1. Introduction
The undisciplined behaviour of pupils in the classroom has been a challenge for teachers for many years (Caldarella et al., 2021; Gilmour et al., 2021; Praetorius et al., 2020; Schlesinger et al., 2018; Wolff et al., 2021). International research (OECD, 2021) shows that as many as one-third of teachers refer to persistent student discipline problems as a barrier to classroom work. There is also a clear link in assessing classroom climate: the more that teachers report disciplinary problems, the more that students report the same issue (OECD, 2021). Therefore, one of the most important tasks of a teacher is to ensure that students have active learning time by creating a supportive learning environment and by responding appropriately to their misbehaviour (Egeberg et al., 2021).
Research from different countries shows that primary school teachers are frequently confronted with student misbehaviour. Although it is difficult to define what constitutes inappropriate behaviour (Lanas & Brunila, 2019), certain trends can be identified. Portuguese primary school pupils struggle the most with maintaining silence and managing aggressive behaviour, posture and movement while facing fewer challenges with socio-emotional skills and attention (de Lemos et al., 2023). Irish teachers see similar problems with misbehaviour (Flynn et al., 2025). They say that pupils often speak out of turn, distract other children and move unnecessarily around the classroom. Pupils also tend to avoid schoolwork and engage in inappropriate physical contact with their peers. However, this type of misbehaviour is less pronounced (Flynn et al., 2025).
It has become apparent that teachers believe that discipline problems can be directly linked to the characteristics and behaviour of pupils. Such attitudes can change the quality of the teacher’s relationship with these pupils and, consequently, lead to a more cynical attitude towards particular pupils or to pupils in general (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017a). It must be stressed that discipline problems in the classroom are not only directly related to the quality of education but also have a strong impact on the teacher’s own and professional well-being. Research shows that teacher perceptions of student discipline in school were the factors most closely related to teacher job satisfaction (Toropova et al., 2020). Disruptive student behaviour can be a predictor of teacher burnout and their motivation to leave the teaching profession (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017b), along with depersonalisation and personal accomplishment (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2017a). The same researchers (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2019) have even pointed out that discipline problems can be identified as one of the teacher’s job domains that may affect teacher self-efficacy negatively. Therefore, the teacher’s ability to manage the classroom appropriately, to respond to students’ misbehaviour in a pedagogically correct way, undoubtedly becomes more important.
As Wubbels (2011) argues, in the day-to-day reality of education, it is usually possible to integrate elements of different theoretical classroom management approaches (behavioural control, internal control, classroom ecology, discourse, curriculum and interpersonal relationships) in order to correct students’ inappropriate behaviour, but there is no single clear approach. Over the last three decades, there has been a shift from behavioural to intrinsic (focusing on the individual student’s resources and capacities) classroom management approaches around the world. This study has, therefore, taken a theoretical approach to Positive Discipline and explores how it is expressed in the primary classroom.
Positive Discipline is based on the Adlerian/Dreikurs approach to school discipline, with its emphasis on fostering student internal resources (Bear, 2009; Bear et al., 2022). According to this theoretical approach, the classroom environment, and particularly the classroom teacher, has a clear influence on students’ behaviour, which is primarily determined by the individual pupil’s needs, goals, values and beliefs. One of the most important needs and goals of students is social belonging, which becomes the main motivation for behaviour and is a key factor in self-esteem. It is argued that school discipline should enhance, not undermine, self-esteem, happiness and social belonging (Bear et al., 2022). Students may have four false behavioural goals: to gain undue attention, to experience a sense of misguided power over others, to seek revenge and to socially withdraw or convey inadequacy (Bear et al., 2022). According to Dreikurs and Soltz (1964), attention-seeking behaviour is defined as an action in which a pupil makes efforts to be the centre of attention to gain significance rather than participating. Pupils also seek power when they feel overwhelmed by a stronger authority (such as parents or teachers) and try to challenge that authority to gain more power. Finally, Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) identify inadequate behaviour as typically originating from factors such as boredom, discouragement, or demotivation. To change a student’s misbehaviour, the teacher needs to understand the student’s goals and meet them in an appropriate way. As Dreikurs (2025) stated, teachers must be trained to be sensitive to recognize what a child’s goals are. This is crucial to understand students’ motivations and the reasons for their behaviour, in order to address academic, behavioural and social difficulties (Dinkmeyer & Dreikurs, 2000).
