Did schools used to have behavioral problems like they do now?

[Anonymous]

No. I went to public K-12 and don’t recall kids ever being disrespectful to the teacher, let alone swearing at teaching, hitting/throwing stuff in class, or being destructive. The worst the happens were kids talking when teacher was talking. But they would typically stop after a stern warning.

[Anonymous]

The change is the 23 years I've spent at the same school (various grade level and specialist positions). The causes IMO are multi pronged so there is no easy answer. Technology use for sure, but also massively increased focus on minute data points that come from excessive testing and retesting to gather that data. Our small group reading intervention groups do computer testing one day every week--that's a loss of 20% of their instructional time, to gather more data points that don't necessarily improve instruction, because the computer testing is considered more reliable than the teachers' anecdotal records. The entire discipline system schools use relies on rewards rather than the consequences that are sometimes needed, and a misapplication of trauma-based approaches means kids get lots of sympathy but maybe not the boundaries they need. As a result of behavior and the data demands, teachers get burned out, so there's a steady flow of new teachers who have not yet developed strong teaching and management skills. And every instructional choice (at least in Title I schools) is focused on improving student performance on standardized tests. We've neglected writing instruction in my state--because it's not formally assessed and tied to accreditation in elementary schools. Not to mention the cultural changes that influence student behavior, specifically disrespect of peers, adults, and authority figures, a sense that school is not important or relevant, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The change is the 23 years I've spent at the same school (various grade level and specialist positions). The causes IMO are multi pronged so there is no easy answer. Technology use for sure, but also massively increased focus on minute data points that come from excessive testing and retesting to gather that data. Our small group reading intervention groups do computer testing one day every week--that's a loss of 20% of their instructional time, to gather more data points that don't necessarily improve instruction, because the computer testing is considered more reliable than the teachers' anecdotal records. The entire discipline system schools use relies on rewards rather than the consequences that are sometimes needed, and a misapplication of trauma-based approaches means kids get lots of sympathy but maybe not the boundaries they need. As a result of behavior and the data demands, teachers get burned out, so there's a steady flow of new teachers who have not yet developed strong teaching and management skills. And every instructional choice (at least in Title I schools) is focused on improving student performance on standardized tests. We've neglected writing instruction in my state--because it's not formally assessed and tied to accreditation in elementary schools. Not to mention the cultural changes that influence student behavior, specifically disrespect of peers, adults, and authority figures, a sense that school is not important or relevant, etc.

I 100% agree about the sympathy without boundaries. The students who have been through trauma benefit the most from caring boundaries and expectations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They used to be able to suspend or expel kids and move disruptive kids to self-contained programs. Now the trend is to pretend like a teacher can handle a classroom with wildly divergent learning levels while also tackling problem behavior in the name of inclusion. I think the pendulum will swing the other way over time, but right now it's bad.

This at least matches the observable facts.

[Anonymous]

I just finished year 25 in the classroom.

For argument's sake, let's say 3-5% of students are going to have serious behavioral problems, for whatever reason. I am not saying that those kids are bad, just that they are not able or not willing to function in a regular classroom without extreme behaviors. Those kids used to be suspended and over, sent to alternative programs, or put in full time special education classrooms, even at young ages. They didn't have a big effect on the rest of the kids, because they were rarely present.

Now we keep those kids in class because we want them in school. When they get dysregulated, we clear the room. We have extensive behavior plans. There are reward systems. The class essentially revolves around this child and his or her moods, for YEARS.

Let's say there's another 10% of kids who would have behavior issues, but ones that a teacher would typically be able to handle. Now they have an already-high level of disruption in the room, and in their judgment, the student with extreme behaviors doesn't seem to experience negative consequences. They escalate and feed off of each other.

The tone of the room is now completely different. You've got another, say, 20% in the room, who would be fine if the vibe of the room was fairly calm and predictable. Now they are following the lead of the instigators, or they are acting out from their own stress because this classroom is tense, chaotic, and unhappy.

We've gone from 10% of kids with mild misbehavior to now maybe 35%, many of whom now have seriously disruptive or extreme behaviors. The other kids are along for the ride, either trying to learn in the chaos, drifting along with their own needs unmet, even becoming literally traumatized by the physical violence occurring near them.

Admin tells the teacher to try forming relationships, make their lessons more engaging, etc. One training FCPS just put its teachers through said that we need to stop calling it misbehavior but instead "stress behavior," and instead of trying to stop it, figuring out what is stressing the child out and reduce the stressor. All responsibility is on the teacher.

This was all done with good intentions. It didn't work.

The kid we are keeping in class is still not learning, and now most of the other kids (many of whom also have trauma, disadvantaged backgrounds, and/or disabilities) aren't either.

[Anonymous]

Yes, the equity/inclusive policies have some great advantages but there are also downsides.

