When disruption is normalized: What about the kids who want to learn?

Schools are where we "teach the next generation how shared spaces work," writes Robert Pondiscio on Dispatch. Behavior norms have to be followed so teachers can teach and students can learn. Inclusion of the disorderly, disruptive and violent destroys the shared space.

Disorder can start small, he learned as a fifth-grade teacher at a South Bronx elementary school. "Behaviors once considered unacceptable become tolerated, then normalized." Eventually, "learning becomes secondary to managing chaos."

Teachers quit, destabilizing the school, he writes. School leaders are tempted to redefine their mission, making “social and emotional learning” a co-equal goal with academic instruction. (It's convenient to have a goal that isn't tested, so nobody can say it's not being met.)

"The moral dilemma at the center of discipline debates is almost invariably framed around the disruptive child," writes Pondiscio. "Suspending a student means excluding him from class. It means denying him access to an education. But allowing him to stay can deny opportunity to a far greater number of students."

It is in school where children first encounter the idea that their freedom ends where someone else’s rights begin. It is where they learn that effort precedes reward, that shared spaces require restraint, and that rules are not merely suggestions. If those lessons dissolve in the classroom, the effects . . . migrate outward into every other shared space and institution.

Expanding inclusion is a "moral achievement," Pondiscio writes. Schools should "offer all students the opportunity to participate in common classroom life." But, behavior that "undermines a school's purpose" -- which is learning -- should not be tolerated. "Learning requires the fragile conditions of order, attention, and shared norms." 

Teachers are fed up with students who ignore school rules, disrespect authority and disrupt classrooms, reports an EdWeek survey. Often, there are "no serious repercussions for students when they misbehave," teachers said in open-ended responses.

"Some teachers are clear about what their schools need to do: Remove students who misbehave, disrupt class, or are violent toward teachers or other students," writes Olina Banerji. Forty-four percent said "placing more students with 'behavioral challenges in a separate class or school' would have a major positive impact on how they manage their classrooms."

But removing students with behavioral disabilities from mainstream classrooms could conflict with inclusion rules in special-education law, she notes. Students are supposed to be in the “least restrictive environment” possible.

Teachers said they've considered quitting because of disruptive and violent students.

"We need to get rid of the laws/regulations that limit which students can be suspended and what they can be suspended for," a Georgia teacher told EdWeek.

Full inclusion is cheaper than staffing a separate classroom for violent and extremely disruptive students, said a California teacher. But "those views need to be reexamined."

Teachers aren't supposed to touch a student who's throwing a tantrum. Instead, they're told to clear all the other students out, so they won't be injured. "When one student trashes a classroom, I don't think it's fair that the other 18 kids have to evacuate the room," a Vermont teacher said. "The student causing the harm should be the one removed."