Sunteți pe pagina 1din 81

1

CAUSES OF LACK OF ATTENTION BY PRIMARY SCHOOL PUPILS IN DELTA

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

Background of the Study

Children and adult respectively are found to be reactive in character and behaviour at times.

Mostly, children of nowadays as a result of their quick exposure to social networks, media

networks, electronics and printed media tends to quickly emulate and adapt to certain way of life

such as fighting, bullying, telling lies, restiveness, loitering among others which conjunctively

amount to disruptive behaviour. However, this may be informed by the rate at which they are

exposed to some violent movies, plays, among others. In many public primary schools in the

contemporary society and Asaba Central Education Authority in particular, there have been report

of alarming rate of lack of attention among the pupils. In this effect, teachers and significant others

have been reporting the alarming rate of this lack of attention exhibited by primary school pupils

to be on the increase and as well its obstructions to teaching and learning process. This trend

continues to deteriorate and metamorphose to other forms of antisocial acts/demeanours and

deviations from societal norms and values such as thuggry, stealing, kidnapping, assassination,

among others for lack of proper attention/orientation and management to ameliorate the

aforementioned issues in order to catch them (pupils) young in the classrooms.

However, every Society across the globe had always had interest in the ways in which their

young ones are prepared and how they learn to take active part in civic life (Anih and Ogoke,

2014). Buttressing further, the authours noted that education has been often conceived to mean the

activities of the teacher and learners in a school environment which is narrow and misconception
2

of education since what takes place in the school is a fraction of education. Education indeed is a

process that starts from the family in which the child is born till the time he

1
attains the official age of formal education. Ogbonnaya (2009) opined that education is the process

by which every society attempts to preserve and upgrade their accumulated knowledge, values,

and skills. Stressing further, authour stated that apart from the home, the primary school is another

educational institutions where children learn and socialize. Traditionally, education is a medium

through which the society inculcates its values and culture to the young (Asebe, 2012).

In the context of this work, education is the process whereby adults members of a society

carefully guide and manage the process of the development of infants and young children (pupils),

initiating them into the culture of the society until they attain the age of formal primary education.

Primary education according to the Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) (2004) is the education

given in institutions for children aged 6 to 11. The National Policy on Education document further

maintained that since the rest of the education system is built upon the primary level, it is the key

to the success or failure of the entire system. With this prospect, and the need for solid foundation,

primary education becomes a focus of national importance. Thus, primary education has always

been regarded as a vital stratum in the nation’s education system (Adepoju and Fabiyi, 2006). This

being the case, the goals of primary education according to FRN (2004: 14) are to: inculcate

permanent literacy and numeracy, and ability to communicate effectively, lay a sound basis for

scientific and reflective thinking, give citizenship education as a basis for effective participation in

and contribution to the life of the society among others.

From the foregoing, it is pertinent to emphasize that quality primary education that realizes

the above objectives has the capacity to improve young children’s learning potentials and prepare

them for further school success. In Enugu state however, primary education is seen as a vital
3

instrument for social and economic mobility and an instrument for transforming the society, the

state has made effort in implementing policies that can realize the above objectives through the

Universal Primary Education (UBE) programme. The objectives of this programme and many

others may however been hindered by several occurrences in the classroom where learning is

expected to take place. Such incidence as prevalent lack of attention in the classroom may inhibit

optimum learning experience.

Primary school pupils exhibit some kind of behaviours. Behaviour refers to the way in which

one acts or conducts one’s self, especially towards others (Mclnerney, 2008). Behaviour can also

be defined as the way in which an animal or a person acts in response to a particular situation or

stimuli. It is also a way in which one acts or conducts one’s self, especially towards others.

Behaviour is a broad term for any type of action; such actions as blinking an eye, smiling,

whistling, crying, walking, talking, eating, praying are all behaviours” (Umeano 2012). This

implies that behaviour is the activity of an individual or group of individuals as a result of

interaction with the environment which may be normal or disruptive. Lack of attentioninclude a

situation whereby the students failed to respond to teacher’s requests, indulge in noise making,

moving out of their seats and staring in a direction other than the teacher or their work. (Wille,

2002). Justifying the above assertion, Ghazi, Gulap, Tariq and Khan (2013) maintained that

disruptive behaviour is simply the behaviour which does not allow the teachers and pupils for

effective teaching and learning process. Buttressing further, the authours stated: with reference to

the fact that learners have their fundamental right to have a safe and respectful environment for

learning, hence disruptive behaviour should be seen as a disciplinary problem and must be dealt

technically.

In the context of the present study, disruptive behaviour in the classroom is that behaviour

which interrupts, obstructs, or inhibits the teaching and learning processes. Disruptive behaviour
4

in classrooms would, therefore, denote an activity by an individual or group of individuals, which

hinders or inhibits the rich and stimulating environment needed for meaningful learning activities

from taking place. Disruptive behaviour can be exhibited physically or emotionally. Buttressing

on this assertion, Puram and Chennai (2012) stated that children or adolescents with conduct

disorder may exhibit some of the following physical lack of attention such as aggression to people

and animals, bullies, threatens or intimidates others, often initiates physical fights; use a weapon

that could cause serious physical harm to others.. Buttressing on emotional disruptive behaviour,

Puram and Chennai posited that it is inability of pupils to build or maintain satisfactory

interpersonal relationships with peers and teachers; inappropriate types of behaviour or feelings

under normal circumstances, a general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression and a

tendency to develop physical symptoms or fears associated with personal or school problems. The

above mentioned lack of attentionmay also constitute prevalent lack of attentionin the classroom.

In virtually all classrooms, lack of attentionoften hamper pupils’ achievement (Gesinde,

2000). Buttressing further, the authour stated that prevalent disruptive behaviour may take many

forms such as persistent questioning, incoherent comments, verbal attacks, unrecognized speaking

out, incessant arguing, intimidating shouting, and inappropriate gestures. Contributing to the above

points, Rachel and Daniel (2012) opined that the prevalent disruptive behaviour in the classroom

is talking out of turn, followed by non-attentiveness, daydreaming, and idleness. Stressing further,

the authours asserted that the most unacceptable disruptive behaviour is disrespecting teachers in

terms of disobedience and rudeness, followed by talking out of turn and verbal aggression. In the

context of this work, prevalent disruptive behaviour can be defined as those anti-social behaviours

exhibited by primary school pupils that obstructs and inhibits the process of teaching and learning.

Such anti-social behaviours include talking out of turn, noise making, pushing of fellow pupils

among others.
5

From the above highlighted views, one may ask what the causes of disruptive behaviour

especially among pupils are. In other words, disruptive behaviour in primary schools can be

perpetrated by many factors, pupil or by the collaboration of many pupils. Contributing to the

above point, Gesinde (2000) observed that classroom management could pose a problem to the

teacher. Especially when the teacher lacks the competence to create the setting, decorate the room,

arrange the chairs, speak to pupils and listen to their responses, putting routines in place and then

executing, modifying and reinstating them, developing rules and communicating those rules to

pupils. Aimee (2003) posited that children who view televised media violence are more likely to

have increased feelings of hostility, decreased emotional response to the portrayal of violence and

injury that lead to disruptive behaviour through imitation. According to Ghazi et al (2013)

disruptive behaviour can be caused by factors such as inconsistent parenting, uncaring parents,

over-protective parents and bad influences on a student’s local community. Stressing further, the

authours posited that poverty, poor quality teaching, repeating the same class, teachers’ negative

attitude towards pupils, lack of motivation from teacher and poor classroom condition such as

lighting and ventilation among others are the major causes of disruptive behaviour in the

classroom.

From the foregoing, it could be deduced that some disruptive behaviour reflects bad

manners and a lack of consideration of others. Disruptive behaviour may on the other hand, result

from overzealous classroom participation, lack of social skills, or inappropriately expressed anger

among others which may be disadvantageous to the process of teaching and learning and may

invariably influence academic objectives negatively. Disruptive behaviour may cause harm within

the classroom on several different levels. Highlighting on the above point, Finn, Fish and Scott

(2008) stated that disruptive behaviour affects individual learning, interferes with academic

achievement, and reduces the chance of higher education. Disruptive behaviour also becomes a
6

burden on the classroom when both instruction and the normal functioning of the classroom are

interrupted. Hence, as disruptive behaviour increases within schools, an unbalanced atmosphere is

created, causing teachers and administrators to spend more time moderating, managing and

controlling the pupils instead of performing duties consistent with the creation of a positive

learning environment.

From the above highlighted points, children with disruptive behaviour may face challenges.

Contributing, Kauffman (2005) stated that due to pupil’s disruptive behaviour, peer rejection may

be common for the child. Buttressing further, the authour, noted that it is unclear whether academic

difficulties precede behavioural problems or if behavioural issues create academic difficulties but

that researchers currently believe that there is a reciprocal influence of both. It is however, the

function of the teacher to effectively manage the classroom in order to guide learning experience.

This is because managing the classroom environment is one of the primary responsibilities of every

teacher. Management is independent of ownership, rank, or power. It is objective function and

ought to be grounded in the responsibility for performance. Management is a function, a discipline,

a task to be done. Terry (2002) defined management as a process "consisting of planning,

organizing, actuating and controlling, performed to determine and accomplish the objectives by

the use of people and resources." In consonance with the above assertion, Ogbuonu (2014) stated

that management is referred to as a procedure in which people’s efforts are directed towards

achieving their established objectives in groups such as classrooms. This implies that management

is the process of planning, organizing and directing a certain group of individuals for the attainment

of a certain goal in a certain organization such as classroom. For the purpose of this study,

classroom is a place where the teachers meet the pupils and guide the pupils to interact with subject

matters and material in order to facilitate learning. According to Evertson and Weinstein (2006)

classroom management is any action a teacher takes to create an environment that supports and
7

facilitates both academic and social-emotional learning. In the same vein, Oliver (2009) defined

teacher-mediated classroom management practices as classroom procedures implemented by

teachers in classroom settings with all students or pupils in order to teach positive social behaviour

and reduce negative behaviour. From the above illustrations, the term classroom management

covers the whole spectrum of management issues that a teacher has to contend with in the

classroom in order to create an environment devoid of obstruction and inhibition for effective

teaching and learning.

In the context of this work, classroom management is the effort made by the teacher to

ensure that pupils in the classroom are controlled and guided for the purpose of creating enabling

environment that facilitates and fosters academic achievements. According to Oyinloye (2010) the

way a teacher manages all the different aspect of classroom will have a powerful influence on how

effectively the children learn and also on how well they behave. This is true because a teacher who

portrays reputable personality, masters his/her subject matter among other classroom management

skills may likely influence the behaviour of the pupils positively to act in such direction. Most

teachers have a pattern of setting up classroom in the way that best facilitates learning so that they

instinctively manage the classroom environment and classroom routines without too much stress.

There exists a variety of management strategies/interventions to help manage the behavioural

problems such as disruptive behaviour among pupils. This includes behaviour modification

therapy such as skills /assertive training, cognitive-behavioural techniques among others. Assertive

training is a form of behaviour therapy designed to help people (pupils) stand up for themselves,

to empower themselves, in more contemporary terms in such that disruptive behaviour and other

anti-social behaviours will be averted (Albert and Emmons, 2001). According to Onwuasoanya

(2006) assertive training is a preferred approach for individuals who have difficulty in the

appropriate expression of various emotions, and who lack the confidence to stand up for
8

themselves without experiencing intense anxiety or exhibiting disruptive behaviour. According to

Lipsey and Cullen (2007) cognitive-behavioral therapy is a technique that is used on its own, it

uses exercises and instruction that are designed to alter the dysfunctional thinking patterns

exhibited by many offenders (pupils). Stressing further, the authours stated that this technique

helps pupils become aware of the existence of dysfunctional thinking patterns such as disruptive

behaviours, or negative thoughts, attitudes expectations and beliefs, and to understand how

negative thinking patterns contribute to unhealthy feelings and behaviours (Wolfe, 2007). A

recent addition to the repertoire of behavioural interventions involves a multicomponent

intervention model. This model includes the use of many behaviour modification tools such as

precision requests, mystery motivators, token rein forcers, response cost techniques and antecedent

strategies (Wille, 2002). Marshal (2001) opined that discipline without stress, punishments or

rewards is designed to educate young people about the value of internal motivation. The intention

according to the authour is to develop within youth (pupil) a desire to become responsible and self-

disciplined and to put forth effort to learn. However, to create and preserve a classroom atmosphere

that optimizes teaching and learning, all participants (teachers and pupils) share a responsibility in

creating a civil and non-disruptive forum within the classroom. Thus, pupils are expected to

conduct themselves at all times in the classroom in a manner that does not disrupt teaching and

learning. In the absence of a well managed classroom with cooperation from the pupils, the action

perform by a teacher on each of these variables mentioned above will determine the academic

achievement and behaviour of the pupils (Nayak and Rao, 2008). The authours further stated that

behaviour management is necessary in order to maintain discipline in the classroom while

suggesting that every loving teacher must exhibit firmness, tenderness and gentleness which could

inform effective strategies in order to cope with and curb pupils’ misbehaviour.
9

Application of effective management strategies in classroom organization and behaviour

management are necessary to address these challenging behaviours of pupils and support

successful efforts in the teaching and learning processes. Strengthening the above idea, Emmer and

Stough (2001) asserted that teachers often find it more challenging to meet the instructional

demands of the classroom without the expertise and competency to address disruptive pupils’

behaviour. Such poor classroom management typically leads to less instruction and worse student

outcomes (Cameron, Connor, Morrison, and Jewkes, 2008). Research has been developing an

understanding of disruptive behaviour in order to improve effective strategies which can be

employed within the classroom to assist the teacher in dealing with such behaviour (Porter, 2000).

Justifying the above point, Porter posited that the subject of disruptive pupils in schools has become

an issue which is now more widely acknowledged and since lack of attention may impede the

pupils learning and instruction, it is imperative that effective classroom interventions be

empirically verified and implemented to decrease such disruptive behaviours.

From the foregoing in line with Haim Ginott (1922) classroom management theory which

highlighted communication and the importance of positive relationships among pupils and between

pupils and the teacher in the classroom with basic interest on the respect for children’s’ basic rights

listening to pupils, brevity, acceptance, asking questions to identify their needs and empathy. The

question now is, have teachers and educational stakeholders taken cognizance of this theory as

major preponderance regarding classroom management for effective teaching and learning.

Statement of the Problem

Educational programmes of every nation are tailored towards the attainment of certain

objectives. The attainment of these objectives could, however be hindered by factors within the

classroom such as pupils’ disruptive behaviours. A classroom may be affected by a variety of

distracting, impulsive and inattentive pupils’ behaviour. The learners who are expected to benefit
10

directly from the educational programmes may also manifest certain behaviour patterns, which

threaten the orderly pursuit of academic excellence. In primary schools, such lack of attentionmay

impede the student learning and instruction. Moreover, the lack of attentionof pupils may require

teachers to spend more time on classroom management, control and discipline while less time may

be allotted to academics. One may ask what are the causes of disruptive behaviour among primary

school pupils due to rate at which it is prevailing today. Or could it be as a result poor parenting

and lack of management strategy by the teachers and curriculum planners among others.

