Teachers aggression towards misbehaving pupils 23

Theories that explain teacher misbehaviour

There are three competing yet interrelated theoretical explanations for
teachers misbehaviour towards challenging pupils. Each is plausible.

Attribution theory
The first of the possible explanations for a teachers use of aggressive
disciplinary techniques is attribution theory (the no one can be expected
to cope with these kinds of kids response). This approach is based on
attribution theory as developed by Fritz Heider (1958), Edward Jones and
Keith Davis (1965) and Harold H. Kelley (1973), and Bernard Weiners
attributional theory of achievement motivation (1985, 1994). The idea is
that teachers may use aggressive techniques with such children because
kids like this dont and cant be expected to understand, appreciate or
respond to more reasonable classroom management techniques. The
reasons are typically seen to reside in the pupils natures or upbringing.
Consequently, when a pupil exhibits challenging behaviour that
teachers find confronting they may respond by giving the pupil what
kids of this kind deserve. According to this explanation, pupils who
deny a teachers legitimate authority and act in a way which they clearly
understand is irresponsible and unfair, deserve (maybe, need) to be put in
their place. Any resistance justifies an angry response from the teacher.
In addition, any class that acts irresponsibly deserves to be punished as a
group. Even if some pupils were not directly involved in the misbehaviour,
they didnt try to prevent it.

Efficacy theory
The second theoretical explanation for a teachers use of aggressive
discipline techniques relates to low levels of perceived self-efficacy (the
Im hopeless at this response). This view is based on Albert Banduras
theory of self-efficacy (1994). Within this conceptualisation, when teachers
view their resources (emotional and professional) as inadequate to deal
with the management situation they confront, they feel incompetent and
unable to cope.
Francis Fuller and Oliver Bown (1975) provide some insight into
the relevance of efficacy theory to the question of why sensible teachers
occasionally do counterproductive things to pupils they like. First, they
postulate that the things that concern (and stress) teachers generally change
as a teacher gains more experience and self-confidence. Initially, teachers
have concerns about themselves. The questions that dominate are along
the lines of: will I look right? can I appear knowledgeable? and so on.

24 Understanding Pupil Behaviour

However, once teachers realise that they have the personal

characteristics required to occupy the role of a teacher, there is a movement
from concerns about the self to concerns about the task of teaching: how
do I question? what is an efficient way to explain a concept? It is only when
these concerns are allayed, as teachers become competent in and confident
about their teaching abilities, that the next level of concern is reached. It
is at this third level that teachers become fully aware of and concerned
about what is best for pupils, for example what style of interaction and
what sort of content best suit individual pupils.
The second aspect of Fuller and Bowns model relevant to explaining a
teachers aggressive behaviour towards pupils is as follows. Teachers who
have graduated from focusing on concerns about themselves and the task,
and who are mainly occupied with ways of designing instruction most
relevant to pupils needs, will regress whenever they feel very threatened
or insecure. That is, when confronted by a situation they perceive as very
stressful, teachers may move from focusing on what is best for pupils to
being relatively more concerned about their own needs. At these times,
they will act to protect themselves even if it is at the expense of pupils.
There is a second way in which efficacy theory can explain teachers
use of aggressive disciplinary techniques. Some teachers may choose
such strategies because they see it as in the interests of all (including the
misbehaving pupil) to suppress misbehaviour in a manner they perceive
as extremely efficient. Sarcasm, for example, can quickly shut down many
pupils. So can yelling in anger.

Attachment theory
The third of the dominant potential theoretical explanations for a teachers
aggressive and unproductive responses to challenging pupils is based on
attachment theory (Bowlby, 1975, 1981, 1982).
A teachers feelings of rejection and hurt, related to the perceived
unfairness of the behaviour of a challenging pupil, promote an emotional
withdrawal and often an aggressive response from the teacher. This stuff
them reaction from teachers is thought to stem from insecure styles of
attachment. Such teachers may be unable to respond to young people
with affection or support, be unable to trust them, or may need and want
emotional support from their pupils and be unable to cope with apparent
rejection.
Imagine an extremely dedicated mathematics teacher. For this teacher
the study of mathematics is one of the most significant pursuits in the
world. She devotes many hours to lesson preparation, working late into
the night, to ensure that her next lesson is interesting, relevant and as
engaging as possible. Through such a captivating lesson she knows she

Teachers aggression towards misbehaving pupils 25

will gain great admiration from her pupils. However, when she presents
her baby to the class, a particularly challenging pupil destroys the process
she worked so hard to develop. He not only rejects her baby, but also
destroys it. The extreme sense of rejection and hurt she experiences may
cause her to react very aggressively.
A study that can shed some light on explanations for teachers use
of aggressive management techniques is a survey of 507 primary and
secondary teachers in Australia (Lewis, 2004).
Teachers indicated how often they used techniques such as:

yell angrily at pupils who misbehave

keep a class in because some pupils misbehave
make sarcastic comments to pupils who misbehave, etc.

They then reported why they did these things. There were no statistically
significant differences between the support for alternative reasons provided
by primary and secondary staff. The reasons most commonly selected by
teachers were:
I do it because Im frustrated.
It allows the lesson to continue.
It makes the pupil listen to me.
It puts me back in control.

Between 40 and 61 per cent of teachers agreed or strongly agreed that

these were reasons that explained their aggressive disciplinary behaviour.
These findings suggest support for efficacy theory. In contrast, the reasons
least likely to be selected as relevant were:
If I dont, the pupil wont learn to behave properly.
It makes me feel better.
The pupil deserves it for behaving so badly.

Only 20 per cent of teachers agreed or strongly agreed with each of

these reasons. Consequently, there appears less support for both attribution
and attachment theory. However, much more work is required before the
contribution of the competing theories can be fully appreciated.

Teachers self-defeating attitudes

Since efficacy theory appears most relevant to explaining teachers
unproductive treatment of challenging pupils, a brief analysis of teachers
attitudes is useful. Michael Bernard (1990) has written extensively on how