012). In order to address this, teachers must use

effective pedagogy to create an engaging environment catering for a diverse range

of students and their learning needs (DeJong, 2005). When teachers do not know

their students learning needs they can fail in making lessons fun and engaging

leaving students to seek out stimulation elsewhere and this often takes the form of

misbehaviour (Glasser & Gough, 1987).

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

Main Interview Findings

A total of 6 people were interviewed for this report; a 25 female year old pre-service

teacher, A 51 year old Mother with three children, two teachers (one male and one

female) who both had over 20 years of experience working in the profession, and

two Male school students aged 16 and 17. Interviews were conducted in the form of

an informal conversation in a setting that was comfortable for participants. This style

and location choice was an attempt to help participants feel more comfortable in the

hopes of creating a more relaxed and honest discussion. Other tactic to ensure as

honest discussion as possible interview questions were based around the primary

question which was Why do you think children misbehave in school? Open ended

interview questions such as Why do you think that? and What do you think

possible solutions to this issue are? were asked in the hope of creating a flexible

discussion to elicit participants thoughts and assumptions about the topic.

Responders outlined their views as to why young people misbehave in school; one of

the main reasons stated by all six people interviewed was boredom. The reasons

given for why students are bored in class varied from a lack of engagement to the

classwork not being academically appropriate (either too easy or too hard).

Responders believed that if these occurred then students would be more likely to

misbehave. Another factor that interviewees believed contributes to student

misbehaviour is the lack of a positive relationship between teachers and students.

Both student and teacher (including pre service teacher) responders particularly

highlighted this is being a major factor in student misbehaviour. However the

Mother interviewed placed more emphasis on factors surrounding the teacher such

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

as a lack of classroom management. Older responders also identified socioeconomic

factors as contributors to students misbehaviour. It was stated by interviewees that

students who come from lower SES backgrounds would be more likely to misbehave.

This idea appeared to be a result of the responders bias towards these types of

students as they made generalisations about these factors and their effects on

student behaviour. Generalisations were also made by interviewees about the effect

of gender on student misbehaviour. Interviewees believed that both genders

misbehaved at school at the same rate however they did note the differences in how

this occurs. Boys were identified as being more overt, loud and more likely to engage

in attention seeking behaviours while girls were viewed to be more talkative and

inattentive. An interesting observation that was made by responders was that

students are more likely to misbehave now in modern classrooms because of

changing school policies which are resulting in students not being as concerned with

the consequences as they once were.

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

Synthesis of Findings

Throughout the interview process the responders outlined the main reasons why

they believed children misbehave in schools. These included lack of engagement,

teacher and classroom management skills, teacher-student relationships, socio-

economic factors. Countless studies have been conducted that support these

assumptions. As Bowman & Plourde (2012) stated, student engagement is a major

influence on students behaviour in school. Teachers must be aware of this and

employ effective pedagogy to minimise misbehaviour and maximise achievement

(Voelkl, 1995; Mounts & Seinburg, 1995). Disengagement in the classroom could be

the result of a number of factors such as a lack of professional knowledge and

students not relating to the material being taught. Charles, Senter and Charles

(2014) stated that teachers lack of knowledge or apparent disinterest in them is a

contributing factor in misbehaviour. This is consistent with the two student

interviewees who outlined teachers not taking the time to get to know their

students and the lack of one on one time.

Students lack of engagement was mentioned by several of the people interviewed

with some stating that a lack of classroom management or poor management skills

was the cause of this. One particular area of classroom management that was

mentioned was the teachers control over the classroom environment and the

setting of clear expectations as well as consequences. Klem and Connell (2004) state

that young students benefit most when behavioural expectations are made clear.

These expectations must also be consistent, fair and have set consequences for not

meeting them. One of the interviewees (One of the experienced teachers) made a

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

comment asking how do we define misbehaviour? Definitions of what constitutes

misbehaviour can vary from teacher to teacher and student to student. Banduras

Social Learning Theory (Charles et al., 2014) claims stating that student misbehaviour

must be considered in the context of societal factors. One example of this influence

was that if swearing is acceptable in their home environment then students may

think it is acceptable in the school environment. Charles (1999) supported this idea

stating that behaviour is considered acceptable or unacceptable based on the

situation. These studies and testimonies from interviewees should the importance of

clear expectations and consequences have on young peoples misbehaviour at

school.

