“Amongst The Worst In The World” - Australia’s Battle Against Behavioural Problems in Schools

Let me put this bluntly – this headline is not news to anyone on the front line of classrooms in Australia. However, if any concrete evidence was needed, the Australian Senate’s recent report The issue of increasing disruption in Australian school classrooms report has spelled it out in black and white. This is after the OECD recently ranked Australia’s classrooms as some of the most disruptive and disorderly in the world, ranking Australia 69th out of 76 school systems consulted. This is a sad, but believable indictment on the state of student behaviour in Australian schools. These are some of the reasons that have been pressed forward as potential causes of the growing issue - some logical, some controversial, all potentially valid.

Family Values
Many teachers suggest that the obligation for teaching appropriate behaviour and values has shifted rapidly from being a family responsibility to being viewed as a school responsibility. If accurate (and there is a myriad of anecdotal evidence to suggest it is) the major flaw in this practice is that children have already lived for five years before they even begin at school. If their moral and social responsibilities are receiving minimal guidance until this point, there is often a five year deficit to address before the student even sets foot in a school. Add to this that students spend around 30 hours a week at school, over a forty week period of the year, which is far outweighed by the time they will spend with their family or significant guardian. If they are not receiving guidance (or receiving limited or inappropriate guidance) on matters of appropriate behaviour and actions then the remaining time at home (making up more than 80% of their existence) far outweighs any good that can be achieved at school.

Another aspect of this often highlighted by teachers is the shift of responsibility for inappropriate behaviour from the student who undertook it, to the teacher. My many teacher friends lament the apparent lack of support from parents if behavioural matters are brought to their attention. There is no arguing that support for one’s offspring is commendable in the right circumstances, but the opposition to the mere suggestion of inappropriate behaviour from a child is often met with vitriol from the parent; as if the teacher dare suggest their child may act in any fashion other than angelically. This is frustrating for a range of reasons, but partly because if they were not present to witness the behaviour, they are not exactly in a position to defend it (and yet often this is exactly what occurs). However, the major factor is this: teachers gain nothing from reporting inappropriate behaviour to families. All it does is result in more work, and quite conceivably the opportunity to be target practice for a parent who has had their feathers ruffled by the suggestion that their child has stepped over the line. With nothing to gain, but a responsibility to deal with inappropriate behaviour in an attempted partnership with parents, potentially therapists and others who may be involved with the child, if there is not even the recognition of the need for action from the family, then the frustration related to the time and effort put in is nothing short of deflating. What’s worse, is that when teachers continually bang their heads against brick walls such as these, it is very difficult to find the motivation to assist the student in question, as it may simply amount to a waste of time.

Cosmopolitan Population
There are so many positives about Australia’s cosmopolitan population. We reap the benefits of knowledge and practices from all over the world and enjoy a relatively peaceful and harmonious existence in its surrounds. However, what this does mean is that there are a range of values and indeed VALUE placed on schooling, and this can greatly impact the ability of teachers to find methods of preventing and dealing with inappropriate behaviour that is culturally responsive and seen as appropriate to all students. Unlike more homogenous populations, such as that of Japan, Finland or The Netherlands, Australia’s diverse values makes agreement and implementation of behavioural policy within schools extremely challenging. What this may mean for students is confusion about what actually is appropriate, and amongst schools as to what is the most culturally sensitive and appropriate way to reduce incidences of problematic behaviour.

A Lack of Support
Not that long ago, if a student’s inappropriate classroom behaviour meant that they had to be exited to school leaders, you could be assured that the student would receive a very clear message about the unacceptable nature of the behaviour. Leaders would without hesitation support classroom teachers, knowing that if things have got to this stage, then something reasonably serious has occurred. Nowadays teachers are rarely able to rely on this level of support from school leaders. More often than not they must face questions about their practice in dealing with such behaviour. Now don’t get me wrong, reflection on these situations is a valid and relevant process, as teachers can consider the response they have chosen in a less ‘heated’ moment and assess its appropriateness, with a view to providing a more productive approach if it is to occur again in the future. However, school leaders must realise that to get to this point, the student has done something considerably disruptive or dangerous, and that a teacher’s responsibility is to their entire class, not only the individual student whose behaviour may cause issues. A bit of support in this situation would go a long way and would reinforce the notion of a team approach that teachers are expected to demonstrate for and with their colleagues.

