Disruptive behavior is one of the greatest challenges teachers face. It interrupts learning, increases teacher stress, contributes to burnout, and affects the academic and social success of every student in the classroom.
While there is no shortage of research on classroom management programs and behavior interventions, much less attention has been given to a simple question:
How do teachers respond when disruptive behavior happens?
A recent qualitative study by Ødegård and Solberg (2025), published in Teaching and Teacher Education, set out to answer exactly that question by interviewing 40 lower and upper secondary teachers in Norway about how they respond after disruptive behavior occurs.
Their findings offer valuable insights into what teachers are doing and what may be missing.
Most Responses Focus on the Individual Student
The strongest finding from the study was that teachers overwhelmingly described strategies aimed at changing the behavior of the individual student. The researchers identified three broad categories of individual responses:
- Subtle cues, such as making eye contact, moving closer to the student, standing nearby, or quietly placing a hand on a student’s shoulder
- Reorientation, where teachers redirected students back to the task by offering help, reminding them of the lesson, or exploring whether the work was too difficult or unmotivating
- Punitive strategies, including written behavior reports and removing students from the classroom
While the strategies varied in intensity, they all focused on changing the behavior of the individual student.
The Quietest Corrections Were Often the Most Effective
One of the most encouraging findings was that many teachers preferred subtle, minimally intrusive corrections over public reprimands. For example, rather than calling students out in front of their peers, teachers described using strategies like:
- eye contact
- standing near the student
- quietly approaching the desk
- brief verbal reminders
These approaches redirected behavior without disrupting instruction or embarrassing students.
However, it is important to note that teachers emphasized the effectiveness of these strategies was directly correlated to whether they had already established positive relationships with their students. In other words, connection made correction more effective.
Teachers Looked Beyond the Behavior
Some teachers described an approach the researchers referred to as reorientation.
Instead of simply telling students to stop the disruptive behavior, these teachers asked themselves why it might be occurring.
- Was the work too difficult?
- Had the student lost motivation?
- Did they need clarification?
Rather than focusing solely on stopping the behavior, these teachers redirected students back into learning by addressing the root cause of the barrier. This is a pivotal shift in thinking denoting a move away controlling behavior to understanding it.
Teachers Questioned Punitive Approaches
Although written behavior reports and classroom removal were commonly used, many teachers expressed discomfort with these strategies and several reported that students eventually stopped caring about written remarks. After receiving so many, students essentially felt they had nothing left to lose. Teachers expressed worry that punitive responses damaged teacher-student relationships or even increased disruptive behavior over time.
When students were removed from class, many teachers emphasized that the removal itself was not enough. Instead, they followed it with conversations, explanations, opportunities for reflection, and plans for successful re-entry into the classroom. The message was clear:
Consequences alone rarely teach new skills.
One of the Most Important Findings Was What Teachers Didn’t Describe
Perhaps the most surprising finding wasn’t what teachers said but what they rarely mentioned.
Very few teachers described strategies aimed at the classroom as a whole. Instead of involving students in creating shared classroom expectations, encouraging peer support, or fostering collective responsibility, most responses remained focused on individual students.
The researchers argue this is a missed opportunity because disruptive behavior rarely affects only one student. It influences peers, interrupts instruction, shifts classroom attention, and changes the overall learning environment. For that reason, they suggest that classrooms should be viewed as communities, not simply collections of individual students.
Building a Classroom Community
Although collective strategies appeared infrequently in the interviews, the researchers believe they deserve much greater attention.
Examples include:
- engaging students in discussions about classroom expectations
- encouraging peers to support positive classroom norms
- helping students reflect on how behavior affects everyone
- collaborating with colleagues to analyze challenging situations
Simple questions can shift responsibility from the teacher alone to the entire classroom community. Examples include:
- What kind of classroom helps you learn?
- What makes it difficult to concentrate?
- How can we support each other when someone gets distracted?
The Most Reflective Teachers Were the Most Flexible
The researchers also observed that the teachers who seemed most effective did not rely on one strategy. Instead, they adjusted their response based on the student, the situation, and the context. Sometimes they used subtle cues, redirected the student back to learning, held a conversation, or even occasionally they removed a student, but only with thoughtful follow-up.
Rather than asking, “How do I stop this behavior?” the teachers focused on asking,
“What does this student and this classroom, need right now?” The researchers describe this as a dynamic approach, one that balances individual support with attention to the broader classroom community.
Practical Takeaways
This study reinforces several important ideas for educators:
- Relationships make subtle corrections more effective
- Looking for the reason behind a behavior often leads to better support than reacting to the behavior itself
- Punishment alone rarely creates lasting behavior change
- Classroom behavior should be viewed through both an individual and a collective lens
- Flexibility, not rigid adherence to one strategy, appears to be a hallmark of effective classroom management
Final Thoughts
In a world where the rise of neuro-divergence and mental health conditions continues to rise and teacher burn-out is at an all-time high, it is encouraging to hear that many teachers are already thinking about support beyond compliance. They recognize that relationships matter and understand that behavior has context. Child misbehavior is not personal. Children don’t wake up in the morning plotting misery on others. Their struggle to meet the expectations is equally, if not harder on them. Noone wants to feel unsuccessful.
Finally, behavior doesn’t happen in isolation. It happens within relationships, classrooms, and communities. As Ødegård and Solberg conclude, classrooms are inherently collective spaces. While supporting individual students remains essential, we may improve outcomes for everyone when we also teach, strengthen, and protect the classroom community itself.
Reference
Ødegård, M., & Solberg, S. (2025). Teachers’ reactive strategies toward disruptive behavior in classrooms: Individual and collective approaches. Teaching and Teacher Education.