Positive student teacher relationships were outlined by responders and research by

Guttmann (1982) revealed that students identified this relationship as an important

factor and a cause of student misbehaviour. This is supported by a more recent

study by DeJong (2005) who claimed that a positive relationship maximises

appropriate behaviour. While student responders outlined the importance of

positive relationships, both experienced teachers stated that it was difficult or they

sometimes did not have time to build personal relationships. In their 2008 study

Clunies-Ross, Little and Kienhuis examined these sorts of comments and found that

teachers are being forced to spend a great deal of time on addressing behavioural

issues. Clunies-Ross, Little and Kienhuis (2008) also stated that if teachers built a

positive teacher-student relationship misbehaviour would likely decrease. This in

turn would reduce the time teachers would allocate to managing behaviour allowing

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

them to plan for a more effective teaching environment which would further combat

student misbehaviour.

Socioeconomic status was one of the most commonly named causes by interviewees

as to why young people misbehave in school. These socioeconomic factors are

beyond the control of the child and must be dealt with compassionately and without

bias. Greene (2011) believes that these external need to be understood in relation to

misbehaviour. Greene (2011) states that when teachers fail to recognise these SES

factors, they are less likely to consider alternative interventions that could be

implemented at school to assist these students. This becomes more serious when

students are quickly diagnosed in an attempt to explain behavior problems. This can

lead to students believing that there is a problem with them and that they need

fixing. Greene (2011) believes that this rush to ddiagnose can distract teachers and

parents from identifying other contributing factors.

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

Implications for Praxis

It may be summarised that student misbehaviour impacts negatively on student

achievement, teacher well being, and the general classroom environment. Research

outlined in this report and comments made by the interviewees indicate that

misbehaviour emanates from various factors present in a students life and may not

solely be caused by one factor at any present time but a combination of many. No

specific intervention will solve one or all behaviour problems or facilitate meaningful

behaviour change (DeJong, 2005). Given the myriad of reasons for student

misbehaviour, it is imperative for teachers, parents and schools to engage in a

holistic effort to identify the ways in which classroom behaviour can be managed

effectively.

Studies conducted by Marks (2000) and Ryan and Patrik (2001) showed that some

students can become more disengaged as their school life goes on. These findings

highlight another issue for teachers as disengagement can lead to student

misbehaviour. In order to address misbehaviour resulting from disengagement

teachers must use effective pedagogy

Yuan (2012) found that if a students behaviour results in consequences and the

teacher judges the students behaviour fairly they could easily earn respect from

students and build a positive relationship. Otherwise a teachers unfair or

inappropriate action can provoke student misbehaviour.

Positive interpersonal relationships in school are also reported to provide students

with an increased satisfaction with school and are more engaged academically

(Marks, 2000; Solomon, Battistich, Watson, Schaps & Lewis, 2000). This coincides

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

with the previous point that if students are more engaged misbehaviour is likely to

decrease.

Disability was a factor discussed by the adult interviewees mentioning that children

who repeatedly misbehave may be suffering from a disability. Austin and Agar (2005)

noted that a students who suffered from a disability that decreased their learning for

the rest of the class, inevitably leading to fewer educational opportunities. In

contrast, research has also shown that there are potential benefits regarding

inclusive education (Bowman & Plourde, 2012). Both teacher and parent

interviewees commented that whilst they think an inclusive classroom is beneficial

they believe more support is needed within the classroom for it to work effectively

with less student misbehaviour. It is important that inclusion works effectively as

Kharevych (2009) has shown as it provides benefits for all students and helps

students fulfil their essential need of belonging in different societal groups that

Dreikurs Model (Charles et al., 2014) proposes is a powerful inborn need for all

humans. Consequently, it becomes increasingly important to fit in and adapt socially

with behaviour being influenced by context and peers affecting each others

behaviours in positive and negative ways (DeJong, 2005; Maybery & Reupert, 2008).

In contrast to Little (2003), by incorporating special educational needs students,

including those with behavioural problems, into a main stream classroom it may

result in reduced misbehaviour due to a sense of belonging. This would require the

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

right support to be available within the classroom along with positive peer

influences.

It is important for teachers to build relationships with the guardians of special needs

children to fully provide the best support for the childrens needs. The parent

interviewee mentioned that her daughter had a disability and commented that

parents know their children best establishing that it is important for schools to

build up a relationship not only with the student but with their guardians also. This

has not just been beneficial for students with a disability but for all students, with

reports stating teacher-parent relationships have a positive impact on students

producing positive attitudes and behaviour (Vickers & Minke, 1995) and that a

community as a whole supports students better than in isolation (DeJong, 2005).

Bonfenbrenner (1994) produced the bio-ecological system theory pointing out that

when two or more microsystems containing the young person combine (for example

school and home) they collectively shape the childs development having an

influence on their behaviour. Students from classrooms with joint involvement

experienced high levels of independence after high school, but also received higher

grades. Parents can also help improve their childrens behaviour in school by

becoming more involved in their education, monitoring their actions, and helping to

increase their achievement, educational expectations, and positive self-perceptions

(Weishew, 1993).