Absence of Consequences
Teachers, alongside parents of students who have been victims or impacted by inappropriate behaviour often bemoan the lack of consequences that students receive from their inappropriate behaviour. This is not only because this approach seems to provide little in the way of motivation to avoid these behaviours in the future, but also because other students recognise that those who do the wrong thing get away with it with little reparation or consequence for their actions. The biggest problem with this is that it is so out of tune with community expectations outside of the school environment. This means that students who are accustomed to behaving any way they like due to a lack of consequences inside the institution, may suddenly find a vastly different set of expectations in the outside world. As an adult, or even an adolescent, if reasonable behaviours are not observed, then there are recriminations either socially or legally. If these don’t exist in any form in schools, what exactly are we setting up our students for outside of school boundaries?

Added to this, the idea of justice that we are often brought up on may be a notion that is lost to children very early in life, if students are the victims or in some way impacted by the problematic behaviours of a peer, yet see little or no consequence for the inappropriate actions.

From a school point of view, it has also been made very difficult for schools to suspend or expel students based on problem behaviour, with extra pressure placed on the school to manage the behaviour ‘in-house’. Whilst suspension or expulsion should never be used as an early step in dealing with challenging behaviours, surely with evidence of continued and ongoing disruption or high-level behavioural concerns there must be some way for schools to protect the other students and staff from extreme behavioural issues and allow the core role of learning to take place relatively free of disruption or concern for safety.

If you’ve ventured into my previous article regarding School-wide Positive Behaviour Supports (SWPBS) you will be aware of my concerns regarding this program. With this program and its like-minded replications, the implementation of consequences for a student having not met behavioural expectations is largely frowned upon. However, this is the model many of our state schooling systems are turning to, which means consequences for actions will reduce even further in the ensuing years, potentially exacerbating the problems that already exist.

The Proliferation of Issues
Thirty years ago there were relatively few diagnoses of autism or the many other conditions and disorders that are today so prevalent. A classroom in which there are no students with such circumstances represents an extremely rare situation in modern schools. Teachers are more aware of these issues than ever before and the range of professional learning that aims to further support teachers to deal with the behavioural offshoots of these conditions are well meaning and may provide some assistance. However, in reality, many of these conditions present in such individual ways that general advice or strategies are rarely sufficiently reliable. Add this to the range of conditions and the sheer frequency with which they now occur (blame food additives, video games, chemicals, the breakdown of the nuclear family unit, the general degradation of community values or whatever reason you choose) in today’s schools and it is very difficult to prevent and manage behavioural issues.

Priorities
Scenarios such as this are lived out daily by Australian teachers. A student experiencing a meltdown begins to trash the classroom, and rather than restrain the student responsible or take action to prevent further damage or safety issues, the whole class is removed and disrupted until the meltdown has calmed sufficiently such that the student can cease the destruction of their own accord. Some consider this madness, that the learning and school experience of 20+ students is disrupted in preference to that of one student; and that one student being the one causing the problem. I have tried to get my head around this for years, but can’t. Yes, every child has rights and deserves respect. Yes, problems are often bigger than the exhibited behaviour itself. However, in the heat of the moment, when the safety of a number of students and the learning that they are trying to undertake is disrupted in such a fashion, surely the least disruptive, safest and most efficient means of dealing with this is the source of the problem behaviour, as opposed to everyone else unfortunate enough to be exposed to it. I must admit that this baffles me, and many other teachers. To me, it seems unreasonable to favour the needs of one student over the needs of the remainder of the class. Though I subscribe to the view that equality doesn’t necessarily marry with equitability, there are limits to how much one individual should be supported (or possibly pandered to) at the expense of a large number of others.

Back to dealing directly with the student endangering the safety of others or damaging school property; schools and staff are now so scared of even coming into contact with students, for fear of disciplinary action (ironic, given the circumstances in which this would be appropriate and the lack of disciplinary action that students who undertake this behaviour are subjected to) that an entire class suffers as a result of one student’s actions. I know some teachers who refuse to provide minor first aid because they are terrified (rightly or wrongly) of the potential consequences of being in physical contact with a student. If this isn’t evidence of the bizarre extremes that these situations have extended to then I don’t know what could possibly constitute it.

