Why do US high school students choose to be disruptive in class?

Question

The high school students know the consequences, but yet they continue to choose the disruptive paths.
Do the students still need that attention to prove their self-worth?
Do the students find it more rewarding with the consequences?
What gains do the students feel like they are getting by getting into trouble?
Does it make the students feel better to be in trouble?
Is the classroom discipline and structure so unbearable that disruption is the only way out?
Are the US students too spoiled with too many choices? Should students be offered less choices?
What are the reasons?

I like to hear constructive comments, not just sarcastic remarks.

http://360.yahoo.com/maestromath

Answer 1

Hi, as a high school history teacher, I have a lot of experience in this subject. All of your questions are partial answers. Every answerer so far is also right. It's for attention, humor, boredom, etc.

There are other reasons as well:

Far too many kids are ignored or neglected by the adults in their lives. For many, acting out is not only a way to get attention, it's the only way they know how to interact with adults.

For some it's a cry for help. Many of my students have parents who are chemically dependent, incarcerated, or both. Many have been sent to live with grandparents who messed up the first time around and are no better at parenting now. I have students who are clinically depressed and cut themselves. I have one student whose father killed his mother, then turned the gun on himself last summer.

Also, many kids come from multi-media environments where there are always commotion and alternative sounds and images competing for their attention.

Then there are the ADD and ADHD kids who are mainstreamed into our classrooms. How normal is it for anyone to sit for hours indoors, especially children?

Another big reason for misbehavior is the absurd antagonism of high level educational administrations toward tracking students. So instead of scheduling all of the low-functioning kids in one class and the college-bound in another, the touchy-feely legacy of the 60's and 70's still haunts our classrooms. What we end up with is an impossible balancing act. I have classes with sophomores who read at the 2nd grade level mixed in with those who read at the collegiate level. The low kids feel dumb and the high kids feel bored and superior. No wonder they misbehave.
---------------------------------
My previous answer seemed so incomplete that I want to add more:

No Child Left Behind's emphasis on multiple choice testing can sometimes discourage active learning such as simulations and projects. It kills some of the joy of learning.

Social promotion is a huge enemy. Kids who are woefully credit-deficient, fail multiple classes, and skip out on summer school are routinely promoted anyway. The message is abundantly clear to students. We act like bad parents, enabling kids in a way that really disables them by not holding them accountable. This breeds a culture of failure and poor behavior.

Culture is another culprit. Compare the attendance at any football game to that of your Open House night. Our society values athletics over academics. Being smart is not cool and we (parents and schools) do a terrible job clarifying for the kids the relationship between education and opportunity. Our society has also become awful at delaying gratification. And our classrooms are overcrowded. Combine these factors with our cultural loss of the concept of shame and it's a wonder that we get any cooperation at all.

And the wonder is that most kids do cooperate and participate actively in their own learning adventure. I'm looking forward to seeing the little dears this coming Tuesday.

Answer 2

I'm a high school teacher so I have some experience here.

First of all most high school students are not disruptive and want to learn. But, yes, there are some students who do not want to learn or don't think they can learn who might seek to try to bring the class down to their level.

There are also students who are immature or who have ADHD and don't take Their drugs who are constantly seeking The teacher's or other student's attention. This is also disruptive.

There are also a few students who have basically only learned how to "beat the system" in their prior years in school and have not put any energy into learning the subject of the course. They can, but not always, be disruptive. But I discourage non performers from staying in my classes.

Most students work these issues out after they finish the 9th grade. There is a significant drop in the percentages of disruptive students when you move from the 9th to the 10th grade. This is the reason why I will not teach 9th graders as I want to teach and not baby sit or entertain students while they are bouncing off the walls.

I don't give my students a choice as to whether they learn or not or are disruptive or not. I teach sciences and mathematics and don't have the time to entertain malcontents. I fail any students who don't perform up to a minimum standard. If they are disruptive, and a parent teacher conference doesn't resolve the problem, I get them out of the class as soon as possible and move them into other easier courses with other students in classes where they cannot interfere with students who want to learn. Guidance councilors don't like to do that but it is the only thing that makes sense.

If teachers are not hard nosed about disruptive students they will destroy the class. It is the responsibility of a teacher to prevent that from happening.

