Research Report Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments 18573480

Why do young people misbehave in school?

Literature Review
This report looked at five research articles on student behaviour and the social and scientific
factors that make young people misbehave in school. The first article was an investigation
conducted by researchers from the University of South Australia and Flinders University,
where 1750 South Australian teachers from a wide range of schools and areas were asked to
identify and note the frequency of observed student behaviours ranging from small incidents
to incidents of abuse. Teachers were also asked how they handled such behaviours and their
opinion on why the students behaved in such a way. Teacher participants were mostly
female, half were secondary teachers, 80% of teachers were employed full time and 27% of
participants were in some form of management role (principal, senior teacher) (Sullivan,
Johnson, Owens & Conway, 2014, p.47). The second article by Jantine Spilt, Helma Koomen
and Jochem Thijs (2011) focused on the importance of teacher-student relationships, and the
cyclic nature of student misbehaviour, teacher stress and burnout (p.469). The article draws
information from a wide range of research papers and theories on student-teacher
relationships and their effect on teacher stress and emotion, and student reaction to teacher
stress. Split does make reference to their own previous research on the matter as well. Martha
Gault-Sherman’s study on the relationship between parenting and delinquency gives insight
into how specific parenting practises will encourage or discourage misbehaviour (2012,
p.124). The study makes reference to theories on adolescent psychology from as early as the
1950’s and compares them to their own study, and addresses the limitations of the current
study in which participants were mostly white and female. Peter Alter, Ja’Nina Walker and
Eric Landers study of 800 teachers from five public schools in the U.S. aimed to discover
what teachers of varying demographics view as problematic behaviour in the classroom
(2013, p.52). The study includes a large amount of participants from different schools and
demographics, but may hold less relevance in Australian classrooms due to its American
context. The final article is concerned with the contentious topic of corporal punishment and
parent’s perspectives on its use and effectiveness as a tool of discipline (Gomba, 2015, pp.63-
64). The study was conducted in Zimbabwe in 2015, with the nine volunteer participants
being parents or guardians of students from the one boarding school. The nature of this study
could prove problematic as the volunteering of participants means that they may have stakes
in the survey’s outcome or will lack complete impartiality. Additionally, as is the case with
Alter, Walker and Landers’ study, results may differ if the same investigation was conducted
in Australian schools, due to differences in cultural values.
Research Report Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments 18573480

Interview Findings
Six interviewees in total took part in this investigation and gave a variety of answers to the
interview question. Three interviewees were male and three female with ages ranging from
from 25 to 59. Interviewees included one male pre-service teacher and two female secondary
teachers, one with 5 years teaching experience and the other with 37 years experience. The
other three interviewees were parents, two parents (male and female) of two children and one
male parent of seven children. Parent interviewees all have young adult children, who have
recently experienced the Australian education system. As a preface to their answers, all six
were informed that their answer to the question could be drawn from wherever they choose,
whether it is their own personal experiences, as a teacher or parent or as ex-students
themselves. Interviewees spoke freely, often giving small anecdotes to explain their points.
Their responses were written down in notes, and when the interviewee had concluded their
response, they were asked if there were any additions or comments they would like to make.
Following this, notes were read back to interviewees to ensure their response was captured as
accurately as possible. Upon the completion of all six interviews, responses were coded using
a table of categories (categories of reasons that young people misbehave). These categories
include:
 Impulse/desire/psychology (3 results)
 Disengagement (5 results)
 Parental influence/ home influence (5 results)
 Government/school/societal restrictions (3 results)
 Teacher/student relationship and communication (6 results)
 Peer influence (3 results)
 Learning difficulties/mental conditions/disorders (3 results)
 Lack of respect (3 results)
Categories were developed in response to the nature of the answers given. Every interviewee
gave several reasons and theorisations, which fell under different categories. The one reason
given by all six interviewees for youth misbehaviour in class was the breakdown in
communication and relations between the student and their teacher. Most notably, a student’s
recognition of the restraints placed on teachers in how they must discipline gave students
confidence that there would be no, physical or emotional consequence for their actions. It
was also a common theory by the interviewees that miscommunication between students and
teachers is a major source of conflict and subsequently misbehaviour. The second most
Research Report Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments 18573480

common reason for misbehaviour related to the negative influence of parents and home
environments through negative attitudes towards education, teachers or authority figures as
well as a lack of appropriate discipline at home. Domestic problems such as financial strain,
family breakdowns and abuse were also cited, although not as much as the aforementioned
reasons. Interview responses will be further analysed using the current literature on
adolescent behaviour.

Synthesis of Literature Review and Interview Findings

As previously mentioned, interview results were coded and placed into categories to view the
frequency of each behaviour. The most common reason cited for youth misbehaviour at
school concerned teacher-student relations and relevant communication issues. Answers of
this nature included the undermining of female teacher’s authority by male students, cultural
differences, lack of understanding of content and most interestingly, a teacher’s low
expectations of low-achieving student. Spilt, Koomen and Thijs suggest that the low
expectations and negative associations teachers create about disruptive children often
manifests in the negative treatment of student regardless of their behaviour (2011, p470).
This negative treatment naturally encourages the student to react negatively and act in a way
that is true to expectation. A paper created by researchers from the University of South
Australia and Flinders University found in their surveying of a range of teachers across South
Australia that teacher cited the biggest reason for student misbehaviour was disengagement in
class (Sullivan, Johnson, Owens & Conway, 2014, p.53). Following student-teacher relations,
interviewees believed student engagement or rather disengagement is a major reason for
student misbehaviour. This disengagement happened, according to interviewees, for many
reasons and took different forms of misbehaviour. For instance, an example cited was that
students disengage because they may have trouble understanding the task or content, and this
may manifest in them talking to their peers or simply not completing their tasks (off-task
behaviour). However, Alter, Walker and Landers argue that while disengagement leads to
simple, non-offensive off-task behaviour, it can often be a gateway to more extreme,
disruptive behaviour if sustained (2013, P.64). Another cited cause of disengagement for
students happens when the student sees no value in lesson content, subject being taught or
education as a whole. These negative attitudes can often escalate to negative behaviours. The
third major category for youth misbehaviour was parental and domestic influences, in which
interviewees cited parental neglect, the inheritance of negative attitudes towards teachers and
education, domestic problems (financial strain, abuse, divorce) and a lack of parental-
Research Report Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments 18573480