The student interviewees acknowledged that responding to misbehaviour in this way

is more likely to be effective than a teacher who comes across in a coercive way by

screaming and showing aggression. Teachers who respond in this way are seen to

have bad management skills by the students resulting in students showing little

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

respect and in some instances causing misbehaviour to escalate. These comments

are consistent with the finding of Miller, Ferguson and Byrne (2000).

References:
Austin, J. L., & Agar, G. (2005). Helping Young Children Follow Their Teachers'
Directions: The Utility of High Probability Command Sequences in Pre-K and
Kindergarten Classrooms. Education and Treatment of Children, 28(3), 222-
236.

Bowman, S.L., & Plourde, L.A. (2012). Andragogy for teen and young adultlearners
with intellectual disabilities: Learning independence and best practices.
Education 132(4).

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1994). Ecological models of human development. International

Encyclopedia of Education, 3(2), Oxford:Elsevier.

Charles, C.M. (1999). Building Classroom Discipline. New York: Longman.

Charles, C.M., Senter, G.W., & Charles, M. (2014). Classroom discipline: The
problems and the promise. In R. H. Parada (compiler), 101642 Positive
Learning Environments (3rd ed., pp. 2-25). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson
Australia. (Reprinted from Building classroom discipline, 11th ed., pp. 2-25,
by C.M. Charles, G.W. Senter & Charles, 2014, Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education, Inc.)

Clunies-Ross, P., Little, E., & Kienhuis, M. (2008). Self-reported and actual use of

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

 proactive and reactive classroom management strategies and their
relationship with stress and student behaviour. Educational Psychology,
28(6), pp. 693-710.

DeJong, T. (2005). A framework of principles and best practice for managing student
behaviour in the Australian education context. Social Psychology
International, 26(3), 353-370.

Guttmann, J. (1982). Pupils, teachers and parents casual attributions for problem
behavior at school. Journal of Education Research, 76(1), 14-21.

Harris, A., & Goodall, J. (2008). Do parents know they matter? Engaging all parents in
learning. Educational Research, 50(3), 277-289.

Hill, N. E., Castellino, D. R., Lansford, J. E., Nowlin, P., Dodge, K. A., Bates, J. E., &
Pettit, G. S. (2004). Parent academic involvement as related to school
behavior, achievement, and aspirations: Demographic variations across
adolescence. Child development, 75(5), 1491-1509.

Hoover-Dempsey, K.V., Bassler, O.C., & Brissie, J.S. (1987). Parental Involvement:
Contributions of teacher efficacy, school socioeconomic status, and other
school characteristics. American Educational Research Journal, 24(3), 417-
435.

Klem, A.M., & Connell, J.P. (2004). Relationships matter: Linking teacher support to
students engagement and achievement. Journal of School Health, 74(7),
pp.262-273.

Kharevych, A. (2009). Benefits of Inclusive Education. Theory and Practice of

Communications, 1 (1).

Little, E. (2003). Kids behaving badly: Teacher strategies for classroom behavior.
Frenchs Forest Australia, Australia: Pearson Education.

Marks, H.M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: patterns in the

elementary, middle and high school years. American Educational Research
Journal, 37(1), 153-184.

Maybery, D., & Reupert, A. (2008). Adolescent mental health. In S. Knipe (Ed.),
Middle years schooling: Reframing adolescence (pp. 97 121). Frenchs
Forest, NSW: Pearson Education Australia.

Miller, A., Ferguson, E., & Byrne, I. (2000). Pupils casual attributions for difficult
classroom behavior. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 85-96.

Mounts, N.S., & Steinberg, L. (1995). An ecological analysis of peer influence on

adolescent grade point average and drug use. Developmental Psychology,
31, 915-922.

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments

Poulou, M., & Norwich, B. (2000). Teachers casual attributions, cognitive, emotional
and behavioural responses to students with emotional and behavioural
difficulties. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 70, 559-582.

Ryan, A.M., & Patrick, H. (2001). The classroom social environment and changes in
adolescents motivation and engagement during middle school. American
Educational Research Journal, 38(2), 437-460.

Solomon, D., Battistich, V., Watson, M., Schaps, E. & Lewis, C. (2000). A six-district
study of educational change: direct and mediated effects of the child
Development Project. Social Psychology of Education, 4, 3-51.

Vickers, H.S., & Minke, K.M. (1995). Exploring parent-teacher relationships: Joining
and Communication to Others.

Voelkl, K.E. (1995). School warmth, student participation and achievement. Journal
of Experimental Education, 63, 127-138.

Weishew, N. L., & Peng, S. S. (1993). Variables predicting students' problem

behaviors. The Journal of Educational Research, 87(1), 5-17.

Yuan, X. (2012). How to deal with student misbehaviour in the classroom? Journal of
Educational and Developmental Psychology, 2(1).

Mark Patterson 16958539 Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments