Assessment One: WHY DO YOUNG PEOPLE MISBEHAVE IN SCHOOL?

Introduction
Misbehaviours are inappropriate behaviours that are considered as undesirable and

unacceptable within society (Bartlett, 2011; De Nobile, Lyons & Arthur-Kelly, 2017). The

topic of misbehaving students has been an ongoing concern for schools and teachers that

could negatively affect the learning environment within the classroom. Identifying

misbehaviours in the classroom may be a challenge for some teachers as there are so many

perspectives on why students misbehave, whether it is intentional or venting out. Having the

essential understanding towards why students are misbehaving will enable further strategies

and pedagogical approach on the issue. This paper will explore the discourses of

misbehaviour in theoretical literature to gain further insights, along with examining the data

collected from the open-ended interviews with the six participants on their perceptions of

why students misbehave. This research will highlight the perceptions of different individuals

in order to examine the implications for praxis, in hopes to inform teacher’s understanding,

practices and pedagogies.

Section One: Literature Review

Adolescent development emerged from the age of adolescence, George Stanley Hall

proposed that adolescence is a period of “storm and stress” (Arnett, 1990, p.317). This refers

to which adolescents are more likely to develop mood swings, engage in conflict with their

parent and risk-taking behaviours (Dahl & Hariri, 2005). The transitioning towards adulthood

undergoes a biological process of puberty, physical reductive maturation and social changes

(Arnett, 2014). The brain development shed light on the cognitive development in

adolescence, the recognition on the imbalance of the two systems, where the socioemotional

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 1

cognition surpasses cognitive control system (Keating, 2004; Steinberg, 2005). The

influential theory on the stages of the cognitive development proposed by Jean Piaget during

1936, in understanding the changes in how adolescent’s thought process becomes complex

and abstract (Piaget, 1971). The psychological and social development involves the identity

development of adolescent through experimenting with relationships and their independence.

The discourse of behaviour in the development of the brain was initiated by Laurence

Steinberg, who pioneered the “hot and cold cognition” (Steinberg, 2005, p.72). Steinberg

“Social cognition” is an aspect of the cognitive development that stemmed from Piaget,

(Evans, 2008, p. 268). The term branches into two aspects: “perspective taking” regarding

having the pro-social behaviour abilities to understand the feeling and thoughts of others,

developed by Robert Selman was an influential scholar in 1976 (Batson, Early & Salvarani,

1997, p.751). While the term egocentrism originated from Piaget, the notion of “adolescent

egocentrism” was coined by David Elkind in 1985. This then divides into two parts of the

“imaginary audience”, adolescent lack the capacity to distinguish between their own

perception of what others think of them and the reality of what others actually think (Elkind,

1967, p.1029). While the “personal fable” is fabricated on the idea of the ‘imaginary

audience’, a belief of being unique and special is generally held by many adolescents (Arnett,

2014, p.85).

Behaviours within the classroom origin from the ecological system theory, it refers to

the complex nature that exists between the student, their relationships and the surrounding

environment that influence their behaviours (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Inappropriate

behaviours are socially and contextually not acceptable, such as disrupting the learning of

others, including themselves, while appropriate behaviour is the opposite (Nobile, Lyons &

Arthur-Kelly, 2017). The origins of inappropriate behaviour include the developmental,

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 2

psychological and environmental factors that influence the way students behave (Duchesne &

McMaugh, 2013).

Behavioral theory dates back to the early psychologists, Edward Thorndike pioneer

the “law of effect” (Thorndike, 1927, p.212) of behaviour, while John Watson coined the

term “behaviorism” (Schneider & Morris, 1987, p.28) and BF Skinner further developed

“radical behaviorism” (Schneider & Morris, 1987, p. 29), relating to the classroom and

behaviour management. Social cognitive theory for behaviour management originated in the

research of Albert Bandura (1986), it recognises that behaviour is acquired through

“observation, reflection and actions”, based on their environmental factors, such as social

influences that prompts certain motivation (Nobile, Lyons & Arthur-Kelly, 2017, p.205).