The consequence of this may be predictable on educational prospects of the learners,

parents and the society at large given that the primary school has been identified by the NPE as the

foundation for further learning. However, the way a teacher manages the classroom will dictate the

stress he may pass through, his pupils’ achievement, behaviour and the tone of the school. It is

therefore imperative that effective classroom management be adopted and utilized in order to

control and effectively manage the issue of prevalent lack of attention among primary school pupils

and promote a conducive classroom environment prerequisite for a meaningful teaching and

learning process. Though a global phenomenon, not much has however been done in managing

pupils’ lack of attention in Enugu state primary school and Asaba Central Education Authority in

particular. Some of the measures employed by teachers could be ineffective or may literally be

subduing the behaviour for some time and this informed the quest of the researcher to embark on

this study. The problem of this study therefore is that there is the need for empirical basis for

managing disruptive classroom behaviours among primary school pupils for optimum classroom

interaction and rich learning experience in primary schools in

Asaba Central Education Authority.


11

Purpose of the Study

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the classroom management of lack of attention

among primary school pupils in Asaba Central Education a Authority. Specifically, this study will

seek to determine the:

1. Prevalent lack of attention exhibited by primary school pupils.

2. Causes of lack of attention exhibited among primary school pupils.

3. Classroom management strategies adopted by teachers to manage lack of attention in

primary school.

4. Effective strategies available for use in management of lack of attention among primary

school pupils.

Significance of the Study

This study has both theoretical and practical significance. Theoretically, this study will

contribute to the existing knowledge on measures that best optimize teaching and learning and the

objectives of children to education with regard to managing lack of attention among primary school

pupils. Moreover, the findings of the study will validate or invalidate Haim Ginott classroom

management theory and Bandura’s Behavioural theory. In other words, the findings of the study

will either approve or disapprove the relevance of the theories on which the study is anchored as it

pertains to management of disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils.

Specifically, the relevance of the theory to this study is that people learn disruptive

behaviour in the same way they learn football, emulates successful students and positive ideals.

Children learn from models that they regard as significant such as colleagues and peers. Peers

establish basic patterns at the school or playing ground which in spite of possible changes is never

completely extinguished as the child grows. From this theory, it stands to reason that the behaviour

of a child is a reflection of the type of peer influences under which the child grew up. Hence,
12

deficiency in proper socialization both by parents and teachers may likely encourage disruptive

behaviours. This thereafter prevents positive socialization processes. Practically, the study will be

beneficial to the Government, Enugu State Universal Basic Education Board (ESUBEB),

curriculum planners, pupils, teachers/teacher trainees, parents, Teachers training institutions and

future researchers.

It is expected that the findings of this study will highlight empirical measures in the areas

of strategic classroom management for the curbing and managing disruptive behaviour when made

available to the government through her agencies (Ministries of Education, UBEC, supervisors and

school administrators) will go a long way on informing evidence based policies on the incidence

of lack of attentionin the classroom. This is because the result of the study will also inform the

government on the need to embark on in-service training for teachers on effective management

practices to curb the effect and interference of disruptive behaviour in classroom activities vis-avis

on the academic performance of pupils.

The results from this study when made available through published articles, news papers,

journals among others will be of immense benefit to the Enugu State Universal Basic Education

board ESUBEB in its policy formulation and implementation, taking cognizance of all measures

necessary to ensure effective classroom management in the state across all the primary schools for

effective classroom teaching and learning. This is because any study that find out the prevalent

lack of attentionamong primary school pupils, its causes, management strategies and effective

teachers’ strategies will create an avenue for stakeholders to come in with policy formulation and

effective implementation procedures for amelioration.

The findings of the study will also be of great importance to curriculum planners. This is

because the study will serve as an eye opener to them such that they will be able to articulate all

the necessary measures and strategies for effective classroom management in the education plans
13

to ensure conducive teaching and learning environment. In order to fast-track the realization of

effective and strategic classroom management, it is expected that the results of the study will enable

the curriculum designers while designing and planning the curriculum to take appropriate steps

towards ensuring that pre-service teachers are equiped and aided with the procedures requisite for

managing classroom that are prone to pupils disruptive behaviours.

The findings of the study will also be of immense benefit to the pupils because when the

teachers and the rest of others stakeholders take cognizance of the findings of this study, the

implementation will be very beneficial to the pupils as it will guide teachers in establishing some

rules and regulations for the class activities and ensure that measures that will enable the pupils

participate actively in maintaining them are fully ascertained for a conducive classroom teaching

and learning environment.

Also to benefit from the findings of this study are teachers. The exposition of teachers’

classroom management skills and strategies will enable the teachers to gain the requisite skills

necessary to execute their duties effectively in the areas of listening to the pupils, controlling and

responding to their questions as and when due among others. The study will as well help teachers

gain competence as regards to effective classroom management such as arrangement of seats, and

positioning of the pupils in the class for effective participation in the process of teaching and

learning. Disruptive behaviour in the classroom is a concern for teachers because conducive

classroom for teaching is paramount for learning. The findings of this study when communicated

to teachers through workshops and conferences would be of utmost important to classroom

teachers in order to carry every child along. The findings of the study will equally be of utmost

important to the teacher trainees in that they would be better prepared for the classroom challenges

of meeting the learning needs of learners with diverse abilities and requisite skills.
14

Parents of the pupils also stand to benefit from the findings of the study when made available

to them through Parent Teachers Association (PTA) meetings, seminars, workshops among others.

This is because parents will be exposed to the various causes of lack of attentionexhibited by pupils

and as well be guided on how to take active roles regarding their parental responsibilities in the

rearing of their kids in order to avert their anti-social behaviour.

The result of this study when disseminated can also help teacher training institutions to

reform their programs in order to meet the challenges of disruptive pupils’ behaviour in the

classroom.

Finally, the findings from this study will contribute to the literature that is most effective

in managing pupil’s disruptive behaviour in the classroom. This study would thus serve as a source

of information and bank of knowledge for other researchers who may wish to embark on research

from a related perspective in this field. It is obvious that this work will provide them direction and

guideline for their study.

Scope of the Study

The geographical scope of this study will cover Asaba Central Educational Authority of

Enugu state, Nigeria. The content scope is limited on the disruptive behaviour exhibited among

primary school pupils. It was restricted to the primary level of basic education. Urban and rural

schools will be involved in the study to determine the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by

primary school pupils, the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among primary school pupils,

classroom management strategies adopted by teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary

schools and effective strategies available for use in managing disruptive behaviour in primary

school.

Research Question
In line with the purpose, this study is premised on the following research questions:
1. What are the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by primary school pupils?
15

2. What are the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among primary school pupils?

3. What are the classroom management strategies adopted by teachers to manage lack of

attentionin primary school?

4. What effective strategies are available in managing disruptive behaviour in primary

school?

Hypotheses

HO1.There is no significance different in the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools on

causes of disruptive behaviour.

HO2. There is no significant difference in the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools

on the classroom management strategies adopted by teachers in managing disruptive

behaviours.
16

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter deals with the review of relevant literature. The researcher reviewed conceptual,

theoretical and empirical research work carried out by other authors relating to classroom

management of lack of attentionamong students. Attention is focused on the following sub-

headings;

Conceptual Framework

Concept of Primary Education

Concept of Behaviour

Concept of Disruptive Behaviour

Concept of Management

Concept of Classroom Management

Theoretical Framework

Haim Ginott’s Classroom Management Theory

Bandura’s Social Learning Theory

Review of Relevant Empirical Studies

Studies on Classroom Management:


17

The relationship Between Effective Classroom Management and Students’ Academic

Achievement.

Primary School Teachers’ Perception of Classroom Management and its Influence on Pupils’

Activities.

Tteachers and Pupils views on use of Corporal Punishment in Managing Discipline in Primary

Schools.

17
Preventing Disruptive Behaviour in the Urban Classroom.

Studies on Disruptive Behaviour:

Elimination of Disruptive Classroom Behaviour by Systematically varying Teacher's Behaviour.

Investigated the Classroom Problems faced by Teachers at the Public Schools

Moderating Effects of Student Perceptions in Relation to School Discipline and Disruptive

Behaviour.

Role of School Counsellors in Connecting the dots Between Disruptive Classroom Behaviour and

Youth Self-Concept.

Job Dissatisfaction and Burnout in School Teachers with respect to Student’s Disruptive

Behaviour and Classroom Conflict Management.

Teachers’ and Students’ Perception of Burnout among Teachers.

Disruptive Behaviour Scale

Study on the Causes of Disruptive Behaviour:

Types and causes of students’ disruptive behaviour in classroom.

Summary of Literature Review


18

Conceptual Framework

In this section of the work, discourse focuses on the various concepts and variables that

informed this research work, it include the following:

Concept of Primary Education

The education of the child is always considered paramount in almost all history of human

existence. However, every Society across the globe had always had interest in the ways in which

their young ones are prepared and how they learn to take active part in civic life (Anih and Ogoke,

2014). Buttressing further, the authours noted that education has been often conceived to mean the

activities of the teacher and learners in a school environment which is narrow and misconception

of education since what takes place in the school is a fraction of education. Education indeed is a

process that starts from the family in which the child is born till the time he attains the official age

of formal education. Ogbonnaya (2009) opined that education is the process by which every

society attempts to preserve and upgrade their accumulated knowledge, values, and skills.

Stressing further, Ogbonnaya stated that apart from the home, the primary school is another

educational institutions where children learn and socialize. Traditionally, education is a medium

through which the society inculcates its values and culture to the young (Asebe, 2012). According

to Olumu (2007) functional and qualitative education is a tool for selffulfilment. Thus, as an

expression of education as a basic right to children, the Convention on the Rights of the Child

(CRC) was adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in November


th
20 1989, and a year later, it entered into force as an international law. Right to education is an

important aspect of CRC. Also at the global level, the United Nations came up with basic

educational targets that all member states should achieve to express this inalienable rights to all

children. These include to:


19

• ensure that by the year 2015 all children particularly girls, in difficult circumstances and

those belonging to the ethnic minorities have access to a complete free, compulsory and

good quality primary education.

• ensure that the learning needs of all young people and adults are in line with the MDGs

• achieve universal primary education by 2015 (UNESCO, 2001),

From the above definitions of education and educational targets for the right of the children, in the

context of this work, education is the process whereby adults members of a society carefully guide

and manage the process of the development of infants and young children (pupils), initiating them

into the culture of the society until they attain the age of formal primary education. Primary

education is the education given in institutions for children aged 6 to 11 (FRN, 2004). It is vital to

child development. Hence, it is acknowledged in the NPE as critical to the success of further

educational venture and training. The goal of primary education is to ensure that all children access

quality education and achieve quality learning outcomes. Especially in numeracy and literacy, and

also in critical areas, such as life skills to prepare children for secure and meaningful live (FRN,

2004). In line with this, developments in primary education in Nigeria have been significant. It has

received immense attention right from the time of the missionaries through the colonial

government to the present day. For instance, the ten year plan of 1942-1953 made adequate

provision for the extension of primary education facilities, and primary education was provided in

the villages with a strong bias to the local needs of the people. As a result, there was nearly fifty

percent increase in the number of primary schools and enrolment of pupils in them (UNESCO,

2001).

In line with the above assertions, National Policy on Education (FRN, 2012) as cited in

Umemetu and Ogbonna (2013) also stated the goals/objectives of primary education to include the

following: Inculcating permanent literacy and numeracy and ability to communicate effectively,
20

laying a sound basis for scientific and reflective thinking; Giving citizenship education as a basis

for effective participation and contribution to the life of the society. Moulding the character and

developing sound attitude and morals in the child, developing in the child the ability to adapt to

his changing environment, giving the child opportunities for developing manipulative skills that

will enable the child function effectively in the society within the limits of the child’s capacity;

Providing the child with basic tools for further educational advancement, including preparation for

trade and craft of the locality. In pursuance of the goals above, the curriculum for primary

education shall include language of the environment, English, French, Arabic, Mathematics,

Science, Physical and health Education, Religious Knowledge,

Agriculture, Home Economics, Social Studies and Citizenship Education, Cultural and Creative

Arts, Computer and so on. A careful consideration of the above goals and curriculum content

brings to the fore front the need for a well-balanced and result oriented teaching and learning

process and interaction among teachers, sociologists, counsellors and students and external

education officials. Highlighting further, the authours stated that with the Universal Basic

Education (UBE) policy, the classes have been restructured to include JSS 1-3. Now the new

nomenclature is Basic 1-9. Primary education thus entails 9 unbroken years of schooling for

children aged between 6-14 years. The content of the curriculum of this level of education has also

been enlarged to cater for a wide body of knowledge in the light of the ever changing global trends

in science, technology and the arts. It is also meant to lay a solid foundation for the senior

secondary where they are prepared for useful living in the society.

Contributing to the above view, Obiweluozo Umemetu & Ogbonnaya (2013) stated that

primary school pupils are children from the age of 6 years to 11 years that receives elementary or

primary education coming before secondary school and after preschool. This implies that primary

school pupils are children that have finished nursery education who are being taught in preparation
21

for secondary education. Nkechi and Umemetu also defined Primary education as the kind of

education which is given to children from age 5+ to about 10 or 11 years. According to the

authours, it is an educational training provided to school age children from primary 1-6. At this

stage, the education they receive is compulsory in most part of the world. Primary education in

particular is the level of education that develops in the individual the capacity to read, write and

calculate. In other words, it helps to eradicate illiteracy, which is one of the strongest predictors of

poverty (Bruns, Mingat and Rakotamalala 2003). This explains why primary education is the

largest sub-sector of any education system and offers the unique opportunity to contribute to the

transformation of societies through the education of the young ones (UNESCO, 2001). It is the

foundation level of the educational system which runs for six years, and it is aimed at developing

basic literacy, numeracy, communication skills and transmission of culture of the people to

younger generations.

At this stage of the educational system, children from different background are meant to

come together to spend a greater part of the day with other children and their teacher in school.

They are vulnerable and can be easily influenced by the kind of interaction they encounter with

one another. So the kind of conduct a child at this stage displays in classrooms or within the school

environment is something that cannot be overlooked no matter how insignificant it may look.

According to Sorhaindo (2006), primary school pupils who experience in school are associated

with social, emotional and behavioural characteristic, which when ignored can mature into

deviancy or disruptive behaviour. Colman (2009) suggested that ‘good social, emotional and

psychological health helps protect children against emotional and behavioural problems, violence

and crime, teenage pregnancy and the misuse of drugs and alcohol. With increasing pressures

placed on schools, administrators, and teachers regarding pupil achievement, pupil behaviour is

increasingly under the spotlight.