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Research Design
The practitioner’s research aims for this study were to determine the main behavioural challenges and Positive Discipline techniques applied by primary school teachers. Qualitative content analysis was applied by using a structured observation form as a part of primary data collection. The lesson observation method was chosen to identify the main misbehaviours of students and the strategies used by teachers because it enables the observer to capture real-time interactions within classroom settings. Methods such as interviews or surveys were not selected since they do not provide the possibility of witnessing the interactions (Cohen et al., 2002).
A structured lesson observation form was created to collect data on students’ misbehaviour and the Positive Discipline strategies applied by teachers. The observation form included an interval recording method to systematically capture the students’ misbehaviour or actions and the teacher’s strategies and responses to the pattern over time. This approach ensures the reliability and consistency of the research.
Participants and Setting
Lessons were observed by the head of the Primary Languages Department (the first author of this article). Lesson observations are common practice at this specialized school and part of the responsibilities of the various heads of the departments. Each head of the department was informed and trained for lesson observations to avoid biases. If the observed teacher feels pressured or thinks that the observer is biased, they have a right to inform the school’s principal about this as part of the school’s policy.
The observations were held in natural classroom settings at a Positive Discipline school in Vilnius, Lithuania. Each lesson lasted for 40 min, with an additional 5 min for tidying up and wrapping up. In total, 12 female teachers, 1 male teacher and 262 students were observed (detailed characteristics of the teachers and students are presented in Table 1 and Table 2). Five lessons were observed for each grade level, which is equal to twenty lessons in total. Four first-grade, four second-grade, three third-grade and four fourth-grade classes were observed. Some classes were observed more than once for a different subject, due to a lack of classes in that grade level. All the participating teachers were trained in Positive Discipline techniques and strategies in various seminars and webinars.
2.2. Data Collection Method
The lesson observation form was divided into five sections to ensure reliable observation throughout the lessons. The first section of the observation form contained the fields where basic information about the time and date of the class, the names of the observer and teacher, the number and gender of the students and the grade, lesson topic and lesson duration were recorded. The second section of the lesson observation form was labelled “Classroom Management and Discipline”. This section was divided into intervals, with a record being completed every 10 min. Teacher strategies such as clear rules and expectations, positive reinforcement, behavioural redirection, student choice and autonomy, conflict resolution and promoting responsibility were recorded using yes or no questions for each interval. The third section of the lesson observation form was labelled “Classroom Dynamics and Student Interaction”. In this section, a three-point scale (low, moderate and high) was used for each 10-min interval time to measure student engagement and peer interactions. Another three-scale point (tense, neutral or positive) was used to classify classroom atmosphere and, finally, a different three-scale point (not conducive, neutral or conducive) was used to measure the classroom set-up for each 10-min interval within a 40-min period. The fourth section of the observation form was used to record and note both the students’ and teacher’s actions. This section was named the “Behaviour observation log”. This section was also divided into 10-min time intervals. To record and note the action, the section has been divided into three columns, denoting participants (teacher/student), their actions and a description of these actions. The fifth and last section of the observation form was added to analyse the coded data. This section was divided into five parts, comprising each 10-min time interval, students’ behaviour, teachers’ strategies, any theories to explain and references.
Data collection took place over a three-week period, recording data from 20 classes in the primary school. Five lessons were observed for each grade level during this period.
2.3. Data Analysis
Step 1. Define the research questions: What are the most common behavioural challenges observed in 1st–4th-grade classrooms? How do primary school teachers manage student behaviour using Positive Discipline strategies?
Step 2: Define the units of analysis.
The unit of analysis in this article is at the syntactical level. Both teachers’ and students’ actions were analysed sentence by sentence and were then coded within the framework of Positive Discipline.
Step 3: Decide on the codes to be used in the analysis.
The key themes were identified by applying inductive coding. The codes were categorized into two distinct sections: “The main misbehaviour challenges in primary school classroom settings” and “Positive Discipline strategies and techniques applied by the teachers”.
Step 4: Construct the categories for the analysis.
Step 5: Conduct the data analysis.
All recorded data were encoded manually, based on the Positive Discipline strategies and behavioural problems proposed by Adlerian–Dreikursan principles. The data were coded by only one researcher (the first author of the article). Both the teachers’ and students’ actions were encoded carefully by avoiding interpretations. The frequency of each code has been carefully checked to establish whether this indicates a level of significance. After finishing the encoding process, common behavioural problems and teacher strategies were identified and grouped. All the findings were analysed briefly at the end of the observation form, in the fifth section within the framework of Positive Discipline.
