Research Report

Why do young
people misbehave at school?

Introduction

The occurrence of difficult and unruly student behaviour, which has taken place in
universities in nearly every part of the globe, has drawn attention to comprehensive studies
into how the sources of such actions are to be identified (Rahimi & Karkami, 2015). This
thesis elucidates the question "Why do young people misbehaviour in school? ' and
analysing the reasons for the misbehaviour of the students, in investigating common
misconduct such as Student misbehaviours such as disturbing verbal communication,
continuous work avoidance, prancing, disruption in educational activity, harassing
classmates, verbal insults, defiance, and hostilities, (Sun & Shek, 2012) and synthesizing
results of the literature and among the participants, discussing theory on the management
of classrooms such as psychoeducational approaches: Goal theory and Choice theory
(Nobile & Lyons, 2017).

Literature review

Student misbehaviour includes negative school behaviours, disrespect, non-engagement,

unnecessary social behaviour, problem-based participation and general upheaval (Croom &
Moore, 2003; Johnson et al., 2017; Plax et al., 1986; Johnson, Goldman, & Claus, 2019).
The disengagement of students in Australia has been seen as a significant issue affecting the
results of teaching (Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership, 2013).
Engagement is not conceptualized as an attribute of the student but rather as an alterable
state of being that is highly influenced by the capacity of school, family, and peers to
provide consistent expectations and supports for learning (Reschly & Christenson as cited in
Christenson, Reschly, Wylie, 2012). In the research literature, the complex nature of the
engagement is also reflected, which defines engagement in three aspects:
behavioural, emotional and cognitive engagement, absence of these leading to low
academic achievement, high student boredom and alienation; and high drop-offs
(Christenson, Reschly, Wylie, 2012).

Method

The use of carefully qualitative interview and ethical conduct was maintained, all
participants knew the main question of the interview that was to give opinions on the
possible cause behind school students' misbehaviour.

Analysis

A thematic analysis to interpret our information and Like the relatable theory, thematic
analysis suggests that researchers should allow meaning to emerge from data instead of
forcing data into theoretical or conceptual frames previously established from other
datasets (Braun & Clarke; Glaser & Strauss, as cited in Johnson, Goldman, & Claus, 2019).
The following are the common themes and subthemes:

Themes Subthemes
Disengagement Bored, Lazy or under Peer Pressure

Biological factors Low intellect

Health issues
Psychological Factors Attention Seekers
Poor upbringing
Failure to see relevance in studies
Personal Issues at home
Institutional Factors Ineffective teaching
Poor classroom management by teacher or
other staff
Lack of motivation
Equal Responsibility No coordination between school and
parents and other people responsible
Contrary to prevalent concepts, parents being held responsible by teachers and vice versa.
The participant in this qualitative research blamed the negative consequences that affected
students and that could be the parents themselves or teacher blaming students for teaching
methods and absence of motivation. Teachers often attributed misbehaviour to household
and student factors rather than teachers or schools (Kulinna, 2007).

Comparing and contrasting – literature review and interview findings

Adolescence is a time of rapid growth, with key developmental tasks capturing open
biological and physiological changes, significant cognitive progress, emotional maturation
and new social relationships (Christenson, Reschly & Wylie, 2012). Some of these factors
were discussed in the interviews, dissecting how they affect in negative behaviour, except
for a few distinct views; the outcomes of the surveys are mostly related. The participant A,
B&D both parents and teacher made it clear that responsibility lies mainly with the students
and then with the variables that influence their behaviour. First, the family and then the
society were the primary variables influencing student behaviour. According to them,
the teacher and college come after that, because parents and peers influence students
more. Whereas participant B, a teacher also clarified that “Students misbehave in school
when their overall wellbeing as well as individual learning is not being catered for”. So partly
the fault for the misbehaviour of the students resides also in the poor management of the
classroom and all these factors lead to the disengagement of the students. While participant
E also referred to the disengagement as the main factor, she emphasized bored and lazy
students. Students who often complain that a class is boring or that the teacher is awful to
listen to. Yet these individuals chose the courses, the teachers and the school! Is a school
that poor or is it just lazy for students? (Smith, 2009). Another subtheme emerged was that
students act to impress their peers in a certain manner. All participants mentioned that
students tend to act in a manner (positive or negative) that craves attention because they
want to fit into a specific group or become popular among friends, disrupts the entire class,
or sometimes leads to serious crimes. Participant c, pre-service teacher, provided real-life
event "My cousin began to behave poorly in school to attract a certain group's attention and
eventually became part of that group." A prevalent desire for students, some more than
others, is to be at the centre of attention. Taking part by mocking others, swearing or just
speaking out, are some ways in which learners are looking for more spotlight can be
misbehaving ("What Are the Causes of Misbehaviours in the Classroom?”, 2015).

Implications and Personal Reflection

This research has implied that all students should feel appreciated, known and cared for.
Through constructive communication, a positive relationship must be developed between
students, teachers and parents. The two main points of view on classroom psychoeducation
and student-oriented perspective are strategies that help students make better choices,
such as goal theory, and choice theory (Nobile & Lyons, 2017).

Conclusion

Although the results of interviews and of literature indicate similar factors, certain
statements seemed to be contradictory for the participants. But the key findings were
adequate to give an insight into the common reason for the misconduct of students in
schools.