Section Two: Interview Findings

This research exercises the methodology of a qualitative research to gather the different

perspectives, attitudes and beliefs on the subject of misbehaving students from six selected

participants (Gall, Gall & Borg, 2015). The criteria for the participant’s selection includes the

categories of pre-service teachers, teachers, parents and non-teaching individuals across both

genders, shown in Table 1. The potential participants were contacted through mobile phone

calls and emails. Ethical standards were carried out, informing the participants the purpose of

this research and that their responses may be used for further analysis. Those who agreed

were provided with the written consent form and signed prior to the interview. Following

ethical standards protocol, participants name will not be stated and will be referred as

participants A, B, C and so forth.

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 3

The semi-structured approach with the initial open-ended question on ‘why young people

misbehave in school’ within the high school context was asked to all participants, along with

further clarification questions regarding possible confused statements. The participant’s

responses were obtained through handwritten comments for data-collection. Responses were

categorised in Table 2, and examined thematically for further synthesis in Table 3.

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 4

The collected data were thematically arranged as shown in Table 3. While the majority of the

responses varied, some responses do share a commonality that could be collated into

emerging themes. The most significant theme was the student’s family circumstances as

contributing element into their misbehaviour at school. As participant A, C and D indicated

that the family “upbringing”, “problems” and “attention” may negatively affect the student's

behaviour. This further interlink with another theme of the students’ developmental cascade

of the intersection of their biological (adolescent development), psychological (family) and

social (community) factors that may influence their behaviours within the classroom. This is

evident in the participant E response of the “biological aspects like hormones” and “students

sometimes act out just to gain social acceptance from peers” (Participants A, C, D and F).

Teacher perceptions towards the student could have a negative influence on their behaviour

was mentioned, “my teacher said I should not continue this class because I wasn’t doing

well” (Participant C). Also having automatic assumptions towards the “stereotype of the

students’ culture, religion or skin colour” (Participant E). Additionally, the social

environments were another emerging theme where the students social surrounding such as

mainstream movies, music, and the school environment that influenced their behaviours.

Students’ disruptive behaviour was mentioned as a link towards the teachers’ pedagogy of the

class content that is either “boring, irreverent, cognitive overload leading to disengagement”

(Participants A, B, C and E).

There are some limitations to this qualitative research. The process of selecting the six

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 5

participants was a convenience sampling as they were available to the researcher.

Furthermore, the timing could have been a contributing factor towards this research as the

time duration of the interview and the time when the interview was conducted.

Section Three: Synthesis

Family circumstances was a popular opinion among the interview responses, indicating that

the role of the family is an essential aspect towards the student's behaviour, which is

magnified in the literature review on the adolescent devolvement and behaviours. Participant

A mentioned that the “family upbringing, sometimes it is nurture versus nature that can affect

them psychologically”, which influences the way the students behave at school. Exposing

students to the undesirable “family problems” (Participant C) and characteristics that can

implicitly impact on their emotional development, developing unwanted delinquent traits of

aggression and disruptive behaviours (Ali & Zubair, 2011; William, Conger & Blozis, 2007;

Yizhen, Junxia, Yan & Jun, 2006). In relation to this matter, participant D suggested that

there is “not enough love and attention at home”, thus signifying that a lack of family support

correlates to the student's destructive behaviours in class (Hannum, & Dvorak, 2004). This

notion of the disconnection of parental attachment and acceptance is a vital factor in shaping

the students’ behaviours, as it may be the cause for them to seek attention elsewhere, such as

attention seeking behaviours of disengagement and destructive (Ali & Zubair, 2011; Cothran,

Kulinna, & Garrahy, 2009). Although the family role and environment may be a result of the

students’ problematic behaviours, it is certainly not the only source towards their

misbehaviour within the classroom (McClelland & McKinney, 2016).

While the family circumstances act as a psychological factor towards the student's

behaviours, the biological and social factors in the literature review are also essential in

understanding the reasons that may also influence their misbehaviour. Interestingly, the
102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 6
participants did not make any direct indication in regards to the social aspects of peer

recognition and acceptance relating to the biological development of the brain. Participant E

acknowledge that the biological aspect of hormones affect the way students may behave

during their adolescent development stage. Whereas, participants A, D and F mentioned the

reasons students are disruptive because they’re are seeking for some form of attention within

their social environments, such as peer acceptance and influence, social status in term of

gender and media influence. In contrast to the findings, the development changes within

adolescents may produce a window of opportunity for misbehaviours. There is an imbalance

between two systems, where the cognitive control system (prefrontal cortex) is crucial for

controlling impulse and decision-making mature gradually (Casey, Jones & Somerville,

2011; Steinberg, 2007). Whereas, the socioemotional system is more sensitive in terms of

responding to the emotional and social rewards. This directly correlates to the poor control of

irrational behaviours of adolescents in fear of peer rejections (Hardem & Tucker-Drob, 2001;

Masten et al, 2009), resulting to a higher chance of misbehaviours to occur within the

classroom.

