Assignment 1: Why Do Young People Misbehave in School

By: 17701352

Behaviour is a term given to define an individual’s movements and interactions, however

there is a negative stigma surrounding young people and their behaviour. In schools,

teachers witness a mixture of behaviours as young people will be going through puberty and

adolescents (Biro & Dorn, 2005). Given the mixture of behaviours exhibited in young people

it is important for teachers to understand how to deal with misbehaviour in a fashion that

does not negatively impact the learning experience of the student. To develop

interventions, teachers need to understand the underlying reason(s) of misbehaviour. The

purpose of this paper is to assist teachers in understanding why young people misbehave in

school? In this paper, current literature will be reviewed and compared against the personal

opinions of 6 individuals that have experienced young people misbehaving.

Young people experience a variety of physiological and psychological changes as they

transition to adulthood. There is evidence that suggests pubertal timing has a direct

correlation with misbehaviour. Negriff, Fung and Trickett (2008) conducted a study that

examined the relationship between pubertal development, depressive symptoms and

delinquency. The study concluded that early pubertal timing is related to “delinquent

behaviour” and depressive symptoms. It concluded that this misbehaviour is related to

sociocultural influences. Early maturing individuals are more likely to be invited to associate

with older peer groups thus increasing their exposure to misbehaviour. This conclusion is

supported by Beaver and Wright (2005), where a correlation between increases in hormone

levels such as testosterone and estrogen and altered behavioural states have been
identified. This same study does identify sociocultural influences as reasons for altered

behaviours. Allison and Hyde (2011) conducted a similar study on early menarche and

concluded that risk taking increases if females encounter menarche earlier than other

female counterparts. That man conclusion from these studies identify the sociocultural

influence of peers as being a big reason for misbehaviour.

Another reason for misbehaviour is ‘attention-seeking’. Cothran, Kulinna and Garrahy (2009)

conducted a study interviewing students and teachers and concluded that a major aspect of

misbehaviour is a students need for attention. These attention seeking behaviours were

attributed to a lack of identity between their peers and a need for recognition off an

authoritative figure. This is similar to peer-pressure as the student demonstrate a need for

acceptance to fit into a peer-group however, there is a lack of interaction between the

student and their peers. This is supported in Downing, Keating and Bennett (2005), student

will engage in behaviours both appropriate and inappropriate due to their desire for the

teachers attention.

In the classroom student surveys attributed misbehaviour to students being bored during

the lesson (Montuoro and Lewis, 2015). Weinerman and Kenner (2016) characterised

boredom as a sever lack of interest. The same study identified that boredom increases an

individuals chances of participating in risk-taking behaviours, which in this instance is

misbehaviour. Boredom in students was attributed to a lack of engagement present in

lesson. This highlights the teachers ability to provide engaging lesson as a reason as to why

students become bored and thus misbehave. Duchesne, McMaugh, Bochner and Krause
(2013) support this idea as it recognises student engagement being a cornerstone to

providing students with a positive learning experience. A positive learning experience will

reduce the students chances of participating in risk-taking behaviours as they will be more

likely to continue doing their work or listen to the teacher.

Data for this study was collected from six willing participants. Each participant was provided

an information sheet disclosing the reasons for the interview and a consent form that

ensured all details of the participant are to be kept confidential. To ensure a variety of

diverse results, the six participants were chosen from different age and gender

demographics. Each demographic has had some form of interaction with misbehaving young

people in schools, thus making them suitable candidates to participate in the study. In

accordance with the studies requirements, there was an even split for male and female

participants. The participants have been allocated an individual coding that keeps their

identity confidential. The participants include:

M1 54yr old Parent. Father to two children currently completing secondary

education.

M2 25yr old Pre-service Teacher. Currently completing masters of teaching

(secondary).

M3 20yr old Swimming Instructor. Works with young people after school.

F1 72yr old Grandparent. Mother to five and grandmother to seven.

F2 23yr old Teacher. First year teacher currently working at a high school.

F3 18yr old University Student. First year university student completing a bachelor

of arts.

* M = Male F = Female
The interviews were all conducted one on one to ensure any answers are not influenced by

biases of other participants. To keep all participants identity confidential, the interview was

not recorded and only note taking was permitted. The structure of the interview was

conducted in a conversation format. Due to the nature of the interview only one question

was the same for all participants; “In your opinion, why do young people misbehave in

school?”. Other questions asked varied to fit the direction of the interview and all questions

were open-ended to reduce the personal bias of the interviewer.

After reviewing the answers from participants, the interviewer identified the most common

themes/beliefs present. The most common themes present were attention seeking,

boredom/frustration and peer-influences. To be considered a theme, the area needed to be

mentioned in two or more interviews. Some of the themes were not explicitly named

however, based off the answers these were the most suitable titles that covered what was

discussed.

