INDISCIPLINE AND ITS EFFECTS ON CHILDREN’S ACADEMIC PERFORMANCES IN PRIMARY SCHOOLS
CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW
Meaning of Indiscipline
Asiyai (2012) posited that education is a critical tool for the transformation of the individual and the society. Secondary education in Nigeria therefore is aimed at preparing the individual for useful living within the society and preparation for higher education. And for the individual to be able to live a useful life in his society and contribute maximally towards socio-economic and political development of the nation in which he/she belongs, relevant skills, values, attitudes, knowledge and competencies that will make him to be disciplined must be impacted. Hence, what is INDISCIPLINE? The term “indiscipline” is a household word in Nigeria today. In fact, it is a word that is found in government offices, private sectors, in politics and in all levels of educational institutions. The trend in secondary schools in the present time is indiscipline of all sorts. The trouble with the term is that every individual may know what they mean when they talk about it, but individual meanings can still differ in a sense, therefore, we will at this juncture present some of the meaning giving to the term by scholar in Journal of Studies in Social Sciences 261 (1995) who also define indiscipline as unruly acts and behaviours, acts of lawlessness and disobedience to school rules and regulation. It can be summarized that indiscipline is any form of misbehaviours which the student(s) can display in the following ways: general disobedient to constituted authority, destruction of school property, poor attitude to learning, abuse of seniority, immoral behaviour, drug abuse, stealing, lateness, truancy, dirtiness quarrelsome, use of abusive or foul languages, rudeness, gangstarism or cultism e.t.c. as the forms of indiscipline in schools are inexhaustible. Timothy (2008) further stated that indiscipline can be said to be the unwillingness of students to respect the constituted authority, observe and obey school rules and regulations and to maintain high standard of behaviours conducive to teaching learning process and essential to the smooth running of the school to achieve the educational objective with ease. In addition, indiscipline is also defined according to Akindiji (1996:5) adapted from Nwakoby (2001: 12) as “an act of misconduct which not only physical act but could also be a thing of the mind”. The above definition presupposes that indiscipline is an act of wrong doing and which must not necessarily be seen from a student’s action but the mood of such student could be interpreted as an act of indiscipline or misconduct. Achebe (1984: 27) on his part defined indiscipline as “a disregard to lay down standards of behaviours, rules and regulations of a social system”. From this assertion therefore, it could be said that indiscipline is negligence of norms and cultures of a social system.
Furthermore, indiscipline as a concept could also be seen as lack of self-control and utter disregard for constituted authority. An undisciplined person therefore is one who does not fit in properly into the system in which he finds himself and as such cannot contribute positively to the improvement of the society (Nwakoby 2001). In the context of a school system, a student is said to be discipline if his behaviours, 262 Journal of Studies in Social Sciences actions and inactions conform to the predetermined rules and regulations of the school concerned. But, when this is not the case, such a child or student is said to be undisciplined (Igwe, 1990). School indiscipline is further defined by Igwe (1990: 16) as “any mode of behaviour, action and conduct which deviates from the established and approved rules and regulations of a school and the acceptance code of behaviour, action, norms and the ethics of the society at large”. Going by the above explanation therefore, any behaviour and action which deviates from acceptable and approved mode of behaviour can be regarded as undisciplined act. Also, when Zubaida (2009) citing Dare, Hashim, Sweinan and Ofie (2004) who defined discipline in schools as respect for school laws and regulations and the maintenance of an established standard of behaviour and implies self-control, restraint, respect for oneself and others. She therefore maintained that “a behaviour that contradicts the above mentioned becomes indiscipline”. Yaroson (2004) when citing The Chambers Twentieth Century Dictionary maintained that Indiscipline is a derivative of the word “discipline” and which is a mode of life in accordance with rules is. She further quoted the Oxford Advanced Learners’ Dictionary where indiscipline is defines as lack of control in the behaviour of a group of people. In other words, it is the inability of a person to live in accordance with rules. Tuluhi and Bello (1980) asserted that indiscipline is the breaking of rules and regulations of institutions. The individuals who are willingly or unwillingly violate laid down rules of an educational institution which hampers the smooth running of the institution are said to be exhibiting indiscipline acts. To this end, indiscipline can simply be seen as mode of life NOT in conformity with rules and non-subjection to control. By extension, the term connotes the violations of school rules and regulations capable of obstructing the smooth and orderly functioning of the school system (Adeyemo, 1985) submitted. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences 263 To cap it all, indiscipline can be defined as any act, habit or behaviour exhibited by the learners or students within the school premises and outside the school, which attract condemnation (instead of praise) by the public and/or the school staff. The critical tool used in the transformation of individual in particular and the society in general.