22

Concept of Behaviour

There are certain ways by which both human beings and animals react or respond to stimuli

which could be said be behaviour. According to Mclnerney (2008) Behaviour is referred to as the

way in which one acts or conducts one’s self, especially towards others. Behaviour can also be

defined as the way in which an animal or a person acts in response to a particular situation or

stimuli. Behaviour is also the way in which an individual exhibits his or her character which may

be positive or negative. According to Umeano (2012), behaviour is the way in which one acts or

conducts one’s self, especially towards others, it is a broad term for any type of actions such as

blinking/winking of the eye, smiling, whistling, crying, walking, talking, eating, praying are all

behaviours. Behaviour is perceived as the way in which an animal or a person acts in response to

a particular situation or stimuli. Buttressing further, the authour stated that behaviour is a broad

term for any type of action; such actions as blinking an eye, smiling, whistling, crying, walking,

talking, eating, praying are all behaviours.

In the context of this work, behaviour can be seen as positive or negative reactions of an

individual to a particular situation or towards other individuals. This behaviour could be normal or

abnormal (disruptive). Contributing to the above assertion, Merret and Wheldall (1987) stated that

over 50% of UK teachers polled reported discontentment and concern about the amount of

disruptive behaviour in their classroom. Due to the importance attached to primary school pupils

in the educational ladder, school places three important demands on pupils: to master academic

tasks, to get along with others, and to follow the rules of the classroom. In a similar view, Sternberg

and Williams (2002) opined that pupils are coming to school with less school readiness, pre-

academic and behavioural skills. At this stage, children who succeed at these developmental tasks

develop a sense of industry or competence (or, as Bandura would say, selfefficacy). Children who

fail at these tasks acquire a basic sense of inferiority: and as such, they believe and expect that they
23

cannot do anything right even in classroom and this can impose diverse challenges. Such

challenges include disruptive behaviour among pupils McGlynn, 2009; Crozier, 2006). Behaviour

is considered abnormal (disruptive) if it is uncommon, different from the norms and does not

conform to what a society expects (Nwankwo, Nwoke, Chukwuocha, Obanny, Nwoga, Iwuagwu

and Okereke, 2010). From the foregoing, it could be deduced that any act or behaviour exhibited

by pupils especially in classrooms which is at variance with the expected code of conduct could

be called disruptive behaviour.

Concept of Disruptive Behaviour

Lack of attentioninclude a situation whereby the students failed to respond to teacher’s

requests, indulge in noise making, moving out of their seats and staring in a direction other than

the teacher or their work. (Wille, 2002). According to McCabe and Frede (2007) disruptive

behaviours during the preschool years constitute one of the strongest predictors of later more

serious problem behaviours including delinquency, aggression, antisocial behaviour, and

substance abuse. Buttressing further, the authours noted that disruptive behaviour is any repeated

pattern of behaviour that interferes with learning or engagement in social interactions. This

includes unresponsiveness to appropriate guidance and actions such as prolonged tantrums,

physical and verbal aggression, disruptive vocal and motor behaviour, property destruction,

selfinjury, noncompliance and withdrawal.

On the other hand, lack of attentionare considered as the transgression of school rules, troubling

learning conditions, teaching environment or relationship with school (Veiga, 2008). Student/pupil

behaviour in classrooms is therefore at the forefront of concern and importance among both initial-

licensure and practicing teachers across all instructional content areas and across all grade levels

(Sabornie, 2010). Behaviour in the classroom that impedes teaching and learning and creates

obstacles to the goal of teaching and learning is considered disruptive and therefore subject to
24

sanctions. Justifying the above assertion, Ghazi, Gulap, Tariq and Khan (2013) maintained that

disruptive behaviour is simply the behaviour which does not allow the teachers and pupils for

effective teaching and learning process. Buttressing further, the authours stated: with reference to

the fact that learners have their fundamental right to have a safe and respectful environment for

learning, hence disruptive behaviour should be seen as a disciplinary problem and must be dealt

technically.

In the context of the present study, disruptive behaviour in the classroom is that behaviour

which interrupts, obstructs, or inhibits the teaching and learning processes. Behaviour in the

classroom that impedes teaching and learning and creates obstacles to the goal of teaching and

learning is considered Lack of attention(DB). DB is overt actions in the classroom that disturb the

teacher and/or other students. Disruption is a behaviour a reasonable person would view as being

likely to substantially or repeatedly interfere with conduct of a class. Some examples of this

behaviour include refusal to cooperate or participate in classroom activities, disregard for others,

interrupting others, inattention to learning requirements, making noise, and not staying in one’s

desks, chronic lateness and chronic leaving class early, sleeping in class, physical threat, verbal

assault, and harassment. Disruptive behaviour in classrooms would, therefore, denote an activity

by an individual or group of individuals, which hinders or inhibits the rich and stimulating

environment needed for meaningful learning activities from taking

place.

Disruptive behaviour can be exhibited physically or emotionally. Buttressing on this assertion,

Puram and Chennai (2012) stated that children or adolescents with conduct disorder may exhibit

some of the following physical lack of attentionsuch as aggression to people and animals, bullies,

threatens or intimidates others, often initiates physical fights; use a weapon that could cause serious

physical harm to others.. Buttressing on emotional disruptive behaviour, Puram and Chennai
25

posited that it is the inability of pupils to build or maintain satisfactory interpersonal relationships

with peers and teachers; inappropriate types of behaviour or feelings under normal circumstances,

a general pervasive mood of unhappiness or depression and a tendency to develop physical

symptoms or fears associated with personal or school problems. The above mentioned lack of

attentionmay also constitute prevalent lack of attentionin the classroom.

Prevalent disruptive behaviour

In virtually all classrooms, prevalent lack of attentionoften hamper pupils’ achievement

(Gesinde, 2000). Buttressing further, the authour stated that prevalent disruptive behaviour may

take many forms such as persistent questioning, incoherent comments, verbal attacks,

unrecognized speaking out, incessant arguing, intimidating shouting, and inappropriate gestures.

Contributing to the above points, Rachel and Daniel (2012) opined that the prevalent disruptive

behaviour in the classroom is talking out of turn, followed by non-attentiveness, daydreaming, and

idleness.

Stressing further, the authors asserted that the most unacceptable disruptive behaviour is

disrespecting teachers in terms of disobedience and rudeness, followed by talking out of turn and

verbal aggression. ‘Talking out of turn” according to the authours is a problem behaviour which

was mainly referred to students chatting among themselves on irrelevant topics that disrupts the

lessons, calling out, and making remarks on somebody or something without teachers’ permission.

It is distinguished from “verbal aggression” which was referred to more hostile verbal expression,

such as teasing, attacking, quarrelling, and speaking foul language. In the context of this work,

prevalent disruptive behaviour can be defined as those anti-social behaviours exhibited often by

primary school pupils that obstructs and inhibits the process of teaching and learning. Such anti-

social behaviours include talking out of turn, noise making, pushing of fellow pupils among others.
26

From the above highlighted views, one may ask what the causes of disruptive behaviour

especially among pupils are.

Causes of Disruptive Behaviour

In other words, disruptive behaviour in primary schools can be perpetrated by many factors,

pupil or by the collaboration of many pupils. Contributing to the above point, Gesinde (2000)

observed that classroom management could pose a problem to the teacher, especially when the

teacher lacks the competence to create the setting, decorate the room, arrange the chairs, speak to

pupils and listen to their responses, putting routines in place and then executing, modifying and

reinstating them, developing rules and communicating those rules to pupils. Aimee (2003) posited

that children who view televised media violence are more likely to have increased feelings of

hostility, decreased emotional response to the portrayal of violence and injury that lead to

disruptive behaviour through imitation.

Justifying above point, Alex (2012) Stated that unwholesome mass media has become a

major contributor of children deviant behaviour. The mass media such as radio, television,

newspaper and magazine, watching of internet films or pornographic materials are recently

developed agency of education in Nigeria. These deviant behaviours also have its causes and its

consequences that might lead to negative contributions in the pupils, families and society at large.

These common behavioral characteristics carry many negative academic and social undertones for

children (Wille 2002). According to Ghazi et al (2012) disruptive behaviour can be caused by

factors such as inconsistent parenting, uncaring parents, over-protective parents and bad influences

on a student’s local community. Stressing further, the authours posited that poverty, poor quality

teaching, repeating the same class, teachers’ negative attitude towards pupils, lack of motivation

from teacher and poor classroom condition such as lighting and ventilation among others are the

major causes of disruptive behaviour in the classroom. The authours also asserted that since the
27

banning of corporal punishment in schools the teachers were found in great trouble because even

the students became aware of the law against corporal punishment and they claim that they cannot

be given corporal punishment at any cost, which in turn, escalated the intensity as well as the

frequency of disruptive behaviour management.

Supporting the above assertions,

Kendra (2015:pg1) stated that the individual is the primary unit of analysis
in psychological theories of disruptive. That is, individual human beings
may be solely responsible for their disruptive behaviours. Secondly, an
individual’s personality is the major motivational element that derives
behaviour within individuals. Thirdly, criminals and deviants are seen as
suffering from personality deficiencies. Thus, disruptive behaviour results
from abnormal, dysfunctional, or inappropriate mental processes within the
personality of the individual. Finally, these defective or abnormal mental
processes could be caused from a variety of things, including a diseased
mind, inappropriate learning, improper conditioning, and the absence of
appropriate role models or the strong presence of inappropriate role
models.

From the foregoing, it could be deduced that some disruptive behaviour reflects bad

manners and a lack of consideration of others. Disruptive behaviour may on the other hand, result

from overzealous classroom participation, lack of social skills, or inappropriate expression of anger

among others which may be disadvantageous to the process of teaching and learning and may

invariably influence academic objectives negatively. Disruptive behaviour may cause harm within

the classroom on several different levels. Highlighting on the above point, Finn, Fish and Scott

(2008) stated that disruptive behaviour affects individual learning, interferes with academic

achievement, and reduces the chance of higher education. Disruptive behaviour also becomes a

burden on the classroom when both instruction and the normal functioning of the classroom are

interrupted. Hence, as disruptive behaviour increases within schools, an unbalanced atmosphere is

created, causing teachers and administrators to spend more time moderating, managing and

controlling the pupils instead of performing duties consistent with the creation of a positive

learning environment.
28

From the above highlighted points, children with disruptive bevaviour may face

challenges. Contributing, Kauffman (2005) stated that due to pupil’s disruptive behaviour, peer

rejection may be common for the child. Buttressing further, the authour, noted that it is unclear

whether academic difficulties precede behavioural problems or if behavioural issues create

academic difficulties but that researchers currently believe that there is a reciprocal influence of

both hence the need for adequate management so as to manage them appropriately.

Concept of Management

It is however, the function of the teacher to effectively manage the classroom in order to

guide learning experience. This is because managing the classroom environment is one of the

primary responsibilities of every teacher. Management is independent of ownership, rank, or

power. It is objective function and ought to be grounded in the responsibility for performance.

Management is a function, a discipline, a task to be done. Terry (2002) defined management as a

process "consisting of planning, organizing, actuating and controlling, performed to determine and

accomplish the objectives by the use of people and resources.” Buttressing further, Terry

considered management as a "process" which depicts a systematic way of doing things and on the

other hand categorized four management activities to encompass Planning, organizing, actuating,

and controlling.

Planning according the author is thinking of actions in advance while organizing is

coordination of the human and material resources of an organization. Actuating is motivation and

direction of subordinates while controlling means the attempt to ensure no deviation from the norm

or plan. In consonance with the above assertion, Ogbuonu (2014) stated that management is

referred to as the procedure in which people’s efforts are directed towards achieving their

established objectives in groups such as classrooms. Cough (2004) in Ogbuonu (2014) viewed

management as both an act and science. This explains that as an art, management involves the
29

application of talents and skills in directing, coordinating, and supervising people to do what they

are supposed to do efficiently, while as a science, management involves the application of

systematic procedures to the understanding and solution of management problems in organizations.

Management is independent of ownership, rank, or power. It is objective function and ought to be

grounded in the responsibility for performance. Management is a function, a discipline, a task to

be done.

This implies that management is the process of planning, organizing and directing a certain

group of individuals for the attainment of a certain goal in a certain organization such as classroom.

For the purpose of this study, classroom is a place where the teachers meet the pupils and guide

the pupils to interact with subject matters and material in order to facilitate learning hence the need

for proper management of the classroom for effective teaching and learning.

Concept of Classroom Management

Classroom management is a term used by teachers to describe the process of ensuring that

classroom lessons run smoothly despite disruptive behaviour by pupils or students. It is the process

of organizing and conducting the business of the classroom. The term also implies the prevention

of disruptive behaviour. It is the strategies that create and maintain an orderly learning

environment. Classroom management is the term used to highlight all of those positive behaviours

and decisions teachers makes to facilitate the learning process of their pupils and students.

Classroom management is therefore an important component of effective teaching.

Classroom management is as important as academic activities incorporating such teaching

practices as opportunities to respond and corrective feedback (Sugai, Horner, & Gresham, 2002).

The ability to calmly control student behaviour so that learning can flourish will make or break a

teacher’s ability to be successful and is the hardest skill to master. Classroom management is

therefore to foster a dynamic environment of quality learning where all pupils/students develop
30

analytical skills, learn to think critically and communicate effectively, promote inquiry, pursue

knowledge, and prepare for productive careers.

Highlighting on the above assertions, Tan, Parsons, Hinson, and Sardo-Brown (2003)

opined that classroom management refers to all those activities necessary to create and maintain

an orderly learning environment such as planning and preparation of materials, organization,

decoration of the classroom and certainly the establishment and enforcement of routines and rules.

Classroom management is any action a teacher takes to create an environment that supports and

facilitates both academic and social-emotional learning as observed by Evertson and Weinstein

(2006). Stressing further, the authours stated that teachers must develop caring, supportive

relationships with and among students; organize and implement instruction in ways that optimize

students’ access to learning, use group management methods that encourage students’ engagement

in academic tasks; promote the development of students’ social skills and self–regulation; and use

appropriate interventions to assist pupils with behaviour problems.

In an introductory text on teaching, Kauchak and Eggen (2008:6) explained classroom

management in terms of time management. The goal of classroom management as perceived by

the authours is not only to maintain order but to also optimize pupil learning. The authours divided

time into four overlapping categories, namely allocated time, instructional time, engaged time, and

academic learning time. Stressing further, Kauchak and Eggen explained allocated time as the total

time allotted for teaching, learning, and routine classroom procedures such as attendance and

announcements. Allocated time is also what appears on pupil's schedule, for example Civic

education: 9:50-10:30 a.m." or English language" 1:15-2:00 p.m.", Instructional time is what

remains after routine classroom procedures are completed which denotes the actual time teaching

and learning takes place. Teachers may spend two or three minutes taking attendance, for instance,

before their instruction begins. Engaged time is also called time on task. During engaged time,
31

students are participating actively in learning activities, asking and responding to questions,

completing worksheets and exercises, preparing skits and presentations, among others. While

academic learning time occurs when pupils participate actively and are successful in learning

activities. Effective classroom management maximizes academic learning time.