The most common theme in the interviewing process was ‘Peer influences’. In four of the six

interviews, this theme was mentioned directly and indirectly. This is a significant figure as it

recognises that majority of the participants believe the main reason for a student’s

misbehaviour in school is a result of another students influence. F1 believed that “young

people will always do silly things when surrounded by friends”. This individual later

explained that she believed that her children and grandchildren acted differently at home

compared to being at school because they were not surrounded by their classmates. These

thoughts were like the ones of M1. “Anytime my children have ever been in trouble with
school it had something to do with their friends” (M1) reiterates the beliefs of F1 but also

highlights the sociocultural influences peer-groups have. The comments in these interviews

were to the point and drew upon their own observations and experiences with their

children. These views differed to the remainder of participants and could be attributed to

the difference in age generations. The remaining participants are much younger and have

experienced this issue differently, as seen in the comments of F2 and F3.

F2 and F3 also referred to peer-pressure as possible reasons but believed it was not the

main cause. Instead both F2 and F3 believed that due to their ages young people want to

“push boundaries” and copied the actions of their friends because that what everyone was

doing. These opinions tend to agree with the conclusions in Negriff, Fung and Trickett (2008)

as there is a common belief young people misbehave because of who they are associating

with. There is evidence that suggests young people are highly responsive to their peers

when making decisions (Bursztyn and Jensen, 2015 and Denscombe, 2001). M3 stated,

“young people can be your best friend or your worst enemy when trying to control a class,

because once one goes they fall like dominos”. This comment was not targeted at peer

influences however, it does further drive the idea that young people are highly influenced

by what is happening around them.

Attention-seeking was another highly discussed point. This theme appeared directly when

interviewing M2 and F3 but also was touched on by F1 and M3. M2 stated, “young people

crave attention especially if they are coming from a disruptive home environment”. After

continuing this conversation M2 also believed that craving attention was not a bad thing
however, “when a teacher wants to keep the class on task, the attention-seeking student

can become disruptive. Even though the student doesn’t mean to be the teach can perceive

this as misbehaviour instead of a need for attention”. This statement from M2 is similar to

the reasoning in Downing, Keating and Bennett (2005) as student look for approval off

authoritative figures. In this case the young person is substituting a parent for the teacher

(Geldard, Geldard and Foo, 2016, P.32). F3 believed that misbehaviour came from young

people that didn’t have an identify. She stated, “the attention seekers at school were always

doing something different to get noticed”. These views come from an individual that was

recently in high school and was able to provide point of view from someone that still can be

considered a young person going into adulthood. These views partially agree with the

findings in Cothran, Kulinna and Garrahy (2009) by recognises students that lack identity and

will do anything to find it.

The final common theme was ‘boredom’. F2 stated, “it is very hard to keep every student

engaged in a lesson they tend to get restless when they are not engaged”. This recognises a

lack of engagement in activities leads to boredom. When interviewing M3 boredom was the

first words to answer the initial question. When digging deeper M3 explained, “many

student like to be involved and when they aren’t, they will start to find ways to entertain

themselves and that usually isn’t what I want when I teach”. These comments mirror the

opinions of F2. Both individuals have experience working as a teacher in some capacity with

young people and appear to have drawn their reasoning from that. Additionally, these

opinions support the views in Weinerman and Kenner (2016) and Duchesne, McMaugh,

Bochner and Krause (2013). Both paper recognise the need for engagement.
After analysing both literature and the opinions of the participants, the common belief is

that young people can misbehave for more than one reason. Using this information, it is

recommended that teachers take a multidimensional approach to their teaching pedagogy.

This approach must incorporate behavioural management and differentiation techniques.

F2 stated, “every student learns differently and not everything you do is going to work”. This

statement is true however, a well-informed teacher will be able to draw upon a variety of

pedagogical approaches in order to minimise the impact.

Maintaining engagement and crucial but also very hard (Katz, 2013). Choice theory assumes

that “student behaviour is based upon whatever is most satisfying to them at any given

time” (Charles, 2011, P. 145). This theory recognises the unpredictable nature of

adolescents and that keeping them engaged one day might not be the same the next day.

Using an ecological model to teacher allow the teacher to view school as an ecosystem. It

incorporates the physical, teacher, student and curriculum/resources factors. In order to

maintain a balance these factors must work together however; the teacher cannot always

control the other factors. The best the teacher can do is use creative measures that will aim

to maintain a students engagement. These can include differentiation techniques that cater

for high achievers, students with learning difficulties and the remainder of the class (Young

and Balli, 2014 and Moss, 2013). Another method to maintain engagement is the

incorporation of ICT into learning as it has been proposed that young people tend to

respond better to modern techniques instead of traditional methods (Katz, 2013 and
Duchesne, McMaugh, Bochner & Krause, 2013). By tackling this issue teachers may be able

to reduce the impact of boredom and to some extent attention seeking behaviours.