2.4. Ethical Considerations
Before the lesson observations, the consent form informing participants of the purpose of the research was signed by each teacher. The consent form allows each participant to withdraw from the research at any time. All the observation records and personal details were anonymized. Any unknown or unobservable student or teacher action was not recorded. The observer played a non-participant role in the classroom and was seated in an appropriate location for optimal observation but at the same not likely to distract the students. Students were informed briefly about the observer and about his purpose to avoid miscommunication and misunderstandings before the lessons.
Since the observer was the head of the Primary Foreign Languages Department, there was no need to obtain extra permission from parents to observe the lessons. Parents had already signed an agreement during the admission process to the school, confirming that their children would possibly be under lesson observation. The school principal had the full right to agree to lesson observations conducted by the researcher or the head of the department without informing the students’ parents, as this agreement was already in the school contract.
3. Results
Throughout the twenty lesson observations, both the positive and negative behaviours of the students were observed and noted. Even though there were some minor differences in their behaviours, interactions and responses to the teachers at each grade level, the vast majority of behavioural issues overlapped. Students’ actions were coded into two categories: positive behaviours and misbehaviour or challenges. Below is a graphical representation of the categories and subcategories that characterize student behaviour (Figure 1).
Positive behaviour refers to observed actions in which students responsibly followed classroom rules and responded positively to the teachers’ techniques, while misbehaviour refers to those actions in which students either violated classroom rules, failed to respond to the teachers’ techniques, or caused or faced other challenges that were not necessarily misbehaviour but that still negatively influenced the general classroom atmosphere.
3.1. Positive Behaviours
The most frequently observed positive behaviour was self-regulation. In most classrooms, the students demonstrated an independent approach to learning. For example, in one of the first-grade lessons, during reflection time, when the teacher asked each student to self-reflect on their learning, one boy responded: “Everything was hard, but I will practice more to make it easy”. This example clearly indicates self-awareness and self-motivation, which are signs of self-regulated behaviour. In another case, during a second-grade lesson, one girl left the classroom to work independently outside. This rule was already set at the beginning of the lesson by the teacher, namely, that students who need to change their environment can work independently in specifically designated places near the classroom without the teacher’s permission, as long as they do not distract other students. Although these actions were still under the teacher’s supervision, this rule showed a sign of improving self-regulation in the classroom environment. In most cases, students followed this rule without interruption and, as this area was close to the classroom, the teacher still left the door open so that they could supervise the children outside easily. No conflicts were recorded. Although self-regulation was observed in nearly every lesson, it was slightly more evident in third- and fourth-grade lessons than in first- and second-grade lessons. Specifically, during fourth-grade lessons, students wrote their names in boxes labelled A (I will behave), B (I will try to behave) and C (I may misbehave), deciding by themselves which box they should choose before the lesson. Most students chose box A. This self-decision-making was a strong indicator of self-regulated behaviour.
Another frequently observed positive behaviour was active engagement. This type of positive behaviour was observed equally across all grade levels. For example, during a third-grade maths lesson, the observation form noted that students were all engaged in calculations and responded positively to the teacher walking around as a form of positive pressure. In another case, during a second-grade lesson, the teacher introduced the lesson by saying: “What is camouflage?” All students seemed engaged and started sharing their ideas about it. Similar examples were noted at almost every interval throughout the 40-min lessons across all grade levels. In conclusion, self-regulation and active engagement were the most frequently observed examples of positive behaviour at all grade levels. These types of positive behaviour also influenced group learning, peer discussions and respect for social norms, as noted in the observation forms for each grade level.
3.2. Misbehaviours and Challenges
Throughout 20 lesson observations in primary classroom settings, two main types of misbehaviour and one primary challenge were identified: attention-seeking, power-seeking and inadequate behaviour. Attention-seeking behaviour was observed 32 times, while power-seeking behaviour was noted 22 times. General inadequate behaviour, such as signs of demotivation, distraction and discouragement, was recorded 16 times across all grade levels. There was also a difference in the frequency of misbehaviour between girls and boys, with variations in how often each group engaged in misbehaviour. Boys were recorded as misbehaving 97 times, while girls were observed misbehaving 42 times, indicating that boys demonstrated misbehaviour almost twice as often as girls across all grade levels. While boys were primarily engaged in attention-seeking and power-seeking behaviours, girls exhibited inadequate or attention-seeking behaviour in comparison.
