Classroom behaviour

A central theme that resonated throughout all the interviews was the problem of classroom discipline. Classroom discipline is strongly related to classroom management. Classroom management refers to all the process, rules and consequences to keep a quiet and productive classroom which also includes the specific management

of student misbehaviour, whereas the term discipline is rather used in the sense of regulating children with threats and punishment and implies the concept of controlling other, in addition, it is less constructive (Landau, 2009).

Persistent discipline problems resulted in losing valuable teaching time. Several teachers reported that disciplinary problems occupy a great part of instruction time:

Forty per cent of the class is spent with disciplining. Sometimes even 100%. [S3TE1]

The types of the reported discipline problems ranged from minor annoyances (off-task behaviour, negative attitude toward learning, not following instructions, interruptions, calling out, impolite actions, talking back to the teacher, incessant chattering) to more severe acts of disruptive or aggressive behaviour and delinquency. Especially children with special needs or behaviour disorder seemed to cause serious problems :

There’s a student with behaviour problems who his classmates are afraid of, because he stands up in class and starts hitting the boy or girl next to him without any reason. [S5TG1]

Children also gave accounts in the interviews that their classmates’ disruptive behaviour disturbed them severely in classroom work, sometimes they recalled aggressive acts with fear. These reports indicate that classroom discipline may result in increased stress for both the teachers and the children.

Dealing with discipline problems might become a complex issue at the school level. The example of School S1 indicates that addressing discipline problems is not the exclusive responsibility of the individual teacher, but effective management of actions on the part of the whole school is necessary. The head teacher of School S1 described in detail what situations they had to face resulting from children’s misbehaviour:

I have to confess we had serious problems with children with behaviour problems that we couldn’t deal with. We even had to call the police because they were fighting, once they even hit a teacher as far as I know.

[S1HT]

In her view, more and more parents started to take their children to other schools because of behaviour conflicts at school, therefore a quick and comprehensive solution was needed. The solution involved reorganizing the whole structure of the school at the beginning of the school year in September:

Both the Hungarian and the Roma parents asked us not to let children with and without behaviour problems learn together. We tried to separate them but it proved to be very difficult. Finally, we asked a series of questions in a questionnaire and they told us about students that hurt them, that they are afraid of, that have already beaten them in the schoolyard, some of them don’t dare go to the toilet, and from these answers we knew which students were problematic. Based on the responses, problematic children were put into separate groups. The more problematic a child's behaviour is, the smaller the group he/she is put into. [S1HT]

The head teacher pointed out that they attempted to avoid being accused of segregation as the criterion of grouping was not the ethnicity of children. The head teacher stated that this model seemed to work according to the feedback of the parents and the children. The classroom observation in one of these remedial groups which consisted of extremely low-performing children with behaviour problems was described on page 156. The comments of this language teacher suggested that teaching in these groups constituted a real challenge.

Another head teacher emphasized that discipline problems can be handled at class level relying on the positive processes of group dynamics:

Based on our experience, behaviour issues should be solved primarily at class level. So I’d stress the role of the community because I believe that a positive community mainly at class level could best influence these children, even their individual development. [S4HT]

The above described view presupposes the existence of a cohesive group where dealing with norm deviation is supported by peer pressure because “members usually bring to bear considerable group pressure on errant members and enforce conformity with the group norms” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 723).

At the class level, the teacher is seen as central in controlling discipline. In this respect huge differences among teachers were reported by both teachers (“With some teachers they jump in through the windows!” [S1TE2]) and children (“In English classes, we don’t misbehave, but in History classes …” [S1CH8]). Most teachers in the study agreed that classroom management involving the use of consistent and systematic techniques for handling discipline problems could be the key to preventing classroom misbehaviour. Teachers first have to set up group norms in order to expect children to behave. Effective procedures for the learning environment should be laid initially.

Moreover, clear expectations for student behaviour should be communicated. One of the teachers saw the explicitness of rules and routines as essential:

They have to know how to behave. At the beginning, I repeat my rules a thousand times. My students know what I expect and they also know what happens if they break the rule. [S1TG2]

Equally important as setting up behaviour expectations is the consistency that teachers confirm systematic reactions to the breaking of rules. One of the respondents added that the reaction may never be over-emotional, aggressive or hostile:

They have to be treated with determination and deliberation. When you raise your voice a bit, it won’t work. This triggers aggression, builds a wall in front of you and no negotiation is possible after that. [S1TG2]

Determination and consistency were the two main concepts of other teachers when talking about techniques of dealing with misbehaviour as the following comments illustrate it:

In this school, if you find the right way to discipline, you win. This is a matter of consistency and determination. They believe that I would hit them although I wouldn’t, but they believe it. You have to be very strict.

[S4TG2]

We have big disciplining problems in all classes but I think if you are consistent you can get by. And yet a certain part of each class is spent with handling discipline problems. [S5TG1]

Official measures to handle misbehaviour on the long run were seen as ineffective:

I’m not for writing notices into the report book, or organizing disciplinary meeting, what do they change? We’re trying to teach the children how to behave in an acceptable way. It takes up a lot of time in classes to discipline them. [S3TE1]

Two specific aspects were found where classroom management and discipline problems influenced directly the language teaching methodology of the teacher: group work and tolerance. Applying techniques of group work requires efficient classroom management. Too much time can be wasted if children are not on task and productive.

Teachers confessed that they group work is rarely used in groups with children with behaviour problems:

In the case of children with behavioural problems unexpected situations emerge. I rather not group them because then they explode. [S1TG1]

The use of group work, especially cooperative group work, could have a positive effect on disadvantaged children’s achievement, moreover, it could improve greatly their interpersonal relationships (Marzano, 2003). Classroom observations proved that it was possible to use group work activities efficiently with disadvantaged children; the most important condition was to set up and stick to relevant rules and procedures during group work. Teacher S1TE2 had a special signal, showing circles with her hand, indicating group work, the children seemed familiar with this signal and the subsequent procedures. This method also helped to reduce transition time of changing from individual work to group work.

One of the teachers explained the reasons for using frontal teaching predominantly by students’ low level of tolerance:

In this class of Grade 8, I can’t use communicative tasks at all. Children start to laugh at each other’s pronunciation or other mistakes. [S3TE1]

Establishing consistent norms of tolerance and acceptance is essential in the language group because “the language classroom is an inherently face-threatening environment because learners are required to take continuous risks as they need to communicate using a severely restricted language code” (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 720).

During the interviews, children were telling long stories of incidents of misbehaviour and different forms of punishments. Surprisingly, several comments referred to regular practices of minor corporal punishment, which they seemed to regard as acceptable means of corrective measure, whereas corporal punishment is banned.

Some children reported on teachers’ apathy towards misbehaviour:

Teachers used to be much stricter. Nowadays they let children have their way. [S3CH2]

Being strict was an important characteristic of good teachers mentioned often in the interviews with children. They explained that by strictness they meant being consistent to consequences:

Good teachers are strict because they keep order and we mustn’t shout!

[S1CH2] And we mustn’t copy or cheat! She always keeps what she promises, for example she always keeps us overtime if we don’t do our homework. [S1CH3]

Classroom observations revealed that classroom misbehaviour was often rooted in inappropriate levels of tasks. Persistent failure in completing tasks may result in non-engagement in the lesson, getting distracted easily by peers, off-task behaviour, disruptive behaviour, or growing frustration might culminate in loss of temper, and other forms of aggression. Kormos, Sarkadi and Csizér (2009, p.128) describe a situation when the reason for misbehaviour of a dyslexic student was the constant lack of success and the teacher’s attitude to learning disability.