Behaviour management is a fundamental concept in the literature review, hence the

teacher-student relationships, especially the role of the teacher is an essential contribution

into shaping the student's behaviours (Demanet & Van Houtte, 2012). Participants C and E

empathises on the teachers’ perception towards the students, as their reaction or response

may place a negative impact on the student’s attitudes, resulting in resentment and

disengagement (Alter, Walker & Landers, 2013). Misunderstood students will have a

negative school experience, as “the teacher said I should not continue this class because I

wasn’t doing well” (Participant C), indicates a disconnection and lack of support from the

teacher and school (McGrath & Van Bergen, 2015). The teachers’ perception of a student

may influence a positive or negative pedagogical approach, affecting the student social and

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 7

emotional learning that implicitly promote inappropriate behaviours (Alter, Walker &

Landers, 2013). Hence, participants A, B, C and E express the concerns of the time

management and class contents, bringing forth significance of teachers having explicit

pedagogy practices and instructions. Certain students may have a different learning

capability, when the students are unable to sustain their own learning due to not enough

attention or challenging content, there is a relation of misbehaviour in terms of inadequate

learning (Demanet & Houtte, 2012; Rayner, 1998).

Section Four: Implications for Praxis

It is essential for teachers to be aware of these perceptions that contribute towards the

students’ behaviour in order to address behaviuoral approaches within the classroom. The

gathered research will help inform my understanding and pedagogies, along with other

teachers’ teaching philosophy, in relation to the multifaceted causes to why students may

behave the way they do.

An important aspect that may influence the student’s misbehaviour is the teachers’

perception. Teachers must develop their own teaching philosophy that contains no biases and

assumptions towards a particular student or culture (Demanet & Van Houtte, 2012). The

process of critical self-reflection will allow teachers to counteract any future challenges

(Howard, 2003), for instance, building persistence and resilience may help with the stress-

level and not finding a quick-fix solution.

Differentiate instruction and scaffolding are well-research pedagogies that

accommodate all student learning needs within the classroom (AITSL, 2011). This will

ensure that all the student's needs are met by the teacher and schools. Differentiating through

individualise lessons and activities will help students that are struggling with the content and

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 8

provide the student with the same learning opportunity as their classmates (Kraayenoord,

2007). Lessons that are student-centred such as, pair-share learning, collaborative group work

and integrating ICT will ensure the productive engagements of students. Hence, constant

support and feedbacks will enable a positive and meaningful learning environment for all

students (De Nobile, Lyons & Arthur-Kelly, 2017).

Schools could conduct an intervention and workshops, where the community and

especially parental involvements on understanding the leading factors for behavioural

problems that occur during adolescent (De Nobile, Lyons & Arthur-Kelly, 2017). Also, the

schools may provide a safe space, where students are able to channel their frustration and talk

to someone other than a counsellor, whom students are comfortable to share their concerns

with. Schools may introduce programs and policies against misbehaviours in term of

disrupting or harming others, ensuring students also have the knowledge and understanding

why certain actions are unacceptable.

Conclusion
In essence, the perceptions and research-based concepts throughout this report will be

beneficial for teachers to grasp a deeper understanding of the essential issues and concerns

surrounding misbehaving students. Reevaluating the teachers’ perceptions and assumptions

towards misbehaving students is a start for further research, pedagogies, strategies and

interventions in helping students who are unable to help themselves, as that is ultimate role of

an educator.