Secondary education in Nigeria is meant at preparing the learners for valuable living conditions within the society and training for further education. In order to live a valuable life within any given community and contribute towards the social, economic, and political development of the nation, the appropriate skills, values, attitudes, knowledge, and competencies must be impacted into the individual. Stakeholders have experienced magnificent increase in students’ indiscipline in secondary schools in Nigeria. In developing nations, indiscipline has been a major and continuous administrative problem among secondary schools in developing countries. Denga (1999) in his study identified indiscipline problems such as stealing, truancy, sexual offence, vandalism and cheating as destructive practices. The percentage of students who drop out of school in most urban and rural areas of Nigeria, is on an increase. These students cultivate and demonstrate deviant behaviours and may never fulfill their potentials. They become burdens to the society. There is an outcry of Nigeria educators, administrators and parents about the increasing rate of indiscipline in Nigeria secondary schools. This observation unsettles the mind of patriotic Nigerian since children are considered the future leaders of the country.
As a result, any attempt to curb students’ indiscipline in school would be highly welcomed by the government, educators, parents, teachers and school administrators. The principal push of this study is to examine students’ indiscipline in secondary schools in Nigeria and discover the frequent and familiar types, the causes and suggest possible solutions to curb this deviant behaviour. Different authors have defined discipline in various terms. Adesina (1980:108), says that discipline is to teach the students manners on how show respect to school authorities, to observe the school laws and regulations and to maintain an established standard of behaviour. From this definition the school has a primordial role to play in instilling discipline into their students. Therefore school administrators and teachers should enforce acceptable behaviour in their students. Egwunyenga (1994) defined discipline as the training that enables an individual to develop an orderly conduct and self-control as well as direction. Peretomode (1995) maintains that discipline involves the ability to have self-control, restraint, respect for self and respect for others. Discipline according to Abubakar (2000) is the ability and willingness to do what one ought to do without external control. Hence one can say discipline is internally motivated within the individual and depends on the state of mind of an individual. It is voluntary and an individual deliberately makes efforts to conform to an established code of conduct. However, Aguba (2009) while emphasizing Douglas McGregor’s theory x, maintained that discipline is externally induced in individuals who do not succumb to established rules and regulations out of personal volition but out of fear of punishment or sanction. Rosen (1997) sees discipline as a branch of knowledge, training that develops self-control, character, orderliness or efficiency, strict control to enforce obedience and treatment that controls or punishes and as a system of rules. According to Slee (1995), discipline involves teaching and self-control. The United States department of Education 1993:1 in Rosen (1997) acknowledges that maintaining a disciplined environment conducive for learning requires an ethics of caring that shapes staff student’s relations. The public presumes that schools are the preferred environment to transform productive and useful citizens of any nations. Agbenyega (2006) retains that decent discipline is one of the key attributes of effective schools and most school which experienced frequent deviant students’ behaviour have been blamed on lack of effective implementation of school rules and regulations for discipline to reign in school. One can say that discipline comes through effective management of an organisation. Indiscipline on the other hand is any act that diverges from the acceptable societal norms and values. It is a violation of school rules and regulations which is capable of obstructing the smooth and orderly functioning of the school system (Edem, 1982). An undisciplined child is an uncontrollable child and can do any damage in school when he does not get what he wants (Asiyai, 2012). Principals as administrative head or chief executive of the institution who plan, control, command, organise and coordinate all the activities that take place in the school and the principal is the president or ex officio of the disciplinary council; to try students whose conduct is not satisfactory (Mbua, 2003). In this connection, principals have records of students’ indiscipline and are in better position to explain to other stakeholders, especially parents on the conduct of their children. Thus every school administrator requires a good measure of discipline in his school. Students’ indiscipline is instigating a menace in all parts of the world in relation to children's affairs. In some parts of the United Kingdom, the rates of absenteeism, vandalism and delinquency are above average. Cases of high incidence of drug and drug related crimes in some parts of Britain are described as ‘no-go areas’ (Ken Reid, 2000). In Chicago, New York, Washington and Detroit pupil’s violence in high truancy schools is rife; for example school-based robberies, vandalism, extortion and insolence to staff (Ken Reid, 2000). In Ghana, Danso (2010) decried the high rates of indiscipline and lawlessness in educational institutions. He observed that not a single day passes without a report of an act of indiscipline perpetrated by teenagers of primary and secondary schools. He lamented over the causes of drug abuse, rape, armed robbery, abortion and even murder in the educational institutions. Meaningful teaching and learning geared towards the attainment of school goals is unattainable if the teachers and students are not disciplined. Aguba (2009) noted that discipline is needed to produce a breed of well cultivated youths who will develop not only respect for themselves but also for others in the school and society.
