|
What language should we use in describing pupils’ behaviour? |
|
|
|
Research taster
Pinpointing pressure points regarding behaviour can help you focus your efforts. Behaviour audits can be used to identify pupils, groups of pupils, lessons, subjects or times of the day that represent a behaviour risk.  Would you and your colleagues find this approach helpful in tackling pupil behaviour in your school? A first step might be to establish a common language for describing behaviour characteristics.
Your evidence
How far do you and your colleagues describe features of students’ behaviours in the same way? One way of discovering this is close observation and analysis of behaviour. A group of you could choose a pupil known to you all and write a list of at least twelve characteristics of that pupil’s behaviour. Working together you could then look at each item on the list and decide whether it is:
• an observable aspect of behaviour such as “wears baggy trousers” or “stands with hands in pockets”.
• an assumption about the person’s behaviour such as “likes to be trendy” or “feels relaxed” or “susceptible to peer pressure”
Consider the two categories of observations. Which category contains the more valid information? Consider the idea that assumptions can be misleading: the person in the baggy trousers may only have hand-me-downs from an older brother or sister and may dream of wearing drainpipes!
Can you recall any time when you made a wrong assumption about someone, or someone made an incorrect assumption about you? How did it happen? How did you feel?
(Adapted from Reflective Activity 11-1a)
Moving forward
Would a useful way forward be to discuss with your colleagues the advantages and disadvantages of using more specific language when discussing or writing about children’s behaviour? For example, which would be a preferred phrase?
- “She is lazy,” or “She does not produce much work”
- “He is aggressive” or “He hits other children.”
Would you find it helpful to agree a set of terms for describing children’s behaviour?
 Find out more
Cooper, P. et al (2000) Positive Alternatives to Exclusion London and New York:
Routledge/Falmer
Hallam, S., Castle, F., Rogers, L., et al (2005) Research and Evaluation of the Behaviour Improvement Programme Research Report RR 702, London: DfES
|