I put a lot of the blame on parents also. If we got in trouble in school, we got in twice as much trouble at home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All of the above combined is the perfect storm and why it is so complicated.
-screen addiction
-SM/societal pressures
-parenting roles have changed from Dr Spock to gentle parenting
-schools being measured by numbers of POC suspended/expelled (higher numbers = not good and administrators can get in trouble)
-less discrete classes/more inclusion means kids aren't getting the services/supports they need to be successful
-special ed funding has beed decimated because the LRE (Least Restrictive Environment) is cheaper

The result is what we are all seeing:
-burnt out, exhausted teachers, most doing their very best in an awful situation
-administrators who's hands are tied, what consequences can they give to students who at best have parents won't follow through, and at worst will have parents sue, and at the same time having high consequences gets them in trouble with their bosses
-disruptive kids not having consequences which leads to more and bigger disruptions
-disregulated kids not getting the help and services so that they can get the education they deserve
-neurotypical kids not getting the education they deserve

100% PP. Do you work in education?

How could you tell 😉

Formerly in Special Ed. The disservice we are doing to this population is unconscionable. I couldn't be part of the problem any longer, and left

[Anonymous]

Every generation says this.

I went to school in the late 1960s/early 1970s at one of the top public schools in this country their were fights, but no one got expelled. We had a shooting gallery in the basement. Smoking in the quad. Skipping school was the norm. Dropouts, teen pregnancy, etc. Directly next door we had St Anthony's, where the priests molested kids and parents looked the other way. If a child was born with issues, they were sent away to live institutionalized.

Spare us. The stupidity of this thread. Schools are not the problem; you know about things more because people talk about it and put it on social media.

[Anonymous]

Marylander here. We had discipline in the home and at school. Students were suspended or expelled. If you were expelled you did farm or factory work.

The only time we left a classroom was for fire drills. Classrooms were never evacuated.
If a student acted up you went to the principals office. Your parents were called and also had to talk to the principal.

Students did not remain in class if they could not behave.

We had Votech and a lot of kids went to Votech. You could study cosmetology, automotive, plumbing, electrical etc.

There were a lot of teen pregnancies but the girls remained in high school.

I feel sad for teachers, admin and students of today.

[Anonymous]

20:53 poster again

Poor behavior was simply not tolerated in the classroom.

My high school was majority African American in a poor county in Maryland. I am white but was the minority race. In my 4 years of Maryland high school in a poor area classes were calm and respectful.

We did have occasional fights in the hallways. Those kids were suspended.

[Anonymous]

One of your kids was assaulted and both of your kids had classes evacuated weekly????

None of my three kids have had anything like that happen in their FCPS schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of your kids was assaulted and both of your kids had classes evacuated weekly????

None of my three kids have had anything like that happen in their FCPS schools.

DP and a teacher. It’s highly school dependent but it does happen.

[Anonymous]

I don't see these behavioral issues from more than a handful of kids in my kid's school. Most kids are well behaved and clearly have parents who instill good manners, whether they are more strict and using time outs or similar, or use a more intensive modern approach of talking it through with kids. Either way the kids are all right.

The kids who struggle either have special needs or difficult home lives, or both. There have always been kids like this. But yes, schools used to separate them into another classroom or use suspensions to keep their behavior from impacting classrooms, and now they often do not. But I don't find those kids totally undermine the classroom. Most of the time it's fine. My kid has only been evacuated due to the violent behavior of a classmate one time.

I do question what middle and high school will be like. Bigger kids, bigger problems. But my kid's elementary experience has been very similar to mine in terms of behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:One of your kids was assaulted and both of your kids had classes evacuated weekly????

None of my three kids have had anything like that happen in their FCPS schools.

FCPS is a huge school system. Not all schools in FCPS are identical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I just finished year 25 in the classroom.

For argument's sake, let's say 3-5% of students are going to have serious behavioral problems, for whatever reason. I am not saying that those kids are bad, just that they are not able or not willing to function in a regular classroom without extreme behaviors. Those kids used to be suspended and over, sent to alternative programs, or put in full time special education classrooms, even at young ages. They didn't have a big effect on the rest of the kids, because they were rarely present.

Now we keep those kids in class because we want them in school. When they get dysregulated, we clear the room. We have extensive behavior plans. There are reward systems. The class essentially revolves around this child and his or her moods, for YEARS.

Let's say there's another 10% of kids who would have behavior issues, but ones that a teacher would typically be able to handle. Now they have an already-high level of disruption in the room, and in their judgment, the student with extreme behaviors doesn't seem to experience negative consequences. They escalate and feed off of each other.

The tone of the room is now completely different. You've got another, say, 20% in the room, who would be fine if the vibe of the room was fairly calm and predictable. Now they are following the lead of the instigators, or they are acting out from their own stress because this classroom is tense, chaotic, and unhappy.

We've gone from 10% of kids with mild misbehavior to now maybe 35%, many of whom now have seriously disruptive or extreme behaviors. The other kids are along for the ride, either trying to learn in the chaos, drifting along with their own needs unmet, even becoming literally traumatized by the physical violence occurring near them.

Admin tells the teacher to try forming relationships, make their lessons more engaging, etc. One training FCPS just put its teachers through said that we need to stop calling it misbehavior but instead "stress behavior," and instead of trying to stop it, figuring out what is stressing the child out and reduce the stressor. All responsibility is on the teacher.

This was all done with good intentions. It didn't work.

The kid we are keeping in class is still not learning, and now most of the other kids (many of whom also have trauma, disadvantaged backgrounds, and/or disabilities) aren't either.

Absolutely spot on, and as a fellow teacher I recommend this message