Causes of Indiscipline
Acts in Schools Indiscipline acts in schools is not an obscure problem or phenomenon that it causes cannot be ascertained. In fact, scholars have carried out extensive studies on it and have been able to identify several factors that have led to its occurrence in our institutions of learning being it locally, nationally and internationally. For instance, Ozigi and Canlan (1979) as cited by Oyetubo and Olaiya (2009) presented seven likely causes of the phenomenon in school and which include:
(a) the idea of democracy with its emphasis on the rights and freOgunm of the individual;
(b) the “generation gap” in ideas, beliefs and values about the nature of man, life and society. There is a wide difference of opinion in these matters between the two generations, the young and the old;
(c) the high level of sophistication of young men and women compared with that of the old generation; (d) the influence of the media (i.e. the newspaper, the radio and television) which carry regular reports about students power against authority;
(e) the failure of the adults, both in society and at school to set standards of good behaviours for young men and women to follow;
(f) the failure of many homes to provide basic and essential moral training in the upbringing of the children and the failure of parents to set good examples’
(g) the failure in communication between young men and women insisting on their right and the authorities who tend to see the issues involved simply from the “official” point of view. Also, on the part of Morongwa (2010), eight factors were identified as the causes of indiscipline among secondary school students which among other things include: Parental / home influence; Teachers / educators; Political, social and economic factors; Learners with emotional problems; Head teachers / principals factor; Influence of gender and race; and Public schools versus private schools.
Types of indiscipline acts in schools
Several forms of indiscipline acts pervade through every corner of the secondary schools among the students. Some occurred within the classroom, some within the school premises, while some others are carried out outside the school premises. Lewis (1991) as quoted by Morongwa (2010 : 11) observed that three types of misbehavior which are regarded as disciplinary problems for the educator in the classroom include: misbehaviours that inhibit the learner’s own learning, misbehaviours by one learner which is destructive to the learning of another and misbehaviours which are disrespectful, defiant or abusive to the educator. He added that, these misbehaviours can be committed intentionally or unintentionally. He further stated in a clear term some of these behaviours which he believes can impact negatively on the morale of the student himself and mentioned them as follows:A learner consistently comes to class late and disrupts the flow of the class;
· He/she talks while the teacher is addressing the class;
· He/she writes graffiti on school property;
· Another one continuously calls out in class;
· One is not listening and asks questions that have already been answered;
· Another one defies the teacher and refuses to follow instructions;
· Another one moves around in the class to the point of becoming a distraction.
· Also, on the part of Rosen (1997 : 51 – 52) he identifies ten other types of disciplinary problems or indiscipline acts among the students and which may lead to suspension as a way of punishing any learner who perpetrate such acts, among these are:
Defiance to school authority;
Class destruction;
Truancy;
Fighting;
The use of profanity;
Damaging school property
Violation of school dress code
Theft / stealing ;
Leaving campus without permission;
Not reporting to after school detention or Saturday School.
Donnelly (2000) also mentions other common types of indiscipline acts experienced in American schools, he therefore mentioned among other things: fighting, insubordination, little support for educators, a general climate of disrespect and distrust of the administration. Alidzulwi (2000) further stressed that some schools have developed into battle fields, since learners carry weapons such as guns and knives to schools. Cases have been reported of learners stabbing their educators and principals with pangas (a large heavy knife used as a weapon for cutting vegetation) and they fight each other using these weapons. 266 Journal of Studies in Social Sciences It is noteworthy to mention at this juncture that there is no country in the world where indiscipline acts are not perpetrated by the students, the problems are almost the same in the different schools, but the intensity with which it occurs only may be differ from school to school.
