Is it Time for Tough Love?

Do we need to replace gentle approaches to managing behaviour with hardline discipline in our schools?

Dr Helen Street

There is no doubt about it, teachers are being stretched to their limits in 2024.? Ongoing staff shortages, natural disasters, poor student mental health and of course, that lingering pandemic, are all contributing to a perfect storm of school-based challenge and overwhelm. Indeed, many students have experienced disrupted educational journeys over the past few years and are consequently struggling with less social and emotional maturity than previous cohorts. Yet, these same students are also being exposed to an increasing volume of online influences encouraging them to ‘act like adults’ in a multitude of ways. It is of little surprise that there is ongoing concern about student attendance, student anxiety and student behaviour.

Poor student behaviour is undeniably a problem for students, it also creates very real stress for teachers. Teachers who are already navigating overload, reduced opportunities for time out, and increased pressure to deliver an extensive curriculum.? Moreover, the overwhelmed parents of disengaged children are often perceived as demanding, stressful, or unduly aggressive in their communication with school leaders and staff.

The overall situation equates to a circle of dominoes cascading down against each other, and creating a crumbling learning environment for all. Or so it sometimes seems. Certainly, we are not experiencing calm and respectful learning communities as a norm in western schools. Rather, we are experiencing increasingly chaotic environments filled with increasingly disengaged students and overwhelmed staff.?

What can we do?

To restore order and calm to our classrooms, the pendulum of behavioural management ideas has recently swung towards ideas of ‘tough love’.? Calls for student agency and relaxed rules are being replaced with a call for hardline discipline and zero-tolerance for disruption. Indeed, some schools in the UK have begun to popularize notions of silent classrooms leading to a rise in ‘neo-strict’ schools.? Most notably the Michaela Community School in London has become known as a school that is run like a military operation in a quest for academic success. The orderly and quiet classrooms associated with the school’s hardline approach are fueling its popularity on an increasingly global scale.? As soft sympathies fade, hard rules and discipline are beginning to sound like a workable idea.

My initial reaction to Michaela’s approach to behavioural management was astonishment mixed with despair. On face value, this seems such backward step in education evolution. ?It is an approach that suggests the difficulties of supporting self-determination can be solved by removing any chance of self-determination at all. ?Yet, although It is certainly not an environment that would suit everyone,? I have found no information to suggest that Michaela’s students are anything but enamored with their school. The cynic in me wonders if this is a sign of Stockholm syndrome at work. Yet, further examination of the school operations reveals something far more hopeful.? Despite its strict rules and high structure, the school promotes kindness and respectful relationships throughout. Moreover, there is a firmly held belief in each child’s potential for high levels of competency. As such, it appears that the school is in fact, meeting at least some of the key needs for student engagement, within an environment that feels safe if not free.

Still, I cannot imagine that this is a context my own children would have embraced, or indeed many other young people I meet. I suspect that the school has developed a very specific context that supports a specific type of student and family. As such, its success is in its carefully considered context, not in its specific strategies per se.

So, what can we do now?

If nothing else, one thing that caught my attention as a positive take-away from the Michaela School is its consistent and unified approach within every classroom. Some may thrive with such a high level of control, while others may suffer, but everyone is certainly treated in the same way. The school offers a context that is unified, and, at some level, this means it is a context that feels fair. It is also certainly a context that appears unique, and in here in lies the rub.

Every school context is unique, consisting of different people with different perceptions of what is working and what is not.? As such, I believe that any generalized approach to improving student behaviour and wellbeing is doomed to fail, if it is implemented simply because it appears to have worked ‘somewhere else’. It is simply not possible to change student attitudes, feelings and behaviours without reference to the unique context in which their attitudes, feelings and behaviours are being created.? Moreover, it is not possible to change individual behaviours, simply by telling students what you want them to do. Normative behaviours develop from the context in which they are created, not from the pages of a new program. Moreover, effective normative behaviours develop when they align with their context’s unique values and vision.

For example, no amount of talk about compassion will breed compassion in a context that favours constant competition over a more collaborative approach. Alternatively, no amount of strict discipline is going to support a peaceful class if the students perceive chaos to be the preferred norm.

Perhaps the answer to supporting positive behaviour and wellbeing in our schools lies within a clearer understanding of the unique possibilities and potential of each unique learning context. ?As such meaningful development is not about agreeing or disagreeing with schools such as Michaela, but in the building and broadening of all that is working well in the specific context of each school. Similarly, effective development needs to incorporate the challenging and changing of each norm that does not reflect the unique aims of the context in which it occurs. In this, we need to turn our attentions away from how non-comparable schools choose to support their students, to ensure we are supporting our own students well, in a way that fits with our own ideals.

Some students experience great relationships within their classes, but the overwhelm of tests and high expectations may mean many of the students are constantly anxious. These classrooms may wish to ?amplify their successful approaches to relationship building, while also aiming to redress approaches to achieving academic success.? In other classrooms, the workload may be perceived to be manageable but there may be a social norm supporting inter-group conflict. In these classes there is less needed to address work pressure, but time could be directed towards building a respectful social environment, with a focus on inclusion.

Overall, successful classes are classes in which there is a clear and consistent balance between freewill, flexible routines, structure and respect.? There is no absolute right or wrong way of achieving this balance, or even of pinpointing the exact recipe for balance to occur. Contexts vary in terms of their strengths and their weaknesses; their values and their overall vision. ?

Classroom life in 2024 can be tough but, in my experience, there are good things happening in every context, in every school; and great things happen when these are seen and developed. There is always something positive to discover and build upon, to broaden and deepen as a foundation for growth. The more that healthy aspects of each learning context are identified and supported, the more easily the challenging aspects of the context can be changed.

Personalized consideration of the unique value of each classroom or whole school context supports the value of each person within that context. This values-based, systemic approach to school development may involve creating firm boundaries, while also supporting a more flexible approach to learning. It may mean that firm rules are made, but also that compassion is demonstrated daily. It is not about one way or the other, it is about building and growing the way that works best to achieve the vision of each classroom or school.

In this, we are indeed talking about tough love. But not the hard-lined tough love of strict discipline or an undue reliance on rewards. Rather the tough love that requires a considered exploration and understanding of each unique context, and that context’s aims and ideals. Tough love that prioritizes consistency and clarity as it develops workable, desirable social norms.?

I personally believe the any success that Michaela School demonstrates is more about the considered development of its context in a consistent and clear way than about its strategies per se.? With that thought in mind, I can’t help but wonder how a school might thrive with a considered and clear approach embracing self-determination and student agency as ideals.

If you are interested in better understanding your unique classroom, staffroom or whole school context, and how to build it well, join Justin Roberts , the Australian Psychological Society (APS) and me at the Positive Schools ‘Big Workshop’ later this year.

Visit PositiveSchools.com.au for all information and registration.

The MacKillop Institute Jo Pengelley Richard Pengelley