The other element to tackle is the impact of peer-influence. This is a difficult aspect to

address as it can be driven outside and carried over into classroom. A method the teacher

could try to incorporate is the additional of social skills into a lesson. By delivering activities

that allow young people to socialise more they will be less incline to display disruptive

behaviours (attention from teacher). The Making Choices intervention (Smokowski, Fraser,

Day, Galinsky and Bacallao, 2004) displayed promising result when working with young

people that displayed social problems. For the teacher tasks such as, group work,

discussions and problem-solving activities may assist these student by developing their

social skills with other students. It should be noted that these techniques may not apply to

every student as mentioned in choice theory however, the teacher can look to develop all-

inclusive activities that aim to provide the best possible learning experience.

The question “why do students misbehave in school?” cannot be answered with one simple

answer. As seen in the literature and the opinions of the interviewees misbehaviour can be

attributed to a variety of reason which may be a result of an external influence. For

teachers, it becomes important to recognise that young people are in a transition period

going towards adulthood and that it is their job to provide guidance to the best of their

abilities. There is no exact recipe to stop all misbehaviour however, employing behaviour

management techniques that promote inclusive learning are the most realistic way to help

students and reduce negative behaviour in school.

References

Biro, F. M., M.D., & Dorn, L. D., PhD. (2005). Puberty and adolescent sexuality. Pediatric

Annals, 34(10), 777-84. Retrieved from https://search-proquest-

com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/docview/217550835?accountid=36155

Negriff, S., Fung, M. T., & Trickett, P. K. (2008). Self-rated pubertal development, depressive

symptoms and delinquency: Measurement issues and moderation by gender and

maltreatment. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37(6), 736-746. Retrieved from

https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/docview/204638499?accountid=36155

Beaver, K. M., & Wright, J. P. (2005). Biosocial development and delinquent involvement.

Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3(2), 168-192. doi:

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1177/1541204004273318

Allison, C. M., & Hyde, J. S. (2013). Early menarche: Confluence of biological and contextual

factors. Sex Roles, 68(1-2), 55-64. doi:

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1007/s11199-011-9993-5

Cothran, D. J., Kulinna, P. H., & Garrahy, D. A. (2009). Attributions for and consequences of

student misbehavior. Physical Education and Sport Pedagogy, 14,155-167. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/17408980701712148?scroll=top&needAcces

s=true

Downing, J., Keating, T., &C Bennett, C. (2005). Effective reinforcement techniques in

elementary physical education: The key to behavior management. Physical Educator,

62,114-122.

Montuoro, P., & Lewis, R. (2015). Student perceptions of misbehaviour and classroom

management. Handbook of classroom management, 344-362. Retrieved from

https://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=XUhsBAAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA344&dq

=attention+seeking+and+misbehaviour&ots=qZV5-

Ys2t_&sig=VWKHu8JmrTeL365QUCelf4qQZE0#v=onepage&q&f=false

Duchesne, S., McMaugh, A., Bochner, S., Krause, K. (2013). Educational Psychology For

Learning And Teaching. Melbourne, VIC: Cengage Learning Australia Dean, D. (2001). The

economy of curriculum integration: Profit and loss. English Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 2.

Bursztyn, L., & Jensen, R. (2015). How Does Peer Pressure Affect Educational Investments?.

The quarterly journal of economics, 130(3), 1329-1367. Retrieved from

https://academic.oup.com/qje/article-abstract/130/3/1329/1935006
Denscombe, M. (2001). Peer group pressure, young people and smoking: New

developments and policy implications. Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 8(1), 7-32.

doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1080/09687630124121

Katz, J. (2013). The three block model of universal design for learning (UDL): Engaging

students in inclusive education. Canadian Journal of Education, 36(1), 153-194. Retrieved

from

https://searchproquest.com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/docview/1440186282?accountid=36155

Charles, C. M. (2011), Building classroom discipline (10th ed), Boston, Allyn & Bacon

Young, M. H., EdD., & Balli, S. J., PhD. (2014). Gifted and talented education (GATE): Student

and parent perspectives. Gifted Child Today, 37(4), 235-246. doi:

http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/10.1177/1076217514544030

Moss, J. (2013). Learner diversity, pedagogy and educational equity. In R. Churchill, P.

Ferguson, S. Godhino, N. F. Johnson, A. Keddie, W. Letts, J. Mackay, M. McGill, J. Moss, M. C.

Nagel, P. Nicholson, M. Vick (eds.), Teaching Making A Difference. (pp. 144-183). Milton,

QLD: John Wiley & Sons Australia Ltd.

Smokowski, P. R., Fraser, M. W., Day, S. H., Galinsky, M. J., & Bacallao, M. L. (2004). School-

based skills training to prevent aggressive behavior and peer rejection in childhood:

Evaluating the Making Choices program. Journal of Primary Prevention, 25(2), 233-251. DOI:

10.1023/B:JOPP.0000042392.57611.05

Alstot, A. E., & Alstot, C. D. (2015). BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT: Examining the functions of

behavior. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 86(2), 22-28. Retrieved from

https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.uws.edu.au/docview/1658716332?accountid=36155