Strategies employed for controlling indiscipline acts among students
Paul (2006) asserted that discipline is the practice of care and respect for others and self. It is about safe guarding the rights of people who are exposed to uncooperative, aggressive or blocking responses by others. It strategies therefore vary according to Daukee (2010) along a continuum from the extremely authoritarian in which the adults make all of the rules and punish any deviation, to the very permissive in which the child makes all of the decision (Field & Boesser, 2002). The authoritarian methods according to Paul (2006) can be aligned with the behaviourist philosophy which emphasizes shaping behaviour through the use of rewards and punishment. Kohn (1993) as cited by Paul (2006) further added that these models are based on immediate and unquestionable obedience as the target behaviour. There are no allowances for the explanations or investigations of circumstances. As a result they are often associated with anger and sometimes result in depression and low self esteem. At the other end of the continuum, Field & Boesser (2002) associated permissive model with maturationist philosophy of education which is grounded on the notion that time is the best teacher. In this model, there is the absence of any type of discipline. Children are left to learn on their own from their own mistakes. Baumerind (1967) as cited by Deaukee (2010) believes that this model overemphasizes freOgunm. Fields & Boesser (2002) felt that this results in low selfesteem and difficulty in getting along with others. But all other models fit along the continuum somewhere between these two extremes. Journal of Studies in Social Sciences 267 Researchers agree that traditional forms of discipline which involve the demand of obedience are closer to the authoritarian end of the spectrum and are no longer reliable. Charles (2002) stated that many of the discipline techniques we have relied on are ineffective especially those that involve demanding, bossing, scolding, warming, belittling and punishing as these tactics can keep behaviour partially under control only for a while. He added that they can produce detrimental side effects such as uneasiness, evasiveness, fearfulness, avoidance, dishonesty, undesirable attitudes towards learning, overall dislike for school and teachers, inclination to retaliate and for many the desire to leave school as soon as possible. These circumstances lead to inhibited learning. These views are not adopted by all, however, as some researchers insist that the traditional method still hold a place in any discipline systems. Following is a brief overview of some of these strategies:
Positive Teacher-Learner Relationships: This according to Paul (2006) have the potential of creating a conducive learning environment in the classroom and in return brings about an atmosphere that is devoid of unruly behaviours in the entire school environment and this again will determine whether or not a learner can benefit from teaching – learning situations. Paul further quoted (Hood & Hood, 2001) that “teachers should be aware of the need for a positive loving relationship if learning is to take place. But, if trust in the relationship between educator and learner is lacking, the educator is in a position of power instead of authority (Oosthinzen, Wolhuter and du Toit 2003, 463). When looking at how the teacher-learner relationship could help in promoting effective classroom discipline and which could also help in keeping acts of indiscipline minimal in the entire school environment, Kruger and Van Schalkwyl (1997) as cited by Paul (2006) observed that behaving consistently and being open and approachable will ensure a healthy relationship. Robertson (1996) also 268 Journal of Studies in Social Sciences supported this when he contended that using humour, friendly greetings and nonverbal supportive behaviour may help improve such relations, but the teachers should avoid humour targeted at the learners (Spaulding, 1992) from Paul (2006).
Clear Guidelines/Rules: According to Deaukee (2010:32) one of the most basic and common part of any traditional discipline system is the setting of rules. Everton, Emmer & Worsham (2000) explained that a rule identifies general expectations or standards for behaviour and added that giving the students a clear set of expectations for what is appropriate will be a major start towards establishing a positive classroom and school environment that would be devoid of unruly behaviour from the students. Clements & Sova (2000) as cite by Deaukee (2010) further added that rules are the foundation for school conduct or behaviour. It is essential that children understand exactly what behaviours are acceptable in school and which ones are not and this is communicated through clear guidelines and rules.