In the same vein, Oliver (2009) defined teacher-mediated classroom management practices

as classroom procedures implemented by teachers in classroom settings with all students or pupils

in order to teach positive social behaviour and reduce negative behaviour. From the above

illustrations, the term classroom management covers the whole spectrum of management issues

that a teacher has to contend with in the classroom in order to create an environment devoid of

obstruction and inhibition for effective teaching and learning.

In the context of this work, classroom management is the effort made by the teacher to

ensure that pupils in the classroom are controlled and guided for the purpose of creating enabling

environment that facilitates and fosters academic achievements. According to Oyinloye (2010) the

way a teacher manages all the different aspect of classroom will have a powerful influence on how

effectively the children learn and also on how well they behave. This is true because a teacher who

portrays reputable personality, masters his/her subject matter among other classroom management

skills may likely influence the behaviour of the pupils positively to act in such direction. Most

teachers have a pattern of setting up classroom in the way that best facilitates learning so that they

instinctively manage the classroom environment and classroom routines without too much stress

in managing disruptive behaviour among pupils. Justifying the above assertion, Ghazi et al (2012)

asserted that there is a dire need of some laws and techniques for minimizing the disruptive

behaviour and its impact on classroom for effective teaching and learning.

As in society at large, rights and freedoms in classroom are supported by a framework of

responsible conduct, without which the rights and freedoms of all may suffer. Thus, the exercise
32

of pupils’ rights and privileges entails the use of responsible judgment, conformity to the law, and

respect for the rights, interests, and values of others. The goal of Nigeria primary education and

use of the classroom is to foster a dynamic environment of higher learning where all pupils develop

analytical skills, learn to think critically and communicate effectively, promote inquiry, pursue

knowledge, and prepare for productive careers.

The classroom is therefore a special environment in which pupils and teachers come

together to promote learning and growth. Civility, understanding and mutual respect among all are

intrinsic to such an environment. Occasionally, that environment is disturbed by the actions or

behaviours of a disruptive nature. It is essential to this learning environment that respect for the

rights of others seeking to learn, respect for the professionalism of the instructor, and the general

goals of academic freedom are maintained through a well articulated classroom management

strategies.

Classroom Management Strategies Adopted by Teachers

Fortunately, there exists a variety of management strategies/interventions to help manage

the behavioural problems such as disruptive behaviour among pupils. This includes behaviour

modification therapy such as skills /assertive training, cognitive-behavioural techniques among

others. Assertive training is a form of behaviour therapy designed to help people (pupils) stand up

for themselves, to empower themselves, in more contemporary terms in such that disruptive

behaviour and other anti-social behaviours will be averted (Albert and Emmons, 2001). According

to Onwuasoanya (2006) assertive training is a preferred approach for individuals who have

difficulty in the appropriate expression of various emotions, and who lack the confidence to stand

up for themselves without experiencing intense anxiety or exhibiting disruptive behaviour.

According to Lipsey and Cullen (2007) cognitive-behavioural therapy is a technique that is used

on its own, it uses exercises and instruction that are designed to alter the dysfunctional thinking
33

patterns exhibited by many offenders (pupils). Stressing further, the authours stated that this

technique helps pupils become aware of the existence of dysfunctional thinking patterns such as

disruptive behaviours, or negative thoughts, attitudes expectations and beliefs, and to understand

how negative thinking patterns contribute to unhealthy feelings and behaviours (Wolfe, 2007).

Justifying the above ideas, Gootman (2008) stated that rules give pupils concrete direction to

ensure that teachers’ expectation becomes a reality, when they become consistent in enforcing the

rules and procedures made. Buttressing further, the authour asserted that there are no perspectives

on classroom management strategies that attempt to be holistic. One example is affirmation

teaching, which attempts to guide students toward success by helping them see how their effort

pays off in the classroom. It relies upon creating an environment where pupils and students are

successful as a result of their own efforts. By creating this type of environment, students are much

more likely to want to do well. Ideally, this transforms a classroom into a community of well-

behaved and self-directed learners. In consonance with the above point, McPhee and Craig (2009)

asserted that teachers who state guidelines early and enforce them at the first appearance of

disruptive behaviour will prevent classroom misconduct from escalating into serious

confrontations and help transgressors to avoid the more serious consequences of such actions. A

recent addition to the repertoire of behavioural interventions involves a multicomponent

intervention model. This model includes the use of many behaviour modification tools such as

precision requests, mystery motivators, token reinforces, response cost techniques and antecedent

strategies (Wille, 2002). Marshal (2001) opined that discipline without stress, punishments or

rewards is designed to educate young people about the value of internal motivation.

The intention according to the authour is to develop within youth (pupil) a desire to become

responsible and self-disciplined and to put forth effort to learn. However, to create and preserve a

classroom atmosphere that optimizes teaching and learning, all participants (teachers and pupils)
34

share a responsibility in creating a civil and non-disruptive forum within the classroom. Thus,

pupils are expected to conduct themselves at all times in the classroom in a manner that does not

disrupt teaching and learning. In the absence of a well managed classroom with cooperation from

the pupils, the action perform by a teacher on each of these variables mentioned above will

determine the academic achievement and behaviour of the pupils (Nayak and Rao, 2008). The

authours further stated that behaviour management is necessary in order to maintain discipline in

the classroom while suggesting that every loving teacher must exhibit firmness, tenderness and

gentleness which could inform effective strategies in order to cope with and curb pupils’

misbehaviour.

Effective Management Strategies Available for use in Managing Disruptive Behaviour in

Primary Schools

Application of effective management strategies in classroom organization and behaviour

management are necessary to address these challenging behaviours of pupils and support

successful efforts in the teaching and learning processes. Strengthening the above idea, Emmer and

Stough (2001) asserted that teachers often find it more challenging to meet the instructional

demands of the classroom without the expertise and competency to address disruptive pupils’

behaviour. Such poor classroom management typically leads to less instruction and worsen student

outcomes (Cameron, Connor, Morrison, and Jewkes, 2008). Research has been developing an

understanding of disruptive behaviour in order to improve effective strategies which can be

employed within the classroom to assist the teacher in dealing with such behaviour (Porter, 2000).

Justifying the above point, Porter posited that the subject of disruptive pupils in schools has become

an issue which is now more widely acknowledged and since lack of attentionmay impede the pupils
35

learning and instruction, it is imperative that effective classroom interventions be empirically

verified and implemented to decrease such disruptive behaviours.

Good order is essential in a primary school if children are to be able to fulfil their learning

potential. Poor and disruptive behaviour in the classroom reduces children’s ability to concentrate

and absorb information; and it unsettles children and causes immense stress for teachers. Children

who are excluded from primary school because of their disruptive behaviour underachieve

academically and are at a high risk of disengagement from education and from making a positive

contribution to society. Thus, persistent poor behaviour in schools can have far-reaching and

damaging consequences for children and can limit their horizons: this is not a problem to be

ignored. These challenges could have made the school environment unfriendly to children and

teachers. From the foregoing, it could be deduced that pupils cannot learn and teachers cannot

teach in a chaotic environment. Therefore, teachers must deal effectively with students’

misbehaviour and promote student self-control through classroom management strategies so that

everyone can meet his/her emotional needs and academic goals. Effective primary school teachers

create optimal learning environments by establishing and enforcing rules, creating caring teacher–

student relationships, addressing problem behaviours, and using quality communication. These

teachers create orderly, safe environments where students feel valued and comfortable, thus setting

the stage for teaching and learning. To achieve that, they strategically arrange classroom space to

support a variety of independent, small and large group activities (Crane, 2001).

Theoretical Framework

Classroom management of lack of attentionhas been approached from a number of

theoretical perspectives, and different educational psychologists propose different theories, but for

the purpose of this present study, Bandura’s Social Learning Theory and Classroom

Management Theory by Haim Ginott was reviewed


36

Bandura’s Social Learning Theory

Albert Bandura was born on 4th December 1925 in Ukraine. In social learning theory Albert

Bandura (1977) stated that behaviour is learned from the environment through the process of

observational learning. Bandura believed that humans are active information processors and think

about the relationship between their behaviour and its consequences. Observational learning could

not occur unless cognitive processes were at work. Children observe the people around them

behaving in various ways. This is illustrated during the famous bobo doll experiment (Bandura,

1961). Individuals that are observed are called models. In society children are surrounded by many

influential models, such as parents within the family, characters on children’s TV, friends within

their peer group and teachers at school. These models provide examples of behaviour to observe

and imitate, e.g. masculine and feminine, pro and anti-social among others. Children pay attention

to some of these people (models) and encode their behaviour. At a later time they may imitate (i.e.

copy) the behaviour they have observed. They may do this regardless of whether the behaviour is

‘gender appropriate’ or not but there are a number of processes that make it more likely that a child

will reproduce the behaviour that its society deems appropriate for its sex. While discussing the

major tenet of his theory, Bandura maintained that the child is more likely to attend to and imitate

those people it perceives as similar to itself. Consequently, it is more likely to imitate behaviour

modelled by people of the same sex.

Secondly, the people around the child will respond to the behaviour it imitates with either

reinforcement or punishment. If a child imitates a model’s behaviour and the consequences are

rewarding, the child is likely to continue performing the behaviour. If parent sees a little girl

consoling her teddy bear and says “what a kind girl you are”, this is rewarding for the child and

makes it more likely that she will repeat the behaviour. Her behaviour has been reinforced (i.e.

strengthened). Reinforcement can be external or internal and can be positive or negative. If a child
37

wants approval from parents or peers, this approval is an external reinforcement, but feeling happy

about being approved of is an internal reinforcement. A child will behave in a way which it

believes will earn approval because it desires approval. Positive or negative reinforcement will

have little impact if the reinforcement offered externally does not match with an individual's needs.

Reinforcement can be positive or negative, but the important factor is that it will usually lead to a

change in a person's behaviour. Thirdly, the child will also take into account of what happens to

other people when deciding whether or not to copy someone’s actions, this is known as vicarious

reinforcement. This relates to attachment to specific models that possess qualities seen as

rewarding. Children will have a number of models with whom they identify. These may be people

in their immediate world, such as parents or elder siblings, or could be fantasy characters or people

in the media.

The motivation to identify with a particular model is that they have a quality which the individual

would like to possess.

Identification occurs with another person (the model) and involves taking on (or adopting)

observed behaviours, values, beliefs and attitudes of the person with whom you are identifying.

The term identification as used by Social Learning Theory is similar to the Freudian term related

to the Oedipus complex. For example, they both involve internalizing or adopting another person’s

behaviour. However, during the Oedipus complex the child can only identify with the same sex

parent, whereas with Social Learning Theory the person (child or adult) can potentially identify

with any other person.

The implication of the theory to this study is that people learn disruptive behaviour in the

same way they learn football, emulates successful students and positive ideals. Children learn from

models that they regard as significant such as colleagues and peers. Peers establish basic patterns

at the school or playing ground which in spite of possible changes is never completely extinguished
38

as the child grows. From this theory, it stands to reason that the behaviour of a child is a reflection

of the type of peer influences under which the child grew up. Hence, deficiency in proper

socialization both by parents and teachers may likely encourage disruptive behaviours. This

thereafter prevents positive socialization processes.

Classroom Management Theory

Classroom management theory was propounded by Haim Ginott (1922). Haim Ginott’s

theory is about communication and the importance of positive relationships among students and

between students and the teacher in the classroom. The main principles of Ginott’s theory as it

relate to behaviour management in the classroom include respect for children’s’ basic rights

listening to pupils, brevity, acceptance, asking questions to identify their needs and empathy.

According to Ginott, in an ideal classroom, the teacher would be more of a facilitator for

conversations that include every member of the class and should address all the important issues.

She/he should value the pupils’ contributions and listen to everyone’s ideas. Ginott wrote that

teachers often speak too much and so brevity on the part of the teacher will contribute to feelings

of validation for the pupils. Hence, recommends a system using mostly “I” statements such as “I

feel...” or “I think...”

For effective management of classroom disruptive behaviour, Ginott’s theory maintained

that teachers should generally accept their pupils both for their person and for the behaviour. If

there is a problem, teachers should address it and not the character of the pupils, and also should

always strive to guide pupils to tolerance acceptable behaviour rather than criticism. According to

Ginott, this is a useful technique for getting pupils used to procedures and also helps keep negative

feelings at bay. Name-calling, sarcasm, and other forms of put-downs should always be avoided

because good communication cannot take place if one party feels belittled.
39

Finally, there should always be respect for the pupils. Teachers should not pry into their

privacy nor should they mask their own emotions to try to hide something. In essence, the teacher

is the model of what she/he wants the pupils to be. Ginott also argue that punishment should be

avoided and praise should be handed out only if it is authentic and warranted. For Ginott

punishment is counter-productive because once it is over the pupils feel that they have paid for

their mistake and are free to commit it again. On the other hand, rewards are often not understood

because they put pressure on pupils to perform and should therefore be given very carefully.

Review of Relevant Empirical Studies

The review of literature here focuses on studies based on the management of classroom

disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils. The state and degree at which disruptive

behaviour prevails among pupils in this contemporary society had been of great interest to people

of various disciplines in the country. Among the scholars who showed concern for the welfare of

the Children (Pupils) are the psychologists, social workers, sociologists, social and counselling

psychologists. In this section, the researcher reviewed those empirical studies that are related to

the study. The review is on studies on classroom management, studies on disruptive behaviour

and causes of disruptive behaviour.

Studies on Classroom Management

Adeyemo (2012) carried out studied on the relationship between effective classroom

management and students’ academic achievement. The purpose of the study was to examine the

relationship between effective classroom management and students’ academic achievement in

physics subjects. The study was carried out in ten randomly selected secondary schools in Shomolu

local Government, Area of Lagos State. The design adopted for the study was a descriptive survey

approach. Simple descriptive analysis was used. The major instrument used in this study were

student questionnaire, teacher questionnaire and physics achievement test, data were gathered with
40

the research instrument and were analyzed, the research question were investigated and four

hypothesis were duly tested using ANOVA and t-test statistics. Findings show that the causes of

classroom disruptive behaviour may originate from the school, the teacher or the child as shaped

by the environment. This indicates that the causes of classroom disruptive behaviour are traceable

in general to the society and in particular to the schools, teachers, children and the homes. Based

on the findings of this research, it was discovered that effective classroom management skills or

techniques have strong and positive influence on student achievement in physics. The study relates

to the present study because it investigated the relationship between effective classroom

management and students’ academic achievement with the rationale to find out the influence of

effective classroom management skills or techniques on students academic achievement while the

present study focuses on managing classroom disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils

with a view to found out the causes and how effective classroom management strategies could curb

and ameliorate the issue of disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils.

In a similar study, Oyinloye (2010) investigated the primary school teachers’ perception of

classroom management and its influence on pupils’ activities. It has been observed that parents and

stakeholders have often blamed pupils’ failure and indiscipline on teachers in Nigeria. Some pupils

have been found wanting in their academic performance while cases of indiscipline and truancy

have been reported at Parents Teachers Association meetings by both Teacher and Parents.