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 9

References

Ali, M., & Zubair, A. (2011). Parental attachment, parental acceptance, and aggression
among adolescents. Pakistan Journal of Psychology, 42(2).
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, 36(4), 51-69.
Arnett, J. J. (2014). Adolescence and emerging adulthood. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Arnett, J. J. (1999). Adolescent storm and stress, reconsidered. American psychologist, 54(5),
317-326.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Bartlett, K. (2011). What is misbehaviour?. Retrieved from

http://attachmentparenting.org/blog/2011/06/22/what-is-misbehavior/

Batson, C. D., Early, S., & Salvarani, G. (1997). Perspective taking: Imagining how another
feels versus imaging how you would feel. Personality and social psychology bulletin,
23(7), 751-758.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development Cambridge. MA: Harvard.
Casey, B. J., Jones, R. M., & Somerville, L. H. (2011). Braking and accelerating of the
adolescent brain. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21(1), 21-33.
Cothran, D.J., Kulinna, P.H. & Garrahy, D.A. (2009). Attributions for and consequences of
student misbehavior, Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 14(2), 155-167.
Dahl, R. E., & Hariri, A. R. (2005). Lessons from G. Stanley Hall: Connecting new research
in biological sciences to the study of adolescent development. Journal of Research on
Adolescence, 15(4), 367-382.
De Nobile, J., Lyons, G. & Arthur-Kelly, M. (2017). Positive learning environments:
Creating and maintaining classrooms. Cengage Learning.
Demanet, J. and M. Van Houtte (2012). Teachers' attitudes and students' opposition. School
misconduct as a reaction to teachers' diminished effort and affect. Teaching and
Teacher Education, 28(6), 860-869.
Duchesne, S., & McMaugh, A. (2013). Educational psychology for learning and teaching.
Cengage AU.
Elkind, D. (1967). Egocentrism in adolescence. Child development, 1025-1034.

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 10

Evans, J. S. B. (2008). Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social
cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol, 59, 255-278.
Gall, M.D., Gall, J.P., and Borg, W.R. (2015). Applying educational research: How to read,
do, and use research to solve problems of practice. (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson
Education, Inc.
Hannum, J. W., & Dvorak, D.M. (2004). Effects of family conflicts, divorce and attachment
patterns on the psychological distress and social adjustment of college freshman.
Journal of College Student Development, 45(1), 562-583.
Harden, K. P., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2011). Individual differences in the development of
sensation seeking and impulsivity during adolescence: further evidence for a dual
systems model. Developmental psychology, 47(3), 739.
Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher
reflection. Theory into practice, 42(3), 195-202.
Keating, D. P. (2004). Cognitive and brain development. Handbook of Adolescent
Psychology, 45-84.
Kraayenoord, C. E. (2007). School and classroom practices in inclusive education in
Australia. Childhood education, 83(6), 390-394.
McClelland, E., & McKinney, C. (2016). Disruptive behavior and parenting in emerging
adulthood: Mediational effect of parental psychopathology. Journal of Child and
Family Studies, 25(1), 212-223.
McGrath, K. F. and P. Van Bergen (2015). Who, when, why and to what end? Students at
risk of negative student–teacher relationships and their outcomes. Educational
Research Review, 14, 1-17.
Piaget, J. (1971). The theory of stages in cognitive development. Measurement and Piaget,
New York, NY, US: McGraw-Hill.
Rayner, S. (1998). Educating Pupils with Emotional And Behaviour Difficulties: Pedagogy Is
the Key!. Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties, 3(2), 39-47.
Steinberg, L. (2005). Cognitive and affective development in adolescence. Trends in
cognitive sciences, 9(2), 69-74.
Steinberg, L. (2007). Risk taking in adolescence: New perspectives from brain and behavioral
science. Current directions in psychological science, 16(2), 55-59.
Schneider, S. M., & Morris, E. K. (1987). A history of the term radical behaviorism: From
Watson to Skinner. The Behavior Analyst, 10(1), 27-39.

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 11

The Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership. (2011). Australian Professional
Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from https://www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-
source/general/australian-professional-standands-for-teachers-
20171006.pdf?sfvrsn=399ae83c_12.
Thorndike, E. L. (1927). The law of effect. The American Journal of Psychology, 39(1/4),
212-222.
William, S. T., Conger, K. J., & Blozis, S. A. (2007). The development of interpersonal
aggression during adolescence: the importance of parents, siblings and family
economics. Child Development, 78(5), 1526-1542.
Yizhen, Y., Junxia, S., Yan, H., & Jun, W. (2006). Relationship between family
characteristics and aggressive behaviors of children and adolescents. Journal of
Huazhong University of Science and Technology: Medical Sciences, 26 (3), 1298-1315.

102082 (PPLE) Assessment One: Report 18075872 - Tran Tuong Vi Nguyen 12