Answer 3

basically teachers feel students OUGHT to like what the teacher does or says, classes can be so much fun if the teachers really do their homework at preparing them. kind hard to find humble teachers who acknowledge that their classes have a lot to be desired from. if you were to turn the tables around a see each student as a potential client whose money is your salary, then you would do something about you class instead of the students. teachers are very much like mothers in law, some do help you with marriage , other expect you to worship them just because you married their most precious treasure. teachers can do a lot
help not filling the students´ minds but instead making the most of the best from the students´ abilities. we want student to be critical but when they judge our work, our ego emerges then the passive students become more attractive, 20 years ago i started teaching prep school students. 12 of those i spent them trying to fit them into my kitty box mind, then the moment I CHANGED by fitting my work into their interests and real world and not the other way around,everything magically changed, and i still feel i have a long way to go. Maybe i sound too romantic but most of the book i have read pertaining effectiveness in the classroom view the student as the problem. i found these two sources very insightful. good luck

Answer 4

Honestly, I think it is becasue we decided that it's better to have teacher shot than to put a bruise on their hinies. I think we took corporal punishment out of the schools and look what has happened. Really they dont' care and you don't have anything of substance to punish them with. What is the worst thing you can do? Expell? ooo whoopie do they get a free vacation from school that is a real punishment there. Cmon you gotta do something else. Principles are all bark no bite so what do you expect the students take over the school because they are bound by the rules of a lefist liberal agenda which is prolific in the education setting. Good students should be rewarded with more choices and the like. I see bad students getting rewared with nintendo ds and all that if they just behave normally. THAT IS AN OUTRAGE! The normal kids should get much more and the kids that "work the system" and they do should get negative reinforcement or punishment. They need to know their place and you are telling them by your inaction and rewards system that it's ok to screw up and if you do we will reward you. HOW ASSININE IS THAT? It's a matter of common sense. Positively reinforce good behaviour and negatively reinforce or punish bad behaviour.

Answer 5

Your questions is huge. It could not be answered in a book, or even several books. I see from your profile you are a math teacher in a inner city school, so you are not just asking these questions out of intellectual curiosity, but out of experience.
You are on to a few things in your follow-up questions. Yes, students are seeking attention, they are looking for self-worth by acting out. Our culture has so comodified youth and provided so little support for kids especially where you teach. The question really should be look at in a larger culture context considering both the culture influences on our students and the role school are expected to play in that culture. School are expected to socialize students, teach class position, prepare students for their assigned place/job, and keep them busy so their parents can work. Children that can not see the benefit of all this culturization in their community are likely to act out.

Acting out gets attention.
Does it make them feel good?, and what are the gains? are the questions we need to be asking.

I believe part the issue is teacher training. As a Special Educator I was required a Graduate class in behavior management. Many of teacher education programs for regular educator addresses behavior only as part of a methods class.

More to come . . .

Answer 6

All of your reasons for disruptive students are accurate, as well as the ones offered by the history teacher. I can offer an additional one and pardon me if someone already said it:

In this age of electronic stimulation and over anxious parents, kids cannot interact with Mother Nature like they once did. For one, they think the only way to be entertained is through the computer or video games and parents are too fearful to let their kids play outdoors with other kids for the extremely rare possibility they will be taken.

Studies have shown that Mother Nature has a calming effect on people and allows for deep reflection and/or creative play. (The American Romantic movement a la Ralph Waldo Emerson knew this to be true and promoted it as cities started to become stressful and problematic places in the early 1800s).

Answer 7

I believe that the anwer to your question is due to a lack of student accountability. Many of the "top" thinkers in education have focused more on the students feelings and self esteem than on preparing students for becoming responsible adults. If you scold a student in front of the class then you are emabrrasing them. If you have them write sentences then you are devloping a loathing for writing. If you kick them out of class then you are singling them out and making them feel rejected. If you call the parents you often get a response of "what do you want me to do about it?" Also, many administrators do not suspend students for their behavior because it is easier to do nothing than to deal with parents who want to fight the school over every action. I feel that the true fault lies with an alarming societal attitude that people are not responsible for their actions and that it is the job of everyone else (besides the parents and student) to come up with solutions to the problem.

Answer 8

The most interesting, and, I think, appropriate, explanation of this phenomenon is what Ruby K. Payne calls "Generational Poverty."

Of course this explanation does not apply to the SES elite that still act out, but those can generally be put down to "spoiled" or not enough positive attention at home. (Forgive me if I sound dismissive.)

Payne explains 3 different SES sets with their own rules. Basically, those of the "GP" set do not live by the values that the "Middle Class" schools take for granted. They value relationships and reputation above longer term goals. Instant gratification is more fundamental.

Payne suggests that since we do not explicitly explain the school paradigm and the value of it, those who do not assume the same values and standards are left outside of the presumed paradigm.

This explains a lot of my students, and of course it is but one aspect, but I fear it would take a dissertation to get to the heart of the other varied and profound issues.

Good question, though!

Answer 9

I am also a high school history teacher and I think Snance comments are very good. I would like to add that we also live in a society that like to promote ideas that school is boring and that is cool to act out.

Good Luck!!!

Answer 10

The character of the "bad boy" is portrayed in a positive way in movies and television, having an influence on viewers who are young and impressionable. They see these character become the heroes and take measures to follow their example.

Personally I feel that's the legacy of the baby boomers. They created a new level of counterculture and portrayed it as the embodiment of the "American Spirit". They made the bad guy the hero and when the next generation took things a step further they refused to take blame for their creation. Yes, you DID start the fire!