Oyinloye study therefore investigated these problems through descriptive research using survey

method to elicit information from 200 primary school teachers through questionnaire. The

questionnaire contained 26 items, which covered specific areas of classroom management such as

classroom environment, teaching and learning and behaviour management. It was validated and

the data collected was subjected to Pearson Product Moment Correlation and a correlation

coefficient of 0.70 was obtained which was considered good enough for the study. The findings
41

from the study show that teachers’ should always organize their classes, involve pupils in activities

in order to reduce disruptive behaviours. Also the teachers should encourage the pupils to obey the

school rules and regulations and apply sanctions without favour.

This work relates to the present work in that the former investigated the primary school

teachers’ perception of classroom management and its influence on pupils’ activities while the

latter investigated managing classroom disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils in order

to found out the causes and effective classroom management strategies that could be used in

managing disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils. There is also relationship with the

design used by the two authours on descriptive research survey method.

In another study, Kimani, Kara and Ogetange (2012) investigated teachers and pupils views

on use of corporal punishment in managing discipline in primary schools in Starehe division,

Kenya. The study adopted a descriptive survey research design. Simple random sampling was used

to select 60 teachers and 300 pupils from the thirty public primary schools in Starehe Division.

Questionnaires were used to collect data from the pupils and teachers. Ten head teachers were also

interviewed. Data collected were analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively. The study found

that corporal punishment was a regular school experience for the pupils. Corporal punishment was

administered by everyone in authority at school including prefects. The most prevalent forms of

corporal punishment used among pupils at school were canning, slapping, kneeling down,

pinching, pulling hair/ears and forced manual work. Head teachers, teachers, and pupils perceived

corporal punishment as part of school ethos and culture. The study showed that school

administrators and teachers are not thoroughly prepared to deal with indiscipline and disruptive

classroom behaviours in the absence of corporal punishment. The study recommended that the

Ministry of Education should train head teachers and teachers on alternative strategies to deal with

lack of attentionother than use of corporal punishment.


42

This work relate to this work because it studied teachers and pupils views on use of corporal

punishment in managing discipline in primary schools. The study showed that school

administrators and teachers are not thoroughly prepared to deal with indiscipline and disruptive

classroom behaviours which informed the gap the present study stand to fill.

Lannie and McCurdy (2007) also carried out a study on preventing disruptive behaviour in

the urban classroom in the North-eastern U.S. In this study, an empirically-based behavioural

management strategy, the Good Behaviour Game (Game), was investigated. The effects of the

Game on student behaviour and teacher response statements, including praise, were examined. The

study was conducted in a general education first-grade classroom of an elementary school in a

large urban area in the North-eastern U.S. The school is comprised of 462 graders. Five teacher

with 22 students in a first grade classroom of an urban elementary school participated in

implementation of the Game. The intervention agent was a female teacher who was identified by

administration as experiencing difficulty with classroom management. Using a withdrawal design,

results showed that student on-task behaviour increased while disruptive behaviour decreased,

replicating previous findings. The number of teacher praise statements remained at near zero levels

across conditions. Frequency of teacher neutral and negative statements varied with the level of

student disruptive behaviour. The study therefore upheld teacher praise as an effective classroom

management approach.

The study relates with the present work in that it is on preventing disruptive behaviour in the

urban classroom and one of the findings of the study indicated that female teachers who was found

to have been experiencing difficulty with classroom management which invariably create a gap

for the present study to fill.


43

Studies on Disruptive Behaviour

Don, Wesley and Armstrong (2006) carried out a study on elimination of disruptive

classroom behaviour by systematically varying teacher's behaviour. The effects of teacher

behaviours on the classroom behaviours of children were investigated by systematically varying

approving (praise, smiles, contacts, among others) and disapproving (verbal reprimands, physical

restraint, among others) classes of teacher behaviour. Measures were taken on both teacher and

child behaviours. Each day a sample of 10 children was observed. The subject pool was a class of

28 well-behaved children in a middle public primary school class. The results demonstrated that

approving teacher responses served a positive reinforcing function in maintaining appropriate

classroom behaviours. Lack of attentionincreased each time approving teacher behaviour was

withdrawn. When the teacher's disapproving behaviours were tripled, increases appeared most

markedly in the gross motor and noise-making categories of disruptive behaviour. The findings

emphasize again the important role of the teacher in producing, maintaining, and eliminating

disruptive as well as pro-social classroom behaviour. The study relate with the present study

because it was on the elimination of disruptive classroom behaviour by systematically varying

teacher's behaviour while the present study deals with managing classroom disruptive behaviour

among primary school pupils.

The study of Mohammad (2011) investigated the classroom problems faced by teachers at the

Public Schools in Tafila Province. The study aimed to identify the classroom problems that faced

teachers in public schools in Tafila province, and the proposed solutions. The samples of the study

were 196 teachers from the public school in Tafila province. The instrument for data collection

was a questionnaire. The data collected was analyzed using mean and standard deviation. The

results of the study show that the mean of the behavioural problems was 2.66, and the mean of the

academic problems was 3.08. Also, the researcher found that statistical significant differences refer
44

to interaction between gender, level of school, and teaching experience in the behavioural problems

for male in the basic school, those with work experience less than 5 years. Also, there are no

statistical significant differences between gender, level of school, education degree, and teaching

experience in the academic problems. The study relates with the present study in that the former

dealt with classroom problems faced by teachers at the public schools while the present study deals

with managing classroom disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils.

The study of Way (2011) investigated the moderating effects of student perceptions in

relation to school discipline and disruptive classroom. The researcher adopted descriptive survey

research behaviour design. Sample size of 210 students was used for the study. The instrument for

data collection was a structured questionnaire. Data collected was analyzed using mean and

standard deviation. This study examines the relationship between school discipline and student

classroom behaviour. A traditional deterrence framework predicts that more severe discipline will

reduce misbehaviour. In contrast, normative perspectives suggest that compliance depends upon

commitment to rules and authority, including perceptions of fairness and legitimacy. Using school

and individual-level data from the National Education Longitudinal Study and multilevel

regression modelling, the author finds support for the normative perspective. Students who

perceive school authority as legitimate and teacher–student relations as positive are rated as less

disruptive. While perceptions of fairness also predict lower disruptions, the effects are mediated

by positive teacher–student relations. Contrary to the deterrence framework, more school rules and

higher perceived strictness predicts more, not less, disruptive behaviour. In addition, a significant

interaction effect suggests that attending schools with more severe punishments may have the

unintended consequence of generating deviance among certain youth.

This study differs with the present study because it dealt with the moderating effects of student

perceptions in relation to school discipline and disruptive classroom behaviour while the present
45

study deals with managing classroom disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils which

create a gap for the present study to fill.

Students exhibiting emotional and behavioural problems in the classroom can significantly

impact the learning environment and often are referred to school counsellors. Bidell and Deacon,

(2008) studied the role of school counsellors in connecting the dots between disruptive classroom

behaviour and youth self-concept. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the relationship

between high school students’ self-concept and disruptive classroom behaviors (DCB). The sample

for this study was selected at a public high school in a South-western city from a pool of tenth

through twelfth grade students (N = 92). School enrolment was approximately 2,700 and

participants were selected from the general education population and reflected the ethnic, social,

economic, and demographic make-up of the High school students (N

= 92) exhibiting DCB were compared with non-disruptive students using the Self-Description

Questionnaire II to assess self-concept. The findings among others show that High school students

exhibiting DCB reported significantly lower levels of self-concept compared to their non-

disruptive peers. Only non-academic aspects of self-concept were significantly lower in students

displaying DCB. The researchers therefore recommend a paradigm shift advocating school

counselling interventions to support student self-concept and reduce DCB before such behaviours

escalate to clinical levels and delinquency. The work relate to the present study. This is because it

investigated the role of school counsellors in connecting the dots between disruptive behaviour

and youth self-concept while the present study deals with managing classroom disruptive

behaviour among primary school pupils.

Otero-López, Castro, Villarde, and Santiago, (2009) carried out a study on job

dissatisfaction and burnout in school teachers with respect to student’s disruptive behaviour and

classroom conflict management in Galicia. The study used a sample of 1,386 teachers from
46

Enseñanza Secundaria Obligatoria (Compulsory Secondary Education), to identify what students’

disruptive behaviour and attitudes as well as what sources of stress derived from conflict

management best discriminate between teachers with different levels of job dissatisfaction and

burnout. A total of 1,386 Compulsory Secondary Education (ESO) teachers were recruited for the

study. This is a representative sample and it is distributed to incorporate (urban, coastal rural, and

interior rural) and gender. In the study, teachers completed a battery of self-reports which, among

other aspects, evaluated the variables of interest. An exhaustive analysis of the findings confirms

the following pattern: as the level of burnout increases, the perception of conflict-related distress

also increases (for instance having to deal with students’ disciplinary problems, having to meet the

parents of disruptive students) and students’ disruptive behaviour (for instance, verbal abuse on

the part of students, vandalism within the premises of the school). Results from this study allow

the researchers to find out that all variables validly discriminate as a function of dissatisfaction and

burnout. Specifically, aspects such as dealing with the parents of disruptive students and students’

disruptive behaviour (vandalism within the premises of the school, aggressions among students,

verbal abuse and challenging behaviour against the teacher) have an incidence on all three facets

of burnout. This work differs with the present because it was on job dissatisfaction and burnout in

school teachers with respect to student’s disruptive behaviour and classroom conflict management

while the present study deals with managing classroom disruptive behaviour among primary school

pupils which is an

indication of gap for the present study to fill.

In a similar study, Evers, Tomic and Brouwers (2004) compared teachers’ and students’

perception of burnout among teachers in the southern part of the Netherlands. The aim of the study

was to explore students’ and teachers’ perceptions of teacher burnout in relation to the occurrence

of disruptive student classroom behaviour and the teachers’ competence to cope with this kind of
47

behaviour. The study took a random sample consisting of 25 percent of the classes, 17 out of 69

(thereby leading to 411 out of 1782 students who participated in the study) at a Regional Training

Centre (RTC) in the southern part of the Netherlands. The sample was divided into 159 female

students (38.7 percent) and 252 male students (61.3 percent). The mean age was 18.3 years (SD =

2.43), ranging from 16 to 23 years of age. The total number of teachers working with them was 73

(58 male and 15 female teachers).The student respondents were asked to fill out three

questionnaires that were all adapted in part from existing instruments in order to comment on their

perceptions of their teachers’ levels of burnout. The findings of the study shows that the Maslach

Burnout Inventory, the Coping with Disruptive Behaviour Scale and the Perceived Disruptive

Behaviour Scale could be adapted to students to report perceived burnout symptoms among their

teachers, the occurrence of perceived disruptive student behaviour and the students’ perception of

their teachers’ competence to cope with disruptive student behaviour. Second, students’

perceptions do not differ according to their age. Third, the study found that there was a significant

difference between the perceptions of male and female students in respect of emotional exhaustion

and depersonalization, but not in respect of personal accomplishment. Fourth, according to the

students’ perceptions, a considerable percentage of variance in each of the three burnout

dimensions was explained by teachers’ competence to cope with student disruptive behaviour and

perceived disruptive student behaviour. Finally, with respect to the teachers’ self-reports, it

appeared that teachers’ and students’ reports differed significantly with respect to

depersonalization, personal accomplishment and the competence to cope with disruptive student

behaviour. The hierarchical regression analyses of the teachers’ data showed that the competence

to cope with disruptive student behaviour significantly contributed to depersonalization and

personal accomplishment, whereas the teachers’ age was significantly related with personal

accomplishment. The study therefore conclude that although the students’ perceptions and the
48

teachers’ self-reports on the teachers’ well-being differed on some dimensions, the students’

information may contribute valid information on some aspects of teachers’ mental health and

classroom processes. The study differs with the present study in that it compared teachers’ and

students’ perception of burnout among teachers while the present study deals with managing

classroom disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils which invariably created a gap for

the present work to fill.

The study of Veiga (2008) developed and validated a disruptive behaviour scale Lisbon and Viseu.

(DBS). The study presents both the construction procedures and the results obtained with a 16-

items Disruptive Behavior Scale Professed by Students (DBS-PS) for Portuguese students.The

sample was made of 915 subjects among the 7th and the 9th grades, male and female, from public

school in Lisbon and Viseu. More exactly, the mentioned sites were chosen by means of a casual

non-probabilistic sampling method. The sample constitution was based on the probabilistic

sampling method by grouping: in each site three schools were randomly chosen and, inside them,

classes were chosen, two per level and in the different schools, in a total of 36 classes. A scale was

built to determine disruptive behaviour evaluation and its psychometric qualities were analyzed.

The construct disruptive behaviour multi-dimensionality hypothesis was confirmed by means of a

result factorial analysis. These analyses showed that, besides a general factor, there were 3 factors

(that explain 51.1% of total variance) and were of use to study the construct or internal validity of

the scale. The psychometric qualities of students’ DBP were evaluated within internal consistency

coefficients to different factors, from temporal stability and external validity. Results obtained with

that self-report instrument were analyzed, and measures of reliability and of construct and

concurrent discrimination were estimated. Three specific factors were identified for the school

disruption through Varimax-rotation factor analysis. These factors accounted for 51 per cent of the

total variance. Reliability coefficients ranged between .67 and .88 for different factors and groups
49

(socio-economic status, residential zone, sex, age and grade). Concurrent validity coefficients were

satisfactory. The researcher observed that results were in accordance with the psychometric theory

of psychological evaluation. The study differs with the present study. This is because the developed

and validated a disruptive behaviour scale while the present study deals with managing classroom

disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils which indicate a gap to be filled by the present

study.

Study on the Causes of Disruptive Behaviour:

Ghazi, Gulap, Tariq and Khan (2013) carried out another study on the types and causes of

students’ disruptive behaviour in classroom at secondary Level in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan.

The purpose of the study was to investigate the types and causes of student’s disruptive behaviour

in classroom in secondary level as perceived by the teachers of secondary schools. The method of

the study was a descriptive survey the research design. The population of the study comprised 500

using multi-stage random sampling technique. The instrument for data collection was a researcher

developed questionnaire and was distributed among the sampled teachers and collected their

responses regarding the types and causes of students’ disruptive behaviour in classroom. Findings

of the study showed that some of the types of disruptive behaviour were reported unanimously by

most of the teacher to include bringing noisy electric devices in the classroom, blaming one another

upon any mischief, initiating quarrel among the students, shouting loudly to create thrill in

classroom among others while causes of disruptive behaviour include inconsistent parenting,

uncaring parents, over-protective parents and bad influences on a student’s local community

among others.

The study also discovered that disruptive behaviour of students of secondary schools needs

an extensive attention of educators, policy makers and the government to address this area for

quality education. The study is related to the present study in that the former investigated the types
50

and causes of disruptive behaviour in classroom in secondary school level while the latter deals

with managing classroom disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils and differs also as a

result of the that the present study is yet to find out the causes of disruptive bevhaviour among

primary school pupils in Nigeria since the former study was carried out outside the country.