Behaviour Contracting: According to Levin & Nolan (1996) as cited by Deaukee (2010) the development of behaviour contract as a strategy to control unruly behaviours of students was grounded on the theories of operant conditioning, which holds that behaviour which are reinforced are likely to be repeated and those which are not reinforced will soon disappear. It is a written agreement between the student and the teacher which commits the students to behave more appropriately and specifies a reward for meeting the commitment. The resulting consequences for not holding to the contract, rewards for meeting expectations and time frame are also specified. Usually a parent is involved in the development of the contract to ensure that the student obtains the necessary support in maintaining the terms stated. Deaukee (2010) further emphasized the effectiveness of this method when he stated that the contract attempts to control behaviours that are not effectively controlled by normal classroom procedures, to encourage self-discipline on the part of the student and to foster the students’ sense of commitment to appropriate classroom or school behavior.
Non-Traditional Methods: Fields & Boesser (2002) proposed a model which provides the ideal balance between these two extremes called the constructivist model. Through this model, students can learn from their own experiences and make informed logical choices. Kamii (1984) as cited by Deaukee (2010) agrees that this model works towards self determined responsible behaviour reflecting concern for the good of oneself and others. The constructivist approach to discipline strives to equip students with the necessary skills to think for themselves and differentiate between desirable and undesirable behaviour. Students also develop caring and respectful relationships with each other and with the adults in their lives. As a result, they are encouraged to think about the effects of their actions on others. The model involves guidance by adults and the exploration of consequences of negative actions. While children are able to become involved in decision-making, they are also guided and taught to make intelligent and informed decisions. Whenever they choose to display negative behaviour, they understand that they are choosing the negative consequences that result from those behaviours.
Modeling Behaviour: This is another strategy which researchers consider highly effective for controlling indiscipline among the students. For instance, DavisJohnson (2000) claimed that teachers are not always modelling positive behaviours. She stressed that part of the role of the teacher is to model the behaviours of positive self-concepts and respect for others and to establish importance of academic achievement. Her view is also shared by Field & Fields (2006) who claims that teacher and parental examples are productive methods of guidance and discipline. Mendler, Curwin & Mendler (2008) further stated that students learn both morals and immoral based on what they see than what they hear. Fields & Fields (2006) also added that sometimes the cause of inappropriate behaviour is that children have learned from inappropriate role models. Curwin & Mendler; (1994) as cited by Deaukee (2010) further stated that an effective discipline approach involves a united effort by the entire school. They therefore outlined twelve (12) processes that form the foundation of any effective discipline programme as follows: Let students know what you need
.· Provide instructions that match students’ level of ability.
· Listen to what students are thinking and feeling.
· Use humour
· Vary your style of presentation
· Offer choice – “you can do your assignment now or during recess”
· Refuse to accept excuses – accepting excuses teaches the students how to be irresponsible.Legitimize behaviour that you cannot stop – e.g. if there are daily paper airplane, buzzing past your ear consider spending 5 minutes a day having paper airplane contests.
When certain types of misbehaviours are legitimized the fun of acting out fizzles. Use huge and touching – pat on the back, give handshakes. One of thebiggest educational fallacies is the prohibition against using touch because of sexual misunderstanding. Be responsible for yourself and allow the kids to take responsibility for themselves. You are responsible for being on time, being prepared and making your lessons meaningful. You are not responsible for judging students’ excuses or doing their work for them. Realize and accept that you will not reach every child-some students must beallowed to choose failure Start fresh every day. Finally, the future of Nigeria as a country is at stake if the problem of indiscipline is left unsolved among secondary school students by nipping it at bud through all necessary means possible, since the youths are believed to be leaders of tomorrow. It is in the light of this that the researchers have decided to embark on this study in order to proffer solution that might be of help to all stakeholders of education across all levels in the country.