Proposed Solutions
The Senate report put forward nine potential strategies for dealing with the current situation in relation to “disruptive and disorderly” behaviour. Some of them are simple and make considerable sense. Others are further flogging the ghosts of dead horses and the remnants of past unsuccessful programs. Among the more sensible is the move away from a universal open planned approach to new school facilities. There is a lot of research to suggest the value of open planned learning spaces (the word “classroom” is often frowned upon in the current educational climate), but the reality of what is often poor acoustics and the unintentional disruption of hearing neighbouring classes go about their business can only be distracting for students and staff. A single area classroom provides much greater potential for the containment of any problem behaviour and the prospects for distraction from outside sources are significantly reduced.

A less sensible measure is the recommendation of a “behaviour curriculum”. Whilst there is evidence to suggest (and SWPBS lives and dies by this assertion) that students need to be actively taught appropriate behaviour, there are already several measures in place to address this. From setting up class expectations with student input, to Respectful Behaviours and even mindfulness and other programs encouraging students to manage negative emotions it is difficult to visualise further additions to this and what impact this may also have on other important curriculum provisions.

Likewise, more training for teachers in dealing with disruptive behaviour is a ‘Band-aid’ solution at best. As previously mentioned, with problematic behaviours presenting in so many different ways, whether general strategies and ideas will be useful is worthy of some scepticism. There has been some talk of this also forming a larger part of Initial Teacher Education courses, and on the surface that seems like a reasonable idea. However, when it must be considered that each school has their own approaches to addressing challenging behaviours, and each and every class a teacher will be involved with has differing needs, again a general smattering of advice and theory behind approaches to dealing with problematic behaviour is likely to be good for exactly the amount of time the potential teacher studies the subject; after which point the knowledge is likely to become fairly obsolete. Having said this, there are evidence-based strategies that have proven fairly reliable with a range of minor disruptions, but these are not the main problem in schools, with the Senate report suggesting the intensity and frequency of higher-level disruptive behaviours is on the rise.

One of the other ideas was to conduct a yearly survey of students regarding the school’s behavioural culture and learning climate. The thing is, they already do this! The Attitudes To School survey has been in operation for years, and the reliability of the data is questionable. Students now complete so many of these surveys that they groan out loud when presented with another one. They often rush through in an effort to get it over and done with as soon as possible, which suggests there is not a great deal of complex thought behind the messages they convey and therefore the value of the data is questionable.

My biggest concern relates to a quote from Australian Education Research Organisation (AERO); Dr Jenny Donovan, who is quoted as saying “By refining their classroom management, teachers will see increased student focus on learning and fewer disruptions, which will subsequently enable teachers to focus more on teaching, leading to improved outcomes for all students”. So what is wrong with this you ask? There is absolutely merit in teachers refining their practices to improve their teaching and the environment for all students, but that’s not the issue here. Where in this is there any responsibility placed on the instigators? Where is the mention of responsibility of families in ensuring their children can make appropriate decisions in relation to their behaviour? Why does responsibility for this fall exclusively on the teacher? Yes, this is over-simplifying the issue somewhat, as there are many, many obstacles to families and individual students reaching the desired levels of appropriate behaviour, but there is absolutely no mention of responsibility for the behaviour being laid at the feet of anyone but the teacher. I understand that politically, to call on families to lift their game in this regard amounts essentially to career suicide. However, the sheer lack of mention of anyone other than teachers here could be interpreted as once again placing them at the centre of the problem, and this is both unfair and counter-productive - teachers are constantly told via the media they are not doing a good enough job, which has led to a universal feeling of being under-appreciated and unrecognised for the difficulties the role entails. During the COVID debacle, people finally began to realise the challenges of teaching, but how quickly that has faded and we are now only too happy, it seems, to once again load up on teachers.

In any argument, any circumstance, any negotiation, there must be some productive input from both sides, and if students and/or their families are not prepared to meet teachers at least part of the way in dealing with inappropriate behaviours, then we might as well surrender to the current circumstances and defeatedly state “Well, we tried”. Teachers have unfairly bore the brunt of problematic behaviour (both in obstacles to them doing their best work, and then the insistence that it is their problem to fix) for too long and it is time to redress the balance of responsibility, and support this with actions that support, rather than undermine our teachers.