Behaviour and Discipline in Schools

Memorandum submitted by Dr Jeremy Swinson

Dr Jeremy Swinson Principal Educational Psychologist Witherslack Group of Schools

1 Background.

I was formally Principal Educational Psychologists in Liverpool, where I had special responsibility for behaviour in schools. I am currently Principal Educational Psychologist for the Witherslack Group of School and Honoury Lecturer at Liverpool John Moores University. I have written extensively on behaviour in the classroom. My work was included in the Government White Paper ‘Excellence in Education’ (1995). My doctoral research (2005) concerned the relationship between teacher feedback and classroom behaviour.

2 Introduction

It is important that when making any recommendations your committee not only considers the opinion of those in the field but more importantly considers the evidence on which those opinions are based. The basis of his submission is research I and others have carried out in classrooms and schools in this country. My research shows that the key to good behaviour in the classroom is the skills of the teacher. Good teachers are characterised by the amount of positive feedback they give to their pupils (Harrop and Swinson, 2000). Good teachers provide three times more positive feedback than censure. As a consequence the pupils tend to be ‘on-task’ more and disruption occurs less often.

3 Training Teachers

We also showed, Swinson and Harrop (2005) that teacher could be trained to become more effective teachers by increasing the amount of positive feedback they provided to their pupils. This training was given to both primary and secondary teacher and contained what we called the ‘The Four Essential Steps to Classroom Management’. The fours steps were:

Always make your directions or instructions to the class very clear

As soon as you give any instruction acknowledge those children who are doing as they are told.

Keep children doing as you have directed by circulating the class acknowledging appropriate behaviour

Never ignore pupils who fail to respond to directions. Catch them early by praising children around them, redirecting their behaviour to that you want, if they continue not to respond give them clear choices as to what will happen if they continue not to do as they are told. If they choose not to respond then make them aware of a range of mild, but irksome penalties or sanctions that they are choosing rather than to do the work set.

In practice we found that if teacher adopt the positive approach as outlined in steps 1 to 3, then the use of sanctions and ‘tell off’ is reduced.

We found that when we trained teachers to use these methods, then the rate of ‘on-task’ behaviour, that is the rate at which we observed pupils doing as they were told increased from around 77% to almost 94%. We found all teachers found it relatively easy to follow this approach. We have found this type of training is effective in all types of school, even including SEBD schools whose pupils have severe behavioural and emotional difficulties, (Swinson and Cording, 1995).

4 The Whole School Approach

This positive approach to classroom management is most effective in schools where it is part of a whole school policy. A good example of this is contained in a very recent paper, Swinson (2010). All the staff in the school were encouraged to follow positive strategies in the classroom, which included the awarding of two merit stickers for good work and behaviour. These stickers were placed in the home work diary which was seen by the parents. This reward system proved popular with both pupils and indeed parents. The pupils liked it because ‘letting parents know about good work and behaviour’, has always been found to be the reward most favoured by pupils (see Harrop & Holmes, 1993).

5 The use of Sanctions or Punishments.

If teachers adopt positive approaches to pupil management as is outline above there will be less disruptive behaviour. However it is important that teachers never ignore disruptive behaviour. Mild but irksome punishments that are delivered on the day of the offence work best. We found 10 minute and 20 minute detentions, which under current rules can be delivered on the day of the offence with out prior notification to the parents, were very effective. There is no evidence that longer detentions are more effective. The most effective punishment as perceived by the pupils is their parents being informed about their misbehaviour.

6 Encouraging support from parents

Parents will not support schools if they feel schools are being unfair or that the school is ‘picking on’their child. We found that if schools are perceived to being fair by having a clear set of values and procedures and most importantly if through use of parent letters, merit stars or sticker (see above). If the parents are made aware that their child gets rewarded for being good then they are more likely to support the school over matters of discipline when they are bad.

7 Nature and level of challenging behaviour

Recent research in primary schools across the country Apter, Arnold and Swinson (2010) showed that in the over whelming majority of classroom the behaviour of the children is very good. This is backed up by recent Ofsted reports. Research by Grey and Sime as part of the Elton report (1988) showed that major incident of very disruptive behaviour involving threats or violence was in fact rare. I have conducted similar surveys in schools and found this to be the case. It would appear that what teachers find wearing is low level disruption such as talking out of turn, chatting etc.

8 The impact of challenging behaviour on teachers.

Low level disruptive behaviour is wearing on teachers. It can lead them to abandon the proactive positive strategies outlined above and become much more reactive. My research, Swinson and Knight (2006) should that on the whole teachers responded much more negatively to pupils with challenging behaviour by repeatedly telling them off. This is not an approach that is likely to change their behaviour. Teachers need to be trained to be proactive and to stop challenging behaviour before it starts by adopting a positive approach.

9 The impact of challenging behaviour on schools.

Disruptive behaviour of any kind prevents teachers from teaching and pupils from learning. It inevitably leads to low educational standards. Improving the behaviour of pupils in schools is probably the most effective way of raising school standards; see research surveyed by Hattie (2009) across the English speaking world.

10 Research on fixed term or permanent exclusions does not show it is very effective in changing behaviour. Similarly the effectiveness of various units, special schools and alternative provision is not strong and as Topping (1983) pointed out a very long time ago they can be a very expensive way of achieving very little.

11 Summary and recommendations

My research and that of others shows:

· Behaviour in schools is not getting any worse

· Behaviour of pupils is related to educational outcomes

· Teachers can be trained to become better classroom managers, at little cost leading to vastly improved behaviour and educational outcomes

· Schools can adopt school wide positive strategies which also impacts on outcomes

· Rewards to children need to involve parents

· Parents need to know the positives about their children if schools wish to have their support in punishments

· Punishments are most effective when they are mild, irksome and given the same day (Committee should consider law on this matter)

· Fixed and permanent exclusions aren’t effective in changing behaviour

· Alternative provision is expensive and not especially effective.

· The most effective use of resources would be in terms of staff training and support for staff in school when they are teaching. This support should be to teachers and not as present focussing on ‘supporting’ the child.

September 2010

References

Apter, Arnold & Swinson (2010) Educational Psychology in Practice 26 (2) 151-172

Harrop & Holmes (1993) Pastoral Care in Education March p30-35

Harrop & Swinson (2000) British Journal of Educational Psychology 70(4), 473-483

Hattie (2009) Visible Learning Routledge

Gray & Sime (1988) National Survey of Teachers in Elton Report, DES

Swinson & Cording (2002) British Journal of Special Education 29(3) 72-75

Swinson & Harrop (2005) Educational Studies 31(2) 115-129

Swinson & Knight (2007) Educational Psychology in Practice 23(3) 241-255

Swinson (2010) Pastoral Care in Education 28(3) 181-194

Topping (1983) Educational Systems for Disruptive Adolescents, Croom Helm