What is Misbehaviour?

I think the simplest explanation of what constitutes misbehaviour in the classroom, is any action that would result in a disruption of the dynamics and functioning of the class regardless of whether this disruption is the goal of the behaviour or not. There are four motivations for misbehaviour outlined by B&S. Their assertion is that children misbehave in order to get attention, to gain power and control over a situation, as a means of revenge, and because of feelings of disability resulting in lack of effort. My mother and aunt are both teachers in the North Vancouver School District and I also have two jobs teaching dance (One at a rec center and the other in an afterschool program in the district) to children ranging in age from 2 years old to 12 years old, and from this experience I have personally found that the most common misbehaviours performed by children results from an attention seeking motivation. These actions consist of all those things children do that are not harmful or cruel but simply rude, silly, irritating, or disruptive. B&S pointed out several times the importance of understanding the motivations behind a misbehaviour in order to prevent and to respond effectively to those behaviours and I strongly agree with this point. For example, when discussing the performance of attention seeking behaviours B&S discussed the tendency of teachers to respond by saying things such as "How many times do I have to tell you?..." or "If I've told you once I've told you a thousand times..." and these responses not only do not serve to stop the behaviours from taking place but actually serve to encourage its continuance. The reason for this is that it rewards the student with an immediate dose of the attention they want so badly and so they stop, but only until the high they got from this first misbehaviour begins to wan and they respond by repeating their earlier misbehaviour as history taught them it would have the desired effect on the teacher. The teacher continues to respond in this way because doing so gives them a temporary high from stopping the behaviour, however, impermanent it may be. Thus the result is a cycle of self-gratification by the teacher and student both without any possibility of long-term fulfillment of their needs. By understanding that the reason for this behaviour is to gain attention a teacher is better equiped to respond in a way that is likely to reduce the occurance of the behaviour. One such way this can work is through attempts at prevention. If a teacher can identifiy students that are prone to attention seeking misbehaviours they can organize part of their lessons and classes so as to be able to give those students the attention they crave but for behaving in positive ways rather than negatively. Similarly, understanding that a motivation for the behaviour is to gain attention could allow a teacher to make the decision of whether or not to respond at all to the behaviour. ALthough depending on the behaviour ignoring it is not always possible, by not giving in to the child's demand for attention from bad behaviour we are discouraging the continuance of that behaviour as its use does not achieve the goal.

As I stated earlier I completely agree with B&S in their opinion on the importance of understanding motivation as a means of prevention and response to misbehaviour. However, it is not only important to understand the motivations behind the misbehaviour, but also the situation that precipitated the behaviour in the first place. What happens when a good and normally well-behaved student suddenly lashes out with a revenge type misbehaviour? What could have prompted this reaction? What is the best way to discipline the student and make sure the behaviour will not happen again? When I was in elementary school we had a number of problem students in my grade. Several of them were rude, offensive, disruptive, and sometimes violent, but we also had a number of very good students who were sweet and well-behaved and understood and respected the rules of the classroom. One day when we were in gym class we were outside playing soccor when a little girl who had always been one of the classes best students jumped on one of the other boys in the class (a boy who had been a little monster from the moment he came to the school) and started to hit him. The girl was taken to the principal's office and sentenced with an in-school suspension for fighting because that was the school's policy and standard punishment. What no one took into consideration though was that the boy she hit had been tormenting her for four years by teasing her and calling her names, hiding her stuff, or pushing her down on the playground. There is no doubt that the girl's reaction was wrong and that something needed to be done to prevent such action from being taken again, but what about the actions of her tormentor? Why should he go unpunished for his involvement in the situation?

I think one of the things that struck me most in reading B&S was their statement that "all children will misbehave". This is true and I believ that having this frame of mind does truly lead to teachers that are calmer and more effective at both preventing and responding to misbehaviour. However, does having this belief also mean that we will respond to misbehaviours like the one I described above as standard and to be expected regardless of the normal temperment of the child? Will we automaticlly be inclined to dole out the standardized punishments developed by past precedence rather than trying to understand if a situation is perhaps more complicated than it first appears? I hope not, I hope that as teachers we will try to make the distinction between the everyday and the disturbing and allow for flexibility in prevention and response because from what I've learned thus far from my experiences teaching children, is that to a certain degree teaching to a group of children that outnumbers you twenty to one is one part planning and organization, one part past experience, and one part improvisation.