Reflection:
I found Shalaby's Introduction and Preface to Troublemakers to be intriguing and very insightful. Where most teachers think of the "troublemaker" kids as the problem, Shalaby looks at them as a warning cry to the problems within schools. I think her comparison of these troublemakers to canaries that were used in the mines to warn miners of carbon monoxide, was extremely interesting. Her perspective made me think a lot about the students that I work with in the Claiborne Pell Elementary School.
There are a few children in the classroom who act out or are constantly raising their hand to "answer a question" and then say something entirely unrelated to the topic at hand. The teacher tries her best to work with these children, sitting near them while the student teacher teaches them math, or writing them encouraging notes, but it is still not always enough. This past week, when I went into the school on Friday, the student who I have seen making the most "trouble" had his desk next to the student teacher, so his back was to the rest of the class. I'm not sure exactly what he did to get there, as I didn't ask, but he was still speaking out from his new position.
That being said, Shalaby explains that there are daily harms in schools that make these children act out, such as, "the requirement to sit still for hours on end, the frustration of boring, disconnected, and irrelevant academic tasks, shockingly little time for free play, and few opportunities to build meaningful relationships in community with other children and loving adults." When I reflected this to my classroom, I couldn't entirely justify this child's behaviors based on these harms. Yes, there are times when the children need to sit still and learn math, but that is only for one hour in the beginning of the day. Then, they either do writing, where they are free to move around the room and read their personal narratives to their friends, or they have their special. After that, they go to recess and lunch. I'm not entirely sure what happens after lunch, other than that the students are back in the classroom for an hour and a half at the end of the day. So, basically, the teacher has them for an hour or two in the morning, and an hour and a half in the afternoon, before they are dismissed for the day. She allows them to work with ea
ch other and collaborate whenever possible, so why is this child still acting out?
From what I can gather, there is a lot going on in his personal life. I've heard the teacher say that he stays at his dad's sometimes, and his dad allows him to stay home from school on Fridays. Maybe his home life is a factor of why he has a hard time in school. Here is an interesting article on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and how they relate to education. Or maybe, it is what Shalaby says, and it's because he doesn't want to sit still at all, maybe he is bored, disconnected, and wants more free time. They were playing with playodough and I heard him say "I need more playodough time" when he was putting it away.
My question for the class is, do you think the troublemakers always act out for reasons that Shalaby says, or do you think there could sometimes be another reason, like some hardships in their personal lives?
Hi Amara, I really appreciated your connection between Shalaby’s "canary in the coal mine" metaphor and your actual observations at Claiborne Pell. It’s a powerful shift to stop seeing a student’s behavior as a "problem to be fixed" and start seeing it as a "signal to be decoded."
ReplyDeleteYour observation about the student asking for more "playdough time" is so telling. It supports Shalaby’s point that even when we think we are providing enough freedom, a child’s developmental need for tactile, unstructured play might still be hit by the "daily harms" of a rigid schedule.
To answer your question: I think it’s rarely an "either/or" situation. It seems more likely that hardships at home (like the inconsistency you mentioned regarding his Fridays) lower a child's threshold for tolerating the "harms" of school. A student with a stable, regulated home life might have the emotional bandwidth to sit still for an hour, whereas a student dealing with outside stress simply can't mask their frustration. They aren't just "troublemakers"; they are often the students most sensitive to the environments we build. I like the link to Maslow's Hierarchy of needs as well. I've found, personally, that humans aren't necessarily "pyramids" but rather an ecosystem.
Hi Amara!
ReplyDeleteGreat blog reflection! While I was reading this week I also related it to a few of the students I work with. Although I did that I have not seen a students desk faced the complete opposite direction! That seems a bit extreme for me for someone so young. If he is not in the class for too long during the day, I wonder what made the teacher think that was best for him! It must be very difficult for him to sit and focus, much like kids I work with and the kids in the reading. Hopefully there will be a change so he can have the support that he needs, while the teacher does as well. I am thinking she does not have the resources or ability to give this student what he needs, and he keeps acting out beyond her control. It does sound like the behavior may begin at home as well...
You have masterfully linked Shalaby’s perspective on "troublemakers" to your own classroom observations; this demonstrates a depth of reflection. I also found the "canary" metaphor to be particularly striking, especially in the way it allows us to reframe our perception of these students: they emerge not as problems in themselves, but rather as signals revealing deeper systemic issues. You raise a pertinent question: does disruptive behavior always stem from harms related to the school environment, or does it sometimes originate from personal difficulties—such as instability at home? I believe it is often a combination of the two. Even when the classroom offers opportunities for movement and collaboration, external factors—such as unmet emotional needs or a lack of consistency in daily routines—can significantly influence a child's behavior. Your example reminds me just how essential it is to view the child holistically, rather than focusing solely on their conduct in the classroom. Human beings are complex, and reducing an individual to their school environment alone is a reductive reflex.
ReplyDeleteHi, I appreciate how you really grapple with Shalaby’s argument instead of accepting it at face value. Your classroom example shows how complex behavior can be, even when teachers create supportive and flexible environments. You highlight why understanding the whole child, not just the moment of misbehavior, is so important.
ReplyDeleteHi Amara, great post and great relation to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs because this was the thinking I had as well. I always try to figure out why a child is acting out and how it is best to proceed. If I yell at a student....who is that helping? I almost have to find out more about them in order to get my point across. Sometimes all I have to do is give a student a look and they know they got caught doing something they shouldn't be. Again, being in the art room is a bit different where we have a little more freedom but I absolutely believe there is a relationship between their personal lives and why they are acting out!
ReplyDeleteHi Amara, your reflection here does a really thoughtful job of sitting in the uncertainty instead of forcing a single explanation, and that’s exactly where this conversation becomes most meaningful. What you’re seeing in your classroom experience is something that complicates Shalaby’s argument in a productive way. It's proof that children don’t walk into classrooms as blank slates shaped only by school, they bring their lives and experiences with them.
ReplyDelete