Theoretical Framework
Henning,VanRensburg and Smith(2004:25) stated that a theoretical framework provides an orientation to the study at hand in the sense that it reflects the stance the researcher adopts in his or her research. This means that a theoretical framework “frames” the study because when research is conducted, it will remain within the boundaries of the “frame”. In this way a theoretical framework becomes a structure that guides the research constructed by using established explanation of certain phenomenon and relationship. “A theoretical framework thereby leads logically to a certain conceptual framework”, Henning et al (2004: 25) maintained. On the basis of these explanations of what theoretical framework is all about, practitioners in education have over the years in response to discipline problems in schools developed several approaches to explain and reduce improper conducts and consequently increase school orderliness. Among which according to Cotton (2005) include: Reality therapy of William; Glasser; Positive Approach to Discipline (PAD) based on Glasser’s reality therapy; Teacher Effectiveness Training (TET); Transactional Analysis of Eric Berne; Assertive Discipline (AD); Adlerian approaches; and Students Team Learning (STL). The aim of these theories is to engender students’ discipline, for it is critical to the attainment of positive outcomes. But inspite of these efforts, there is no single specific known cause of indiscipline and rather the causes are multifaceted that only the aforementioned theories cannot be claimed to be enough for its explanation. The present studies therefore will be explained based on three theories, one from the above listed theories and two others based on the exposure of the researcher to a plethora of literature. These theories include: Individual psychology of Alfred Adler; Psychoanalysis Theory of Sigmund Freud; and The Social Learning theory of Ivan Pavlov.
Individual Psychology
Adler (1956) believed that every individual has a goal he/she sets to achieve in life. It is the goal set by any person that explains the sort of behaviours he/she exhibits at any point in time. He also emphasized that the motivation to achieve the set goals causes feelings of inferiority in every person and that the final goal of every individual in life is to be superior. He added that the quest for superiority is what guides people to be either constructive or destructive. And if an individual’s goals are formulated in a destructive manner it then leads to domination and exploitation of others around him or her. It could therefore be inferred that students who exhibit domineering attitude over their peers through the use of foul languages and bullying as forms of school indiscipline acts could have set their goals in a destructive manner. Besides, under Adler’s simple typology of personality he categorized some individuals as the RULING TYPE and added that the individuals within this category lack social interest and courage. They do not believe in the important of equality and cooperation between people and when they are faced with problems they are unable to solve, they tend to act in antisocial ways. He added that their own striving for superiority and power is so unrealistic that they exploit and harm others in order to achieve their goals. Typical examples of those students who exhibit this trait are the bullies and the gangs who often time frighten their colleagues in the classroom and in the entire school premises. Also, if the individuals in the gang are constantly manifesting their hostile behaviours toward other weaker students successfully without check and caution by the school authority and entire staff they may end up form a secret – cult to maximally achieve their goal of superiority.
Psychoanalytic Theory
Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) in his theory of psychoanalysis has ID as one of the major concepts he conceptualized. He described it as Cauldron of seething excitations. The chief characteristics of ID according Freud is the desire to satisfy its immediate needs no matter whose ox is gored and by nature it is irrational, amoral and does not bother with logic or reality. The ID is pleasure seeking, and not minding the consequences of the action carried out. The only concern of the ID is maximum gratification of instincts and once gratification is achieved ID is satisfied. Even though every individual has this concept of ID in him or her because it makes every persons to be desirous of anything at any point in times but the wrong gratification of desires by some rapists among secondary school students without minding the consequences of such action could be said to be the work of ID and despite their awareness of the fact that the school authority or the society at large frown at such action, they will still go ahead and perpetrate it. The Ego in such individuals therefore could be said to be weak or not functioning appropriately because it is suppose to act as “Mr. Censor” to any action of the ID that is morally harmful in order that the individual may be protected from the outside world. In fact, EGO is responsible for the determination of the desires of the ID whether to be allowed or not but its failure sometimes is usually associated to the fact that it does not have its own power and rather burrows it from ID.
Social Learning Theory of Ivan Pavlov (1849-1936)
The major assumption of social learning theory is that all behaviours whether adaptive or maladaptive, social or antisocial, defiant or non-defiant, praiseworthy or condemnable are learned and can also be unlearned. It could be said therefore that all manners of indiscipline acts that pervade our secondary schools environment today or that are prominent among students at that level of education are as a result of poor learning experiences. The influx of and acceptance of some western cultures that are not in consonance with the practices and norms in our country and which the adolescent take after without adequate censor by them make them to perpetrate indiscipline acts within or outside the school premises. Makinde (2004) concluded that “adolescents” which is the proper appellation for the secondary school students because of their age bracket are rebellious and to the adults to rebel against convention through exhibition of acts of indiscipline is chaotic.