What are the most-common reasons for challenging behaviour?
Challenging?
In an educational setting behaviour might be defined as ‘challenging’ for many reasons. Therefore it is important that every school has a definition of the type of behaviour that it considers to be challenging so that it can be communicated to learners, teachers and parents.
When challenging behaviour does occur, the school-specific definition can be used to offer support to the learner, but it must also be used to offer support for the teacher too.
The needs of teachers who are dealing with challenging behaviour must not be
I am pleased to see that behaviour is being viewed as a form of “communication”. Often this is forgotten in schools and is seen as a challenge. William Glasser said all we do is behave and I believe we use those behaviours that we are familiar with (have learnt from others) and those that have been successful (discuss successful!) for us in the past. The four areas I like to focus on that form our needs from a teaching point of view and can easily be remembered through my simple mnemonic are: Power, Belonging, Choice and Fun. PBCF, or Please Be Child Friendly. Making sure we meet these needs for engagement can significantly reduce both non compliant behaviour as well as unmask compliant non learning behaviour.
For more on compliance being a learning disability see my article: http://wp.me/p2LphS-kd
For more on PBCF the link is: http://wp.me/p2LphS-4
Thanks for your comments. I agree with your point about engagement. Relationships are critical. I shall read your article
I look forward to any comments you may make.
Does he cover attachment disorder and controlling behaviour (i.e. responses to attachment developmentally and trauma in children – particularly those in care or SEMH)? If so, it looks pretty well thought through and could be a very useful little book particularly for NQT’s.
Thanks for your query. The book is not solely about children and nor is it directly aimed at teachers – although people who work in the area of trauma such as Mike Armiger are using parts of the book in courses relating to trauma I would say that if you are searching for a book about attachment and trauma then Inner Story is not the book for you. I do suggest intervention methods in terms of responding to challenging behaviour – methods that worked when, many years ago, I was appointed to help turn around a special school that was in special measures. They are respectful techniques and they work with children and adults. i also ankle the issue of why we all behave the way we do.
In relation to NQTs, I have had feedback from NQts who have found aspects of the Inner Story useful – particularly the first 4 chapters.
If you would like to see two teacher reviews of the book please look at the reviews of @Ezzy_Moon and @Lenabellina (neither of whom I know. Search the hashtag #InnerStory
Tim
This is glaringly simplistic, and could be counterproductive in improving the teacher whose ‘boring’ lessons drive much maligned behaviour to begin with.
Thanks for taking to time to make a comment.
First of all, this is a blog and therefore written in a undifferentiated style aimed at a broad range of access. Clearly you think it is ‘glaringly simplistic’.
If it is helpful please read some of my more academic writing about behaviour from the days when I lectured at The Institute. This is more about the complex relationship between curriculum, pedagogy, behaviour and the intersubjective nature of participation in learning.
Admittedly, these were written a long time ago but it will give you a sense of the framework from which the intended functional analysis in the blog emerges.
I left the field of education years ago (taught in mainstream and special education and then became a lecturer) but I would be interested in what people who are currently teachers think about the assumption you make that “boring lessons drive much maligned behaviour to begin with”
Tim
Hi Tim
I hope that your other writings are indeed more insightful into the causes of behaviour in students. The point i make however doesn’t need me to venture into that space, as i am referring to the article that was published via Teacher Toolkit’s twitter, a medium potentially reaching thousands of educators. Let’s look at the very 1st and therefore most imperative cause of poor behaviour cited: the wanting of attention. The fact is that if a student presents behaviour that can be characterised by such a despairing fact, the teacher needs to be extremely skilful in communicating empathy, as opposed to reducing such behaviour to a manipulative effort by the student. As soon as the teacher entertains such a negative and pessimistic understanding of student motivation, the slope is indeed very slippery, and pragmatically, incredibly ineffective in adjusting the behaviour.
In terms of the boring lesson link, i have yet to teach a class where a lesson that didn’t engage students didn’t result in poor behaviour. My concern with your article is that teachers who fail to engage students by delivering lessons that lack relevancy are able to justify such poor teaching by blaming it on the student. This notion of relevancy should then be the first question teachers need to ask about causes of behaviour, because otherwise it contradicts the idea that young people’s first instinct is to learn.