Summary of Literature Reviewed

This study reviewed the classroom management of disruptive behaviours. The major thrust

of this was to highlight the basic concepts, theories and review of related empirical studies on the

subject. Causes and types of disruptive behaviour and strategies for managing lack of attentionwere

equally surveyed.

In view of this, the researcher reviewed the concept of primary education, it was found that

the goal of primary education is to ensure that all children have access to quality education and

achieve quality learning outcomes especially in numeracy and literacy, and also in critical areas,

such as life skills to prepare children for secure and meaningful live. Concept of behaviour was

visited, it showed that behaviour depicts the way in which one acts or conducts one’s self,

especially towards others. Also, concept of disruption behaviour was reviewed and it was indicated

that disruptive behaviour is simply the behaviour which does not allow the teachers and pupils for

effective teaching and learning such as shouting, playing among others. Under disruptive

behaviour, prevalent disruptive behaviour was also investigated to include those behaviours often

exhibited by pupils that obstructs and inhibits teaching and learning such as talking out of turn,

followed by non-attentiveness, daydreaming, and idleness among others. Management and

concept of classroom management were as well surveyed and it was found that it include the effort

made by the teacher to ensure that pupils in the classroom are controlled and guided for the purpose

of creating enabling environment that facilitates and fosters academic achievements. Equally

reviewed in this study was the causes of disruptive behaviour and strategies to manage it were
51

suggested. In the course of the review, the study was hinged on the Classroom Management Theory

as propounded by Haim Ginott. The review of related empirical studies to this study shows that

lack of attentionamong children are fairly common and often are developmentally normal.

However, when such behaviour significantly interferes with a child’s academic, social and/or

emotional development the educational goal of the society will be undermined.

Under empirical studies, Relationship between effective classroom management and

students’ academic achievement of students, Primary school teachers’ perception of classroom

management and its influence on pupils’ activities; Teachers and pupils views on use of corporal

punishment in managing discipline in primary schools, Preventing disruptive behaviour in the

urban classroom, elimination of disruptive classroom behaviour by systematically varying

teacher's behaviour, Classroom problems faced by teachers at the public schools and moderating

effects of student perceptions in relation to school discipline and Disruptive behaviour among

others were also reviewed. However, at the course of this research work with respect to the

empirical studies among other variables discussed in this work, it appears that none of the above

studies explored the classroom management of lack of attentionamong primary school that are

peculiar to pupils in Asaba Central Educational Zone. Hence, it is against this background that the

present study is being carried out in order to fill the existing gap.
52

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHOD

This chapter dealt with the research method adopted in conducting the study. The chapter

was organized under the following subheadings. Research design, area of the study, population for

the study, sample and sampling techniques, instrument for data collection, validation of the

instrument, reliability of the instrument, method of data collection, methods of data analysis

Research Design

Descriptive survey research design was adopted for the study. According to Nworgu (2006)

it is a study which aims at collecting data on and describing in a systematic manner the

characteristic features or facts about a given population. Survey research is also one in which a

group of people or items is studied by collecting and analyzing data from only few people or items

considered to be representative of the entire group. Descriptive survey studies are oriented towards

the determination of the status of a given phenomenon. The rationale for choosing this design is

that, it would help the researcher to identify the characteristics of the population. Hence, this design
53

would enable the researcher to gather reliable information relating to classroom management of

lack of attentionamong primary school pupils in Asaba Central

Education zone. It was therefore considered appropriate for this study.

Area of the Study

The study was carried out in Asaba Central Local Government Education Authority of

Enugu State. There are 17 local government areas in the state, which Asaba Local Government

Authority is one of them. Asaba Local Government Education Authority comprises of three

Educational Authorities namely, Asaba Central Local Government Education Authority,

Asaba East Local Government Education Authority and Asaba West Local Government

55
Authority. Under Asaba Central Local Government Education Authority, there three communities.

There was no known empirical study by the researcher on the prevalent disruptive behaviour in

Asaba Central Local Government Education Authority. This informed the researcher’s choice of

this area of study. A study on such school factors as disruptive behaviour that may mar learning

outcome becomes necessary.

Population for the Study

The population for this study comprised all public primary school teachers in Asaba

Central Local Government Education Authority. The number of schools in the LGA is 53 (28

Urban and 25 Rural respectively and a total number of 582 teachers. (Source: Enugu State

Universal Basic Education Board (ESUBEB 2013).

Sample and Sampling Techniques

The sample for this study was 120. This consisted of teachers teaching in urban and rural

public primary schools in Asaba education Central Local Government Education Authority.

Simple random sampling technique was first used to select 10 urban and 10 rural public primary
54

schools in the Education Authority. Simple random sampling technique was also used to draw 6

teachers from each of the schools selected given a total sample of 120 respondents. This is done to

give all schools and teachers equal chance of being selected. This sample size was appropriate for

the study as recommended by Ali, (2006); Cohen, Mannion and Morrison (2011) for a population

of few hundreds.

Instrument for Data Collection

The instrument for data collection was a structured questionnaire titled Classroom

management strategies for Disruptive Behaviour among Pupils Questionnaire (CMSDBPQ). The

instrument was divided into two sections; section A was on the demographic data of the

respondents while section B was in 5 clusters. Clusters A to D has a 4-points rating scale. In all,

the instrument was a 61 item instrument in 4 clusters - one for each research question. This took

cognizance of prevalent lack of attention exhibited by primary school pupils; causes of disruptive

classroom behaviours exhibited among primary school pupils, classroom management strategies

adopted by teachers to manage disruptive classroom behaviours in primary school; and effective

strategies lack of attention can be managed in primary school. (See Appendix A).

Validation of Instrument

The initial draft of the CMSDBPQ was subjected to face validation by three experts to

ascertain its validity, two from Educational Psychology, and one from Measurement and

Evaluation, all from University of Nigeria Asaba. The experts were requested to validate the

instruments with respect to appropriateness, clarity and structure of the items. The experts carefully

assessed the items in the instrument, their observations, comments and suggestions helped in the

modification and production of the final draft of the instrument for the study (See

Appendix B, C and D).


55

Reliability of the Instrument

To ascertain the reliability of the instrument, the validated instrument was trial tested in

Methodist Primary school Agbani Road Enugu which is equally outside the study area. Data

collected was subjected to the test of internal consistency using Crombach alpha procedure. This

gave the reliability co-efficient value of 0.75 for cluster A, 0.82 for cluster B, 0.75 for cluster C

and 0.82 for cluster D with an overall reliability coefficient of 0.79 respectively. These values were

considered satisfactory by the researcher to attest to the instrument’s reliability. Cranach’s Alpha

method was used because the items are polytomously scored and measures the internal consistency

of the items (See Appendix D).

Method of Data Collection

The Researcher personally administered the instrument to the respondents.

Adequate briefing was given to the respondents on prevalent lack of attention exhibited by primary

school pupils, Causes of lack of attention exhibited among primary school pupils, classroom

management strategies adopted by teachers to manage lack of attention in primary school and

effective strategies available for use in management of lack of attention among primary school

pupils. At the schools, the validated Classroom Management Strategies for Disruptive Behaviour

among Pupils Questionnaire (CMSDBPQ) was administered directly by the researcher to the

sampled public primary school teachers with the help of two trained research assistants. The

research assistants were briefed on the methodology of this study. Permission and advice of the

Head-Teachers of the selected schools were sought on the best time to administer the questionnaire.

Copies of the completed questionnaires were collected immediately after completion in order to

minimize wastage and achieve a 100% return rate.


56

Method of Data Analysis

The data collected was analyzed using mean and standard deviation and statistical package

for social science (SPSS) to answer the research questions. The decision rule was used on the mean

of 300. This implied that any item with a mean score above 300 was considered positive and

important while any mean below 300 was considered negative and unimportant. t-test was

used to test the two null hypotheses at .05 level of significance.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION AND REUSLTS

This chapter was concerned with the presentations of the analyzed data and the results obtained.

The results of the study are presented in tables in accordance with the research questions and

hypotheses that guided the study.

Research Question 1:
What are the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by primary school pupils? Table 3:
Mean ratings of the pupils on the prevalent disruptive behaviour exhibited in primary
schools.

S/N X SD Dec

Mean

1 Laughing unnecessarily 3.51 .67 A

2 Shouting 3.37 .67 A


57

3 Cheating during tests 3.05 .79 A

4 Jumping from one place to another 3.56 .59 A

5 Talking without permission 3.20 .95 A

6 Raising a hand when not necessary 2.88 .84 D

7 Loud yawning in the classroom 3.76 .74 A

8 Fighting 3.22 .80 A

9 Finger pinching 3.03 85 A

10 Joking while a lesson is going on 3.10 .83 A

11 Murmuring 3.14 .95 A

12 Ignoring teachers direction 3.35 .84 A

59
13 Sleeping in the class 2.94 .91 D

14 Bullying 3.15 .90 A

15 Speaking without permission 3.15 .98 A

16 Leaving ones seat to yell at others 3.20 .78 A

17 Verbal attack on teacher 3.13 .54 A

18 Destroying school properties intentionally 2.77 1.0 D

19 Threatening classmates 2.80 .96 D

20 Swearing in the classroom 3.02 39 A

3.17 .79 A

SA= Strongly Agree, A= Agree, D=Disagree, SD=strongly Disagree X=Mean, SD=Standard


Deviation.
58

The data in table 3 above indicated that the respondents agreed to all the items

I,2,3,4,5,7,8,9,10,11,12,14,15,16,17 and 20 which rated as 3.51, 3.37, 3.05, 3.56, 3.20, 3.76,

3.22, 3.03, 3.10, 3.14, 3.35, 3.15, 3.15, 3.20, 3.13and 3.02 with standard deviations of .67, .67,

.79.59,.95,.74,.80, .85, .83,.95,.84,.90,.98,.78,.54 and .39 as the prevalent disruptive behavious

exhibited by primary school pupils. Of significance are item 5 (x=3.20, SD= .95), 7 (x=3.76, SD=

.74), item 8 (x=3.22, SD= .80), and item 16 (x=3.20, SD= .78 indicating that talking without

permission, loud yawning in the classroom, fighting and leaving ones seat to yell at others

constituted more of the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by primary school pupils The

respondents also disagreed to items 6, 13, 18 and 19 which rated as 2.88, 2.94, 2.77 and 2.80 with

standard deviations as .84, .91, 1.0 and .96 indicating raising a hand when not necessary, destroying

school properties intentionally and threatening classmates were not prevalent lack of

attentionexhibited by primary school pupils.

The results from the above table are indicative of the fact that the respondents are of the

opinion that the statements in the items indicate that all the items except items 6, 13, 18 and 19 are

prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by primary school pupils with an overall mean value of (x=

3.17, SD=.79).

Hypothesis one

There is no significance different in the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools on

causes of disruptive behaviour.

Table 4: Summary of t-test analysis on the mean responses of the respondents on the causes of

disruptive behaviour

X Std t Df Sig. Decision


(tallied)
3.05 .46 .584 367 .54 NS
59

Table 8: above indicated that at 0.05 level of significance that there is no significance different in

the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools (x=3.03, SD=.46) on the causes of disruptive

behaviour. t (367) = .58, p= .56. Therefore, the hypothesis which stated that there is no significance

different in the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools on causes of disruptive behaviour

among primary school pupils is upheld.

Research Question 2 What are the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among primary school

pupils?

Table 5: Mean ratings of the pupils on the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among
primary school pupils

S/N X
Mean SD Dec

21 Lack of interest in subject matter 3.54 .70 A

22 Disability 3.65 .79 A

23 Teachers’ ineffective teaching 3.36 .64 A

24 Scarcity of instructional materials 2.81 1.0 D

25 Overcrowding in the classroom 3.50 .92 A


60

26 Lack of flexibility of the curriculum 2.72 .82 D

27 Poor sitting arrangement 3.19 .82 A

28 Poor home training (inconsistent parenting) 3.58 .89 A

29 Exposure to violence 3.77 .89 A

30 Hunger 3.08 .79 A

31 Health conditions 3.52 .87 A

32 Repeating the same class 3.91 .81 A

33 Lack of motivation from the teacher 3.76 .96 D

34 Teachers’ negative attitude towards pupils 3.29 .70 A

35 Lack of recreational time 3.10 .74 A


36 Non conducive classroom environment 3.51 .73 A

37 Lack of understanding 3.45 .93 A

Grand Mean 3.19 .73 A

SA= Strongly Agree, A= Agree, D=Disagree, SD=strongly Disagree X=Mean, SD=Standard


Deviation.

The data in table 5 above indicated that the respondents agreed to items 21, 22, 23, 25, 27, 28, 29,

30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36 and 37 as the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among primary school

pupils. Of significance are items 22, 29, 32 and 33 which rated as 22 (x=3.65, SD= .79), 29 (x=3.77,

SD= .89), item 32 (x=3.52, SD= .87) and item 33 (x=3.76, SD= .96) indicating that disability,

exposure to violence and lack of motivation from the teacher constitute more of the causes of lack

of attentionexhibited among primary school pupils. The results from the above table also showed

that the respondents disagreed to items 24, 26 which rated as 2.81, 2.72 with standard deviations

of 1.0 and .82 indicating that Scarcity of instructional materials and lack of flexibility of the

curriculum are not the causes of disruptive behaviour exhibited among primary school pupils.
61

The results from the above table are indicative of the fact that the respondents are of the opinion

that the statements in all the items except items 24 and 26 are causes of disruptive behaviour

exhibited among primary school pupils with an overall mean value of (x= 3.19, SD=.73).

Hypothesis Two

There is no significant difference in the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools

on the classroom management strategies adopted by teachers in managing

disruptive behaviours.

Table 6: Summary of t-test analysis on the mean responses of the respondents on the

classroom management strategies adopted by teachers in managing lack of attention

X Std t Df Sig. Decision


(tallied)
3.15 .49 .475 347 .50 NS

Table 6: above indicated that at 0.05 level of significance that there is no significant difference in

the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools (x=3.15, SD=.49) on the causes of disruptive

behaviour. t (347) = .48, p= .50. Therefore, the hypothesis which stated that there is no significant

difference in the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools on the classroom management

strategies adopted by teachers in managing lack of attentionis upheld.

Research Question 3:

What are the classroom management strategies adopted by teachers to manage lack of

attentionin primary school?