controlled boundaries as the major factors. Martha Gault-Sherman suggests that parental
involvement and the monitoring of children is vital for avoiding deviant behaviours in later
adolescence. This is because misbehaviour can be observed and acted on immediately, and
careful monitoring “fosters the psychological presence of the parent” within the child’s mind.
The expectations for behaviour become clear and ever-present when a child is negotiating
their own behaviour (2012, p.124). Adversely if a child is not monitored and neglected, they
are given no expectations on which to model their behaviour and will be more likely to
misbehave. During the interview coding, there was only one demographic pattern that
emerged and was worth noting. Three of the four participants over 45 years of age stated that
student misbehaviour is more prevalent because of government restrictions on teachers that
control what disciplinary methods are at their disposal. In particular, corporal punishment
was mentioned to be an effective tool for discipline in the three interviewees’ opinion.
Clifford Gomba’s 2015 study also found that most participants over the age of 50 supported
the use of corporal punishment and the threat of it for disciplinary purposes (p.66).
Interviewees in this current study further explained that students misbehaved as they had no
fear of any ‘real’ punishment.

Implications for Teaching Profession

The responses for the six interviews and the research articles on adolescent behaviours have
many implications for pedagogy and understanding student behaviour. To learn how to
manage and reduce student misbehaviour, it is important to first discover why a student might
be acting in a particular way. The many interview results on the role of domestic situations in
student misbehaviour shows that consideration of the student’s home life is paramount for a
teacher. In the synthesis of interview findings with behaviour research, it is clear that most
strategies to be collected from this research are concerned with understanding your students
and changing your attitude toward their behaviour. Sullivan, Johnson, Owens and Conway
suggest that teachers must rethink what they consider misbehaviour in a classroom (2014,
p.53). For instance, a student who begins to discuss with their friend the content of the lesson
is speaking out of turn, but it is up to the teacher to whether or not that constitutes
misbehaviour. Additionally, if a student is listening to music on their headphones while
working on a task, should they be policed? Regardless, teachers must discern what
‘misbehaviour’ is productive and supports engagement and what behaviour is disruptive and
draw a clear line between them. Setting this expectation of behaviour at the beginning of the
school year gives students an indication of the boundaries and freedoms they are awarded, so
Research Report Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments 18573480

that they will be aware when they have broken the rules. These expectations also become part
of the class ritual, a comfortable pattern students adhere to which encourages good behaviour
(De Nobile, Lyons & Arthur-Kelly, 2017, p.70). Following this, the teacher must think about
the way they approach not only the lesson and how it is taught, but the way they
communicate with students. The identification and regulation of negative emotions is vital for
teachers, as their negative attitudes can often manifest in their mood, teaching and
communication, creating an atmosphere of negativity in the class which inevitably leads to
misbehaviour (Spilt, Koomen & Thijs, 2011, p.471). In essence, the simple recognition of
stress or negative emotion is the first step in stopping the vicious cycle of negativity in the
classroom. Positive relations play a major role in keeping students on-task and should be
encouraged in appropriate social settings, such as at school events or during lunchtime
supervision (De Nobile, Lyons & Arthur-Kelly, 2017, p.245). Interacting with students on a
personal level via humour or common goals (cheering on a sports team) encourages trust and
rapport within the classroom. This sentiment regarding positive relations is further mirrored
by Alter, Walker and Landers, who suggest that the key to student engagement lies in
positive reinforcement, highly-engaging learning activities and proximity control (2013,
p.65). The idea of proximity control is the teacher equivalent of Gault Sherman’s theory of
parental monitoring, in which misbehaviour and potential misbehaviour can be spotted by
vigilant parents/ teachers and quickly managed (2012, p.124). Proximity control is effective
because expectations for behaviour are clear and reinforced. In conclusion, analysis of these
sources and interviews gives pre-service teachers valuable insight into the causes and
potential management strategies for misbehaviour but most importantly the skills to create a
positive and engaging classroom setting.
Research Report Pedagogy for Positive Learning Environments 18573480

Reference List
Alter, P., Walker, J. N., & Landers, E. (2013). Teachers' perceptions of students'
challenging behavior and the impact of teacher demographics. Education and
Treatment of Children, 51-69.

De Nobile, J., Lyons, G., & Arthur-Kelly, M. (2017). Positive Learning Environments:
Creating and Maintaining Productive Classrooms. Cengage AU.

Gault-Sherman, M. (2012). It’s a two-way street: The bidirectional relationship

between parenting and delinquency. Journal of youth and adolescence, 41(2),
121-145.

Gomba, C. (2015). Corporal Punishment is a Necessary Evil: Parents’ Perceptions on

The Use of Corporal Punishment In School. The International Journal of
Research in Teacher Education, 6(3), 59-71.

Spilt, J. L., Koomen, H. M., & Thijs, J. T. (2011). Teacher wellbeing: The importance
of teacher–student relationships. Educational psychology review, 23(4), 457-
477.

Sullivan, A. M., Johnson, B., Owens, L., & Conway, R. (2014). Punish Them or
Engage Them? Teachers' Views of Unproductive Student Behaviours in the
Classroom. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 39(6), n6.