Agree with many of your points
Hi Paul,
No need for you to venture into another space. Let me reply to your comments on this particular space
Your assumption that the list is hierarchical rather than interactive is an interesting one.
I fundamentally disagree with you about the perception of behaviour being related to attention as being a ‘negative and pessimistic understanding’ by the teacher. It is a one way – amongst many – of making meaning of what is happening before your eyes.
Lets take an example of a self-injurious child with Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties in a special school. The behaviour may be sensory, its function may be to achieve environmental reinforcers, it might be a communication to end a task or escape from it and it might be to gain attention. It cannot be assumed to be about one aspect. If the teacher has a working model about the function of the behaviour then the underlying communication may be understood. Not negatively, not judgmentally, not to blame but in order to help a young person be better at critically interacting with their environment.
What about a child with SLD in a special school who can vocalise but has extremely limited language and is persistently screaming? It could be any singular one of these reasons or a combination. If the function was to gain attention so that the teacher can establish whether the young person is, for example, hungry, in pain, uncomfortable or distressed then the teacher can respond appropriately.
The same ways of making meaning apply for a young person with complex emotional needs in the type of alternative provision for those who have been excluded from mainstream mainly due to behaviour-related reasons.
The same for someone presenting with challenging behaviour in a mainstream classroom.
Having been a teacher in all of these contexts of course I understand that the environment the teacher provides is a factor that relates to behaviour (our environment is always influential in terms of our behaviour) but the teacher also has to reflect on what the behaviour means for the child. It is about communication on behalf of the student not manipulation.
There is no intention in this blog to suggest that teachers should blame challenging behaviour on the students and take no responsibility for creating a responsive, engaging environment. Your assumption that the list is hierarchal may have taken you to that conclusion?
William Glasser said “All we do is behave”. That behaviour is influenced by our choices and our experiences. Behaviour of any kind is symptomatic of us attempting to meet our needs. We recognise and accept Mazlow’s hierarchy but in teaching I think there are specific learning needs associated with engagement. Using Glasser and my experience (I started teaching in 1977) as a foundation I would suggest four. These are: power, belonging, choice and fun. These need to be put into a teaching and learning context. Power is about having a voice. Belonging about being recognised. Choice about learning behaviour options and consequences. Fun is to be forged from achievement. If our needs are not being met (imagine being powerless, ignored, unknown, having no choice and being “bored”) then we behave in ways we know in order to address the lack of our needs being met. The “class clown” has been with us ever since the first teaching and learning relationship for a reason. Poor behaviour is our judgement as a teacher and we mean a lack of engagement and possibly disrespect. Such behaviour we regard as poor may be the learnt behaviour of the student that exits him from one environment where his/her needs are not being met and into another where they may be. Poor behaviour can also be the demanding of attention, either by overt volunteering for example or by refusing to follow instructions, but we tend to respond to those most forcefully that threaten our control of the class. Students can elect to mentally remove themselves too, a sort of compliance but without engagement, daydreamers perhaps! I would recommend reading Bandura at this point who concludes that those who are most successful are those that have learnt the greater number of strategies for dealing with situation in which they find themselves. Some of our students have few or limited strategies for dealing with situations where their learning needs are not being met, some have greater self efficacy and are therefore more able to deal with situations where needs are not being externally met by finding ways of satisfying them themselves.
Teachers who naturally meet the four learning needs are in my experience are more successful with a wider range of students and abilities than those who do not. My recommendation is always to plan to meet these needs in some way. Not all of them all of the time but most of them, most of the time.
Articles that may help explain this point of view in more detail include:
As a learner how important is self-belief http://wp.me/p2LphS-lg
Understanding Learning Needs http://wp.me/p2LphS-4
Kev
How do i figure out which type of behavior is being demonstrated? I have reason to believe that this behavior is 3/4 on your list. Is it possible that this behavior could be a combination of both?