62

Table 7: Mean ratings of the respondents on the classroom management strategies adopted
by teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary school

X
Mean SD Dec
S/N

1 Sending the child out of the class 2.89 .100 S


2 Sending the child to do manual labour 2.85 .95 S
3 Flogging 3.02 .97 O
4 Scolding 2.72 .10 S
5 Referral to school disciplinary committee 2.47 .93 S
6 Spanking 2.47 .97 S
7 Shouting at pupils 2.67 .97 S
8 Kneeling 2.79 .97 S
9 Labelling 2.41 .93 S
10 Swearing on pupils 2.39 .96 S
11 Monitoring 3.18 .91 O
12 Motivating good students 2.98 .87 S
13 Standing the pupil up for sometime 3.32 3.7 O
14 Engaging pupils on unnecessary assignment 2.85 .91 S
15 Proper classroom arrangement 2.85 .90 S

Grand Mean 2.96 6.9 S

Key: VO= Very Often; O = Often; S= Sometimes; N= Never

The data in table 7 above identified items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 10 12, 14 and 15 which rated as 2.86,

2.85, 2.72,2.47, 2.47, 2.67, 2.79, 2.41, 2.39, 2.98, 2.85 and 2.85 with the standard deviations of

.100, .95, .10, .93, .97, .97, .97, .93, .96, .87, .91 and .90 which indicated that Sending the child

out of the class, Sending the child out of the class, Scolding, Referral to school disciplinary

committee, Spanking, Shouting at pupils, Kneeling, Labelling, Swearing on pupils, Motivating

good students, Engaging pupils on unnecessary assignment and Proper classroom arrangement

were classroom management strategies adopted sometimes by teachers to manage lack of


63

attentionin primary school. The result in the above table also showed that items 3, 11 and 13 which

rated as 3.02, 3.18 and 3.32 with the standard deviations of .97, 91 and 3.6 were classroom

management strategies adopted often by teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary schools.

The results from the above table are indicative of the fact that the respondents are of the opinion

that the statements in the items 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14 and 15 were classroom management

strategies adopted sometimes by teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary schools while

items 3, 11 and 13 were classroom management strategies adopted often by teachers to manage

lack of attentionin primary schools with an overall mean value of

(x= 2.96, SD=.6.9).

Research Question 4:

What effective strategies are available in managing disruptive behaviour in primary school?

Table 8: Mean ratings of the respondents on the effective strategies that are available in
managing disruptive behaviour in primary school

X
S/N Mean SD Dec
1. Encouragement 3.28 .70 A
2. Reinforcing good behaviours 3.30 .66 A
3. Warning before hand 3.25 .79 A
4. Setting up usable rules 3.75 .88 A
5. Include course and behaviour norms and expectations
for pupils in the learning objectives 3.43 .81 A
6. Let pupils know you expect them to act appropriately,
by reminding them of these norms 3.36 .52 A
7. Share control and responsibility with pupils 3.14 .81 A

8. Defining what is meant by a disruptive behaviour 3.90 .92 A

Grand Mean 3.43 .76 A


64

The data in table 8 above showed that the respondents agreed to all the items 1-8 presented in the

above table which indicated that encouragement, reinforcing good behaviours, warning before

hand, setting up usable rules, include course and behaviour norms and expectations for pupils in

the learning objectives, let pupils know you expect them to act appropriately,

by reminding them of these norms, share control and responsibility with pupils and defining what

is meant by a disruptive behaviour are effective strategies are available in managing disruptive

behaviour in primary school. Of significance are items 4 which rated as (x=3.75, SD= .88), item

8 which rated as (x=3.90, SD= .92) which indicated that ssetting up usable rules and defining what

is meant by a disruptive behaviour to the pupils are more reliable effective

strategies are available in managing disruptive behaviour in primary school

The results from the above table are indicative of the fact that the respondents are of the opinion

that all the statements in the above analyzed table are effective strategies are that available in

managing disruptive behaviour in primary school with an overall mean value of (x=

3.43 , SD=.76).

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION OF RESULTS, CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS,


65

RECOMMENDATIONS AND SUMMARY

This chapter presented the discussion of the results of the study, conclusion, educational

implications of the research findings, conclusions, recommendations, limitations of the study,

suggestions for further research and summary.

Discussion of the findings


The findings of the study are discussed in accordance with the research questions and
hypotheses.
Research question one sought to identify the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by

primary school pupils. The findings show that the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by primary

school pupils include Laughing unnecessarily, shouting, Cheating during tests, Jumping from one

place to another, Talking without permission, Loud yawning in the classroom, Fighting, Finger

pinching, Joking while a lesson is going on and Murmuring among others. The result of the study

is accordance with Wille (2002) who stated that lack of attentiondepicted a situation whereby the

students failed to respond to teacher’s requests, indulge in noise making, moving out of their seats

and staring in a direction other than the teacher or their work. The findings are in concert with the

postulations of McCabe and Frede (2007) who asserted that lack of attentionduring the preschool

years constitute one of the strongest predictors of later more serious problem behaviours including

delinquency, aggression, antisocial behaviour, and substance abuse. Buttressing further, the

authors noted that disruptive behaviour is any repeated pattern of behaviour that interferes with

learning or engagement in social interactions. This includes unresponsiveness to appropriate

guidance and actions such as prolonged tantrums, physical and verbal aggression, disruptive vocal

and motor behaviour, property destruction, self-injury, noncompliance and withdrawal. The above

findings are also in

68
66

agreement with Ghazi, Gulap, Tariq and Khan (2013) who asserted that disruptive behaviour is

simply the behaviour which does not allow the teachers and pupils for effective teaching and

learning process. (Gesinde, 2000). Buttressing further, the author stated that prevalent disruptive

behaviour may take many forms such as persistent questioning, incoherent comments, verbal

attacks, unrecognized speaking out, incessant arguing, intimidating shouting, and inappropriate

gestures. Contributing to the above points, Rachel and Daniel (2012) opined that the prevalent

disruptive behaviour in the classroom is talking out of turn, followed by non-attentiveness,

daydreaming, and idleness. Stressing further, the authors asserted that the most unacceptable

disruptive behaviour is disrespecting teachers in terms of disobedience and rudeness, followed by

talking out of turn and verbal aggression

Research question two sought to investigate the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among

primary school pupils

The findings also indicated that Lack of interest in subject matter, Disability, Teachers’ ineffective

teaching, Overcrowding in the classroom, Poor sitting arrangement, Poor home training

(inconsistent parenting), Exposure to violence, Hunger, Health conditions, Repeating the same

class, Lack of motivation from the teacher, Teachers’ negative attitude towards pupils and Lack of

recreational time were the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among primary school pupils. The

above findings are in accordance with Gesinde (2000) who observed that classroom management

could pose a problem to the teacher, especially when the teacher lacks the competence to create

the setting, decorate the room, arrange the chairs, speak to pupils and listen to their responses,

putting routines in place and then executing, modifying and reinstating them, developing rules and

communicating those rules to pupils especially those with disabilities. Aimee (2003) posited that

children who view televised media violence are more likely to have increased feelings of hostility,

decreased emotional response to the portrayal of violence and injury that lead to disruptive
67

behaviour through imitation. The result is also in agreement with Alex (2012) who Stated that

unwholesome mass media has become a major contributor of children deviant behaviour. The mass

media such as radio, television, newspaper and magazine, watching of internet films or

pornographic materials which are characterized by violence movies are recently developed agency

which perpetuates disruptive act among children. While justifying the findings Ghazi et al (2012)

opined that disruptive behaviour can be caused by factors such as inconsistent parenting, uncaring

parents, over-protective parents and bad influences on a student’s local community. Stressing

further, the authors posited that poverty, poor quality teaching, repeating the same class, teachers’

negative attitude towards pupils, lack of motivation from teacher and poor classroom condition

such as lighting and ventilation among others are the major causes of disruptive behaviour in the

classroom. Research three explored the classroom management strategies adopted by

teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary school.

The findings revealed among other things that Sending the child out of the class

Sending the child to do manual labour, Flogging, Scolding, Referral to school disciplinary

committee, Spanking, Shouting at pupils, Kneeling, Labelling, Labelling, Monitoring, Motivating

good students, Standing the pupil up for some time, Engaging pupils on unnecessary assignment

and Proper classroom arrangement were the classroom management strategies adopted sometimes

and often by teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary school. The above findings are in

concert with the postulations of Gootman (2008) stated that rules give pupils concrete direction to

ensure that teachers’ expectation becomes a reality, when they become consistent in enforcing the

rules and procedures made. Buttressing further, the author

asserted that there are no perspectives on classroom management strategies that attempt to be

holistic. One example is affirmation teaching, which attempts to guide students toward success by

helping them see how their effort pays off in the classroom. It relies upon creating an environment
68

where pupils and students are successful as a result of their own efforts. The findings are in

accordance with McPhee and Craig (2009) who asserted that teachers who state guidelines early

and enforce them at the first appearance of disruptive behaviour will prevent classroom misconduct

from escalating into serious confrontations and help transgressors to avoid the more serious

consequences of such actions. The findings also lay credence to the postulation of Marshal (2001)

who opined that discipline without stress, punishments or rewards is designed to educate young

people about the value of internal motivation. The intention according to the author is to develop

within youth (pupil) a desire to become responsible and self-disciplined and

to put forth effort to learn.

Research question four sought to identify the Effective Management Strategies Available for

use in Managing Disruptive Behaviour in Primary Schools

The findings indicated that Encouragement, Reinforcing good behaviours, Warning

before hand, Setting up usable rules, Include course and behaviour norms and expectations for

pupils in the learning objectives, Let pupils know you expect them to act appropriately, by

reminding them of these norms, Share control and responsibility with pupils and Defining what is

meant by a disruptive behaviour were the Effective Management Strategies Available for use in

Managing Disruptive Behaviour in Primary Schools. The above results are in consonance with the

assertion of Gootman (2008) who stated that rules give pupils concrete direction to ensure that

teachers’ expectation becomes a reality, when they become consistent in enforcing the rules and

procedures made. Buttressing further, the author asserted that there are no perspectives on

classroom management strategies that attempt to be holistic. One example is affirmation teaching,

which attempts to guide students toward success by helping them see how their effort pays off in

the classroom. It relies upon creating an environment where pupils and students are successful as

a result of their own efforts. The finding is also in consonance with the view of McGhee and Craig
69

(2009) who asserted that teachers who state guidelines early and enforce them at the first

appearance of disruptive behaviour will prevent classroom misconduct from escalating into serious

confrontations and help transgressors to avoid the more serious consequences of such actions.

Table 4 above indicated that at 0.05 level of significance that there is no significance different in

the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools on the causes of disruptive behaviour.

Therefore, the hypothesis which stated that there is no significance different in the mean ratings in

urban and rural primary schools on causes of disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils is

upheld since the findings showed that there is no significance different on the causes of disruptive

behaviour among primary school pupils.

Finally, t-test was employed as shown in table 6 to determine the mean ratings in urban

and rural primary schools on the classroom management strategies adopted by teachers in

managing disruptive behaviours. Evidently, the result showed that there is no significant difference

in the mean ratings in urban and rural primary schools on the classroom management strategies

adopted by teachers in managing disruptive behaviours.

Conclusion

From the findings of the study, the following conclusions were drawn; Disruptive behaviour

among primary school pupil is a multifaceted phenomenon that requires an understanding of

individuals, families, the schools and all the stakeholders and curriculum planners in taking

appropriate measures that is most requisite in managing lack of attentionamong pupils to ensure a

threat free society. This is because it has been revealed that if these lack of attentionare not tackled

especially when these children are young it could metamorphose to more behavioural disorder that

is capable of tearing a society apart.


70

Educational Implications

The findings of this study have far reaching implications including the following: Since from the

research results, it was revealed that the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by primary school

pupils include laughing unnecessarily, shouting, cheating during tests, jumping from one place to

another, talking without permission, loud yawning in the classroom, fighting; finger pinching,

joking while a lesson is going on and murmuring among others. It implies that if the teachers adopt

an appropriate class room management strategies, it will enable them curtail the prevalent rate of

disruptive behaviour among primary schools pupils to the barest minimum. Also, if teachers’ lack

of interest, teachers’ ineffective teaching, lack of motivation, teachers’ negative attitude towards

pupils as indicated to be the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among primary school pupils will

be addressed through an appropriate occupational adjustment like undergoing in-service training

to acquire requisite skills for effective teaching and motivation, it will go a long way to solving the

problems of lack of attentionamong pupils and as well add to the value of the teachers..

Moreover, if the teachers adopt appropriate classroom management strategies as revealed pupils’

lack of attentionwill be properly handled and thus creating enabling environment for conducive

teaching and learning. If teachers employ encouragement, reinforcing good behaviours, warning

before hand, setting up usable rules, among others as indicated to be the effective management

strategies available for use in managing disruptive behaviour in primary schools, pupils’ deviant

and behavioural disorder will be handled appropriately.

Recommendations

The following recommendations have been made based on the findings of this study:

• Teachers should be provided with in-service training programmes to enable them acquire

the requisite skills and knowledge for effective teaching and learning.
71

• Good upbringing of the child begins at home therefore; parents should put efforts in

ensuring that their children and wards are taught the norms and values of the society so as

to discourage them from indulging in anti-social behaviours.

• Teachers should always make out time for recreational activities and ensure that all pupils

participate during the allotted period.

• Parents should strictly avoid their children and wards from being exposed to media that are

characterized by violence movies.

• Government and nongovernmental organizations should from time to time organize

seminars to pupils including their teachers and parents on the effects of disruptive

behaviours.

• Government should device means in ensuring that the class rooms are equipped with all

necessary learning material, renovate and construct new classroom to ensure conducive

teaching and learning environment.

Limitations of the study

This study is not without some obvious limitations

• Some of the respondents were reluctant in providing the necessary information because of

the nature of the topic investigated. This could have affected the result slightly.

• The nature of instrument used may also be a factor. The researcher used survey

questionnaire as instrument for data collection. Considering the limitations of survey

questionnaire, one might doubt the generalizability of the findings.

Suggestions for Further Research

Based on the findings of the study, the researcher makes the following suggestions for

further research;

• The study should be replicated in other parts of the state or country.


72

• A study on the effect of disruptive behaviour on the academic performance of pupils.

• Family factors as determinants of disruptive behaviour among primary school pupils.

Summary

The main purpose of this study was to investigate the classroom management of lack of

attentionamong primary school pupils in Asaba Central Education Authority. An extensive review

of literature was undertaken to guide the researcher into what has already been carried out in the

area of the study. To guide the study, four research questions were posed and two hypotheses

formulated.

Descriptive survey design was adopted. Population for the study consisted of 120 teachers from

Asaba Central Education Authority who responded to the questionnaire. The instrument used for

data collections was a validated Classroom Management Strategies for Disruptive Behaviour

among Pupils Questionnaire (CMSDBPQ) The internal consistency reliability coefficient was

determined for the questionnaire using cronbach Alpha. The data were analyzed using mean,

standard deviation and t-test statistics to test the hypotheses. The major findings of the study

showed among others that the prevalent lack of attentionexhibited by primary school pupils

included laughing unnecessarily, shouting, cheating during tests, jumping from one place to

another, talking without permission, loud yawning in the classroom, fighting, finger pinching,

joking while a lesson is going on and murmuring among others. The findings while ascertaining

the causes of lack of attentionexhibited among primary school pupils, the findings also indicated

that lack of interest in subject matter, disability, teachers’ ineffective teaching, overcrowding in

the classroom, poor sitting arrangement, poor home training (inconsistent parenting), exposure to

violence, hunger, health conditions, repeating the same class, lack of motivation from the teacher,

teachers’ negative attitude towards pupils and lack of recreational time were the causes of lack of

attentionexhibited among primary school pupils.


