Rudolph Dreikurs describes four goals of students' misbehaviour: attention seeking, power seeking, revenge seeking, displaying inadequacy. These goals are based on the mistaken belief it will get the student the recognition/attention that they want. I like Dreikurs theory because in hightlighting teachers feelings in response to student misbehaviour,it gives another set of tools to analyse student behaviours. I often find that I get an emotional reaction to a behaviour first and then need to spend quite some time trying to work out why I am feeling that way. Dreikurs' work lets us use our feelings as a pointer to appropriate behaviour management. With Dreikurs theory he suggests that if a teacher is feeling annoyed by a student's behaviour then the student is most likely to be attention seeking; if the teacher feels threatened, then the student may have been power seeking; if hurt, then revenge seeking; if powerless with the student, then the student may have been displaying hopelessness/inadequacy. Add some more elements of Dreikurs' theory and your comments.
Matt | (129.78.104.103) | Wednesday, 22 May 2002 1:52:58 PM
Dreikurs' theory is, I agree, a good basis for behaviour management in the classroom, however, in my opinion, it is a little too simplistic and asserts too many generalizations about adolescent behaviour. I have come across teenagers who make certain remarks that directly inflict hurt and pain on the receiver, however, this does not necessarily mean that the teenager was seeking revenge, it could be equally as likely that they were seeking love, affection and attention. The point is that people express their feelings in different ways, and what may seem likely is not always the case.
Melissa | (203.88.255.235) | Wednesday, 22 May 2002 8:44:47 PM
I believe than in any situation involving two or more people, there will often exist a struggle for power. This is apparant also in many teaching situations. Mutual respect is often the outcome of recognising the need not for power or domination or one-sided attention but recognition of the equality of power, that is, no one person is more powereful than the next. This can be useful when searching for positive responses in tense situations. It is useful also for summoning patience in a stressful situation and also for reinforcing your ability to rise above a difficult situation because of your maturity and experience. It is always useful to try and assess the situation from the point of view of the perpetrator and actively seeking understanding of where the bad behaviour is coming from. I think Dreikurs is a simple and compassionate theory yet wholly relies on the motivation and effort of the teacher to almost discard themselves in order to understand the student. This is a huge ask for most people and requires a lot of energy. Basically, I think the strategy of "stop, think, act" must always precede any other strategy in difficult situations
Sue | (144.138.142.46) | Saturday, 25 May 2002 4:57:39 PM
Dreikurs theory gives us a starting point for assessing student behaviour. The samples given are ones we are all familiar with and to have some information re the reasons possibly behind these behaviour will give me some confidence to react in the appropriate way. I feel this in only a starting point as students won't always fit neatly into these four categories and may require a combination of approaches or a solution that as a teacher I am not equiped to handle. Being familiar with the possible behaviours, I will be able to recognise its not personal, reflect on my reaction first and respond in an immediate appropriate way. Then if it is beyond what I can achieve in the classroom refer the student for further help.
Lucy | (202.67.64.134) | Sunday, 26 May 2002 7:31:42 PM
I think Driekurs four goals are a bit simplistic, but do offer a useful starting point. Sometimes kids may misbehave for a combination of the four reasons. However, I think his point that teachers need to evaluate how the behaviour makes them feel it important. Too often we make emotional responses and our reactions may not be appropriate. However, unlike Dreikur, I do think that some behaviour is aimed directly at the teacher personally. I remember behaving badly at school when i didn't like the teacher.
Daria | (210.8.232.2) | Tuesday, 28 May 2002 9:24:48 PM
I agree with others about the Dreikurs theory as a good basis. But, I think that the theory is a bit generalized because I dont't believe that All students who misbehave fit into these four goals of misbehaviour (there could be many reasons that we are not aware of eg. family problems etc); however, I believe that it would be useful to be familiar with these goals when trying to respond to students misbehaviour.
Lauren | (210.50.129.195) | Thursday, 27 June 2002 6:37:00 PM
While I think theorising is an important method of analysing ideas and concepts, it is also very dangerous to conclude that there is such a thing as "4 goals of student misbehaviour". As many above have mentioned, Dreikurs' theory is very general and simplistic, however I think it is also extremely narrow minded. I do not think Dreikur is correct in assuming that it is principally a teacher's interpretation in confrontational situations which explain the motives of the student, and I object to the categorising of students into 'types' and the teacher's (often misguided) opinion as the 'standard'. I believe Dreikur's theory is interesting, but not practical.
Esther Cheong | (202.172.40.156) | Wednesday, 18 February 2004 6:15:22 PM
I suck, I am a bitch... I am so sorry I failed a group with a very good project and topic and LITERATURE REVIEW in year 2003... I am sorry, and may the moderator of this chatroom forgive me for my eternal sins.
Flog me and restore my TOH!