Managing Student Indiscipline and Behaviour in Our Schools
By Raymond Hackett School of Education, St. Augustine

As adults we find it particularly difficult to understand why our schools today are so plagued by student disruptive behaviours. We expect students to be responsible, orderly, sympathetic, cooperative, considerate, honest courteous, respectful, quiet, eager to work and always inclined to appropriate behaviour. In addition, we want our students to interact fairly and ethically with their peers, revere their teachers and put away all thoughts of vandalism from their minds. Foolishly we have remained oblivious to the changes that subverted the world. We have failed to understand that all human behaviour is learnt; that if adults consistently behave in a particular way, our children will eventually behave similarly. Consequently, many of our children are now found to be unruly, dishonest, uncooperative with teachers and peers, aggressive and increasingly violent. Perhaps what is worse is the fact that the authority of the teacher – like so many other authority figures - has seriously eroded in our society. Students seem to have little or no respect for their teachers. Teachers now seem powerless. I have discovered that many believe that they cannot depend on support of school and Ministry of Education administrators, parents and the community. Indeed, the evidence available indicates that some parents tend to be rooted in denial, taking sides with their children. A few are known to have initiated litigation against the school and Ministry of Education.

Clearly, schools, which were once centers for character building and the dissemination of positive values, have become virtual war zones and sites for indiscipline. The research literature is now replete with studies which sought to determine what has gone wrong and what strategies can be found to set things right. As a result several perspectives on discipline and punishment has emerged.

Some educators see discipline in the content of submission to rules and complying with the requirements of learning and certain standard operating procedures governing behaviour in schools. Others see it in terms of the projection of ethical and moral standards.

The consensus is that discipline can be reinforced in different ways - self-imposed, imposed on the individual by others, or through discovery by the individual that to conform brings benefits, while to attract sanctions can be painful or unrewarding.

Proponents of self-discipline argue that self-imposed discipline produces rational and responsible students; that externally imposed discipline tends to generate feelings of alienation and doubts on the dignity and integrity of the individual; that punishment helps to bring about order and conformity in schools, but not self-discipline.

Nonetheless, the debate in our society between discipline and punishment continues to rage as student indiscipline escalates. Only recently has the focus turned to training teachers how to handle students who display disruptive behaviours in the classroom in particular and the school in general. We no longer take it for granted that school rules and regulations are important for guiding students’ conduct. Experience has shown that where there are no longer proper rules and regulations, chaos and confusion tend to prevail. Participant observation on my part, however, has confirmed that too many teachers still do not recognize the difference between humanistic democratic approaches to student control as opposed to authoritarian approaches.

Very often students see rigid or mechanistic school rules and regulations as attempts to curb their freedom. This usually results in resentment and strikes and riots as experience has shown in Japan, China and the United States. On the other hand, consensus in the literature supports the view that rewards and penalties - as promoted by humanistic and democratic approaches - should be used to encourage obedience to school rules and regulations.

Good discipline cannot be created overnight or simply be wished into schools. It is the result of consistent and visionary efforts. For example, when teachers and students recognize and accept the purpose of school rules and regulations, they tend to commit themselves to upholding the rules and regulations of the school. Also, teachers who model self-discipline, courtesy, consideration, respect, honesty, punctuality in interacting with their peers and students contribute to a climate, which promotes good discipline among students.

Good discipline results when school rules are developed, revised, and maintained through collaboration among administrators, teachers and students. Basic sociology informs us that when people have a stake in affairs, they tend to be more committed to the success of such affairs. Also, it is accepted that good discipline prevails wherever the channels of communication are kept open between students on one hand and staff and administration on the other hand.

Proponents of the humanistic democratic orientation to discipline point out that problems of indiscipline in schools can be minimized once the school practices humane and democratic disciplinary measures which are educative in nature, reflect warmth, caring and respect for the student and which are based on principles that are considered helpful to the overall development and growth of the student. We, however, should be careful not to import wholesale solutions for good discipline from other cultures. We should understand that while human beings throughout the world have essentially the same psychological structure, their culture tends to make them different. On the other hand, we should not allow the negative features of our culture to prevent us from introducing sound and firm action plans for curbing indiscipline in our schools. For example, we must recognize that while punishment may be necessary, it can generate serious problems, if not properly applied. Some writers caution that punishment does not teach the student alternative ways of behaving or how to behave positively in the future. They argue that disruptive students should be given instruction as to how to behave in socially acceptable ways.

Others submit that punishment inhibits learning. They very often cite studies to drive home their point. Findings from these studies indicate that students of punitive teachers express less value in learning, were more aggressive and more confused than students who benefited from instruction on how to behave in keeping with rules and regulations. Findings also highlighted that schools in which students learn more meaningfully tend to promote lower rates of punishment, but provide greater opportunities for allowing positive reinforcement of student behaviour. There are other studies, which have demonstrated that misbehaviour actually increased when greater punitive measures were introduced. In addition, some writers insist that unless schools prepare our students to live and interact in a humane and democratic society, they will become useless.

We therefore have to find ways for encouraging acceptable behaviour and conflict resolution among our young. We, however, must first understand, as teachers and educators, that indiscipline is often the result of bored students who find learning activities boring, poor facilities, deprived classroom conditions, and cramped seating arrangements. Also, we cannot deny that those teachers who apply ineffective classroom management strategies are part of the problem. Such strategies as threats, corporal punishment, and the loss of privileges should be avoided. Instead, every attempt should be made to address students’ indiscipline with dialogue, problem solving techniques and conflict resolution methods. Resorting to confrontational tactics is clearly counter-productive.

Curbing indiscipline and promoting discipline in our schools are extremely complex tasks. They are closely aligned with school culture, teacher attitude, teacher professional characteristics, optimum school facilities and good pedagogy. While administration and staff should be caring, warm and respectful, they must be able to provide firm leadership. There can be no quick fixes in this regard. Seminars and workshops are laudable, but it is commitment on the part of all which will eventually matter. Time and hard work, therefore are inevitable factors related to promoting good discipline. Finally, administration and staff must be united on this issue.