73

Furthermore, the findings of the study also identified the classroom management

strategies adopted by teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary school to encompass sending

the child out of the class sending the child to do manual labour, flogging, scolding, referral to

school disciplinary committee, spanking, shouting at pupils, kneeling, labelling, labelling,

monitoring, motivating good students, standing the pupil up for some time, engaging pupils on

unnecessary assignment and proper classroom arrangement were the classroom management

strategies adopted sometimes and often by teachers to manage lack of attentionin primary school.

The findings of the of study also showed that that encouragement, reinforcing good behaviours,

warning before hand, setting up usable rules, include course and behaviour norms and expectations

for pupils in the learning objectives, let pupils know you expect them to act appropriately, by

reminding them of these norms, share control and responsibility with pupils and defining what is

meant by a disruptive behaviour were the effective management strategies available for use in

managing disruptive behaviour in primary schools. The implementation of the findings is

important to all levels of education and to all the stakeholders of education and NGOs Non

Governmental Organizations. This shall not be limited to employment of well informed educated

and determined teachers for comprehensive classroom management only.


74

REFERENCES

Adepoju, A. & Fabiyi, A (2006). Universal basic education in Nigeria: Challenges and prospects.
Journal of social science 4. 33-41.

Adeyemo, S. A. (2012). The Relationship between effective classroom management and students’
academic achievement. European Journal of Educational Studies 4(3),pp, 367 – 381

Albert, R. and Emmons.M. (2001). Your perfect Assertiveness and Equality in your Life and
Relationships 8th edition; Atascadero CA: Impact Publishers Inc.

Ali, A. (2006). Conducting research in education and social science. Enugu: Tashiwa network
Ltd.

Anih, F.P & Ogoke, J.C (2014). Education and guidance and counselling for responsive
citizenship. A philosophical review. A paper presented at the 14th annual international
conference of the Home Economics Research Association of Nigeria. University of Nigeria,
Asaba.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Barnes, C. & Mercer, G. (2004). Implementing the Social Model of Disability: Theory and
Research, Leeds: The Disability Press.
75

Bidell, M. P. & Deacon, R. E. (2008). School counselors connecting the dots between disruptive
classroom behavior and youth self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97(4), 617-
629.

Bru, E. (2006). Factors associated with disruptive behaviour in the classroom. Scandanavian
Journal of Educational Research. 50 (1), 23-43

Crozier, S. (2006).Preparing the general education classroom for your child. In E.A. Boutot and
M. Tincani (Eds.), Autism Spectrum Disorders Handouts: What Parents Need to Know
(pp.169-171). Austin, Texas: ProEd.

De Martini-Scully, D. D., Bray, M. A., & Kehle, T. J. (2000). A Packaged intervention to reduce
disruptive behaviors in general education students. Psychology in the Schools, 37, 149156.

Don R. T., Wesley, C. B & Armstrong, M.(2006). Production and elimination of disruptive
classroom behavior by systematically varying teacher's behavior. Journal of Applied
Behavior Analysis. 1, 35-45

Dunbar, C. (2004). Best practices in classroom management. College of education. Michigan State
university. Retrieved from: Web: http://outreach.msu.edu
Evers, W. J. G. Tomic, W & Brouwers, A (2004).Burnout among teachers students’ and teachers’
perceptions compared. School Psychology International. 25(2): 131–148. DOI:
10.1177/0143034304043670
Evertson, C.M, Weinstein, C (2006). Handbook of classroom management: research, practice
and contemporary issues, London: lawrence elbaum. Publishers: Google Search. Federal
Republic of Nigeria
Fayden, T (2005) How children learn. getting beyond the deficit myth. London. Paradigm
Publishers.
Federal Republic of Nigeria (2004). National policy on education. Abuja: National Educational
Research Development Council.
Federal Republic of Nigeria. (2004). National Economic Empowerment and Development
Strategy (NEEDS). Abuja, Nigeria.

Ghazi, S.R. Gulap S., Tariq, M & Khan, Q. A (2013).Types and causes of students’ disruptive
behavior in classroom at secondary level in khyber pakhtunk. Science and Education
Publishing
Gesinde, A. M. (2000). Learners' lack of attentionand the prospects of educational development in
Nigeria. Journal Of Educational Development. I (2), 2000

Gillispie, P. M (2005).Diverting disruptivebehavior.. The effects of early interventionon the defiant


behavior of students,using a social skills curriculum! Action Research Project.

Gootman, M.E. (2008). The caring teacher's guide to discipline: helping students learn selfcontrol,
responsibility, and respect, K-6. p. 36. ISBN 1412962846

Head, G. (2005) Better learning, better behaviour. Scottish Educational Review, 37 (2), 94-103
76

Higgens, J. W., Williams, R. L., & McLaughlin, T. F. (2001). The effects of a token economy
employing instructional consequences for a third-grade student with learning disabilities: A
data based case study. Education & Treatment of Children, 24, 99.
Hunter, L. (2003). School Psychology: a public health framework III. Managing disruptive
behaviour in schools: the value of a public health and evidence –based perspective. Journal
of School Psychology, 41(1), 39-59

Kauchak, D & Eggen, P. (2008). Introduction to teaching: Becoming a professional (3rd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Kehle, T. J., Bray, M. A., Theodore, L. A., Jenson, W.R., & Clark E. (2000). A Multi-component
intervention designed to reduce disruptive classroom behavior. Psychology in the Schools.
37, 475.

Kimani, G. N., Kara, A. M. & Ogetange, T. B. (2012).Teachers and pupils views on persistent use
of corporal punishment in managing discipline in primary schools in starehe division,
Kenya. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Vol. 2 No. 19 [Special Issue
– October 2012] 268-274

Lannie, A. L. & McCurdy, B. L. (2007). Preventing disruptive behavior in the urban classroom:
effects of the good behavior game on student and teacher behavior. Education and
Treatment of Children. 30 (1(, 85-98.

Lipsey, M. W., & Cullen, F. T. (2007). The effectiveness of correctional rehabilitation: a review
of systematic reviews. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 3, 297–320.

Mackay, S., McLauglin,T. F., Weber, K., & Derby, K. M. (2001). The use of precision requests to
decrease noncompliance in the home and neighborhood: a case study. Child & Family
Behavior Therapy. 23, 43-52.

McCabe, L. A. & Frede. E. C. (2007). Challenging behaviors and the role of preschool education.
policy brief series.E. C. Frede, and W. S. Barnett, (EDs).National Institute for Early
Education Research.December 2007, Issue 16. www.nieer.org

McGlynn, A. P. (2009). Managing disruptive behavior by creating a positive tone. Retrieved from:
www.mccc.edu/~amcglynn/index.html

McGoey, K. E. & DuPaul, G. J. (2000). Token reinforcement and response cost procedures:
reducing the disruptive behavior of preschool children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity
disorder. School Psychology Quarterly. 15, 330-343.

McMahon, T & Loschiavo, C. (2006). Dealing with difficult students. Retrieved from:
http://www.jmu.edu/counselingctr/DisruptiveStudents.shtml
77

McPhee, A. & Craig, F (2009).Disruptive behaviour within the classroom: an ecosystemic view of
pupil behaviour. Retrieved from: http://hdl.handle.net/1905/805

Mohammad, S. (2011). The Classroom problems faced by teachers at the public schools in tafila
province, and proposed solutions. International Journal of Education Science, 3(1): 3748.

Marshal (2001) Discipline without stress, punishments or rewards. Science and Education
Publishing Co. Ltd.

Munn, P. Johnstone, M. and Sharp, S. (2004) Discipline in scottish schools: a comparative survey
over time of teachers' and head teachers' perceptions. Commissioned by SEED.

Musser, E. H., Bray, M. A., Kehle, T. J., Jenson, W. R. (2001). Reducing lack of attentionin
students with serious emotional disturbance. School Psychology Review. 30, 294-305.

Nayak. A.K & Rao V.K. (2008). Classroom teaching methods and practices. New Delhi. APH.
Publishing Corporation.
Nworgu, B.G.(2006). Educational research. Basic issues and methodology: (second edition)
Asaba: University Trust Publishers.

Obiweluozo, N., Umemetu, M & Ogbonnaya , N. O. 2013). Supervision and inspection for
effective primary education in Nigeria: strategies for improvement. Academic Research
International .( 4) 4 p 586

Ogbuonu,C,N (2014)Management and development: A contemporary reading in public


administration. Premium Publishing House Abuja.
Ogbonnaya, N. (2009). Introduction to education: The Nigeria perspective.
Enugu. Ugovin Publishers.

Oliver RM (2009). Protocol for systematic review of the effectiveness of teachers’ universal
classroom management practices on disruptive student behaviour. Google Search using
Evertson and Weistein (2006).

Onwuasoanya, P.N. (2008) Behaviour modification techniques counselling. Great AP Express


Publishers LTD, 3 Obollo Road, Asaba, Nigeria

Otero-López, J. M., Castro, C., Villardefrancos, E & Santiago, M. J. (2009). Job dissatisfaction
and burnout in secondary school teachers: student’s disruptive behaviour and q management
examined. European Journal of Education and Psychology.2009, Vol. 2, N2.pp 99 –
111.Retrieved from: www.ejep.es

Oyinloye, G. O. (2010). Primary school teachers’ perception of classroom management and its
influence on pupils’ activities. European Journal of Educational Studies 2(3).pp, 305 – 312.
78

Oyinloye, G.O. (2010). Primary school teachers’ perception of classroom management and its
influence on pupils’ activities. European Journal of Educational Studies 2(3), 2010

Porter, L (2000) Behaviour in schools. theory and practice for teachers, Buckingham: Open
University Press.

Puram R.A.and Chennai (2012) Emotional and behavioral disorders. Retrieved from:
http://vexcel.org/topics/ebd_disbeh.shtml#top

Rachel C. F. Sun1 & Daniel T. L. S (2012) Student classroom misbehavior: an exploratory study
based on teachers' perceptions. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1100/2012/208907

Sabornie, E. J. (2010). Managing and improving behavior in inclusive educational environments.


The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

Sugai, G., Horner, R.H., & Gresham, F.M. (2002). Behaviorally effective school environments. In
M.R. Shinn, H.M. Walker, & G. Stoner (Eds.), Interventions for Academic and Behavior
ProblemsII: Preventive and Remedial Approaches (pp. 315-350). Bethesda, MD: National
Association of School Psychologists.

Terry.G.R (2002) Management concepts and application management. Retrieved from:


https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Management_Concepts_and_Application /m anagementDX

Umemetu, U and Ogbonna N, (2013). Supervision and inspection of primary education in


Nigeria: Strategies for improvement. Academic Research International l (4) 4. Retrieved
from www.savap.org.pk.

UNESCO. (2001). Monitoring report on education for all 2001. Retrieved 08th September 2011
from http://www.unesco.org/education/efa/monitoring/monitoring_rep_contents.shtml

Veiga, F. H. (2008).Disruptive behavior scale professed by students (dbs-ps): development and


validation. International Journal of Psychology and Psychological Therapy 2008, 8, 2, 203-
216

Way, S. M. (2011), School discipline and disruptive classroom behavior: the moderating effects of
student perceptions. The Sociological Quarterly, 52: 346–375. doi:
10.1111/j.15338525.2011.01210.x

Wille, J. R. (2002) Reducing disruptive classroom behavior with multicomponent intervention. A


Research Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Master of
Science Degree, California State University.

Wolfe, D. A. (2007). Acting out: understanding and reducing aggressive behaviour in children
and Youth. Toronto: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.
79

Wong, H. K & Rosemary T. (2001) How to be an effective teachers! The first days of school.
(Revised) Mountain View. CA Harry Kwong Publications, inc.

Section A: Personal information of respondent

Attestation and Demography: Dear respondent, measures have been taken to insure that your

participation as a respondent in this research will not in any way harm or be used against you.

Hence, your identity or personal contact is not required.

Please indicate by ticking (√) in the appropriate box, your class

1. Name [ ]
2. Age [ ]
3. Class [ ] Section B
Instruction on how to fill Section C-D: Please indicate your level of agreement on the following
statement by ticking [√] in the boxes against the statement of your choice. All the items are on a
four points rating scale. The responses are as follows;
SA Strongly Agree
A Agree
D Disagree
SD Strongly Disagre
Instrument for Data Collection Classroom management Strategies for Disruptive Behaviour
among Pupils Questionnaire (CMSDBPQ)

S/N The following are possible lack of attention which SA A D SD


pupils exhibit in classroom
1 Laughing unnecessarily
2 Shouting
3 Cheating during tests
80

4 Jumping from one place to another


5 Talking without permission
6 Raising a hand when not necessary
7 Loud yawning in the classroom
8 Fighting
9 Finger pinching
10 Joking while a lesson is going on
11 Murmuring
12 Ignoring teachers direction
13 Sleeping in the class
14 Bullying
15 Speaking without permission
16 Leaving ones seat to yell at others
17 Verbal attack on teacher
18 Destroying school properties intentionally
19 Threatening classmates
20 Swearing in the classroom

Cluster B: Causes of Disruptive Classroom Behaviours


S/N The following are possible causes of lack of SA A D SD
attention which pupils exhibit in my classroom
21 Lack of interest in subject matter
22 Disability
23 Teachers’ ineffective teaching
24 Scarcity of instructional materials
25 Overcrowding in the classroom
26 Lack of flexibility of the curriculum
27 Poor sitting arrangement
28 Poor home training (inconsistent parenting)
29 Exposure to violence
30 Hunger
31 Health conditions
32 Repeating the same class
33 Lack of motivation from the teacher
34 Teachers’ negative attitude towards pupils
35 Lack of recreational time
36 Non conducive classroom environment
27 Lack of understanding
81

Cluster C: Strategies Adopted by Teachers


S/N I adopt the following strategies in managing VO O S NE
disruptive classroom behaviours in my classs
1 Sending the child out of the class
2 Sending the child to do manual labour
3 Flogging
4 Scolding
5 Referral to school disciplinary committee
6 Spanking
7 Shouting at pupils
8 Kneeling
9 Labeling
10 Swearing on pupils
11 Monitoring
12 Motivating good students
13 Standing the pupil up for sometime
14 Engaging pupils on unnecessary assignment
15 Proper classroom arrangement
16 Others, please specify
Key: VO= Very Often; O = Often; S= Sometimes; N= Never
Cluster D: Effective Strategies Available
S/N The following are available strategies that can SA A D SD
be used to effectively manage disruptive
classroom behaviour
1 Encouragement
2 Reinforcing good behaviours
3 Warning before hand
4 Setting up usable rules
5 Include course and behaviour norms and
expectations for pupils in the learning
objectives
6 Let pupils know you expect them to act
appropriately, by reminding them of these
norms
7 Share control and responsibility with pupils
8 Defining what is meant by a disruptive
behaviour

S-ar putea să vă placă și