The first and most frequently observed misbehaviour in primary school classroom settings was attention-seeking. Examples of attention-seeking behaviour can include actions such as “trying to be funny, throwing things on purpose, whining, etc.” (Dreikurs & Soltz, 1964). For example, during a first-grade lesson, it was noted in the observation form that: “One of the boys on purpose moves his classmate’s tool and causes it to fall, distracting the class, and he starts smiling about it”. In another case, during a second-grade lesson, it was observed that: “One of the boys leaves his seat and throws his pen around”. Also in the third grade, this incident was recorded: “One boy is distracting his classmate (girl). He is swinging his chair towards her”. These examples are clear indicators of attention-seeking behaviour. Regardless of the causes of these misbehaviours, in all these scenarios, a student disrupts the class to receive attention, as these actions require the teacher’s reaction.
Another type of misbehaviour noticed during the observations was power-seeking behaviour. During one of the fourth-grade lessons, one boy disagreed with the teacher: “Why did I only read one sentence? I want to read more”. In this example, the student challenged the established rules for reading and the teacher’s authority and wanted to decide for himself how many sentences he would read. During a second-grade lesson, another instance of power-seeking behaviour was observed: “One boy is ignoring the teacher and starting to play with cards. He is trying to act independent and confident and ignores the classroom rules”. It is clear that in both scenarios, there is an attempt to challenge the established norms and assert greater autonomy.
During the observations, not only was misbehaviour noted but other challenges linked to inadequate behaviour that disrupted the lesson were also observed. Some students appeared to be either demotivated, distracted or discouraged. For example, in one of the first-grade lessons, the following behaviour was observed: “One boy, who was sitting at the bottom of class and seemed previously distracted many times, seems confused and distracted again by spacing out and looking around in daze”. In another case, it was observed that: “One male student is crying and seemed challenged with the tasks. He seems uncomfortable by making impressions”. In both scenarios, it is obvious that students face challenges with social belonging or with keeping up with other students in the class. In conclusion, attention-seeking behaviour stood out as the most frequently observed misbehaviour, while power-seeking behaviour was the second most common observation. Overall, similar problems of misbehaviour were observed at each grade level.
3.3. Positive Discipline Techniques Applied by Primary School Teachers
As stated before, all the teachers being observed had been trained in Positive Discipline techniques through various seminars held by the school. This could be the main reason why there were not many significant differences recorded in terms of the applied positive techniques. The main Positive Discipline techniques used across the 20 lessons in the studied primary school were encouragement, behavioural redirection and the application of logical consequences (a graphical representation of common Positive Discipline techniques is shown in Figure 2). The encouragement technique was the most frequently observed, being recorded 39 times, followed closely by behavioural redirection, which occurred 38 times, while the application of logical consequences was noted 25 times across all grade levels. All these techniques were applied at different time intervals during each lesson, across all grade levels.
The most frequently observed Positive Discipline technique applied by teachers was encouragement. This technique was used at different time intervals in each lesson, depending on the situation and task. For example, during a first-grade lesson, the teacher started reading a short story to the children: “Okay, let’s start reading a story together”. In another case, during a second-grade lesson, one boy was encouraged by the teacher: “You are so confident today!” In both examples, teachers used encouragement as a technique to motivate students.
The second Positive Discipline technique was behavioural redirection. For example, during a fourth-grade lesson, the teacher approached a boy who was misbehaving and said: “You need to start the task, and please check the lesson goals”. In this scenario, instead of shaming the student or escalating the conflict, the teacher kindly and firmly redirected the behaviour by encouraging him to review the lesson goals. Also in the first-grade lesson, an incident was recorded in which one boy refused to accept his assigned responsibility and started to cry. The teacher waited and then approached him a little later: “Are you okay now?” The boy responded: “Yes”. The teacher then said: “Now I am reassigning responsibilities for how to work in teams again”. The teacher gave him new responsibilities, which the student accepted. In this case, the teacher redirected the power-seeking behaviour in a very calm manner.
The last Positive Discipline technique applied by primary school teachers was the application of logical consequences. Dreikurs and Soltz (1964) define logical consequences as an approach in which a child is given the opportunity to experience the consequences of their own actions rather than receiving punishments or rewards. For example, during a first-grade lesson, one boy was distracting the class and seemed uncomfortable with being in the classroom. The teacher approached him in a very kind manner without forcing him: “Maybe you can work outside by yourself today”. In this scenario, the teacher provided the student with a chance to make decisions about his own actions. In another observation, during a second-grade lesson, it was noted that the teacher had created a heart system in which each student received a heart for positive actions. However, if they misbehaved, they had to erase their hearts. One boy distracted the class, was warned by the teacher, and consequently lost his previously earned reward as a result of his own actions. In both cases, the teacher played a minimal role in decision-making and allowed each student to experience their own consequences without imposing direct punishments.
In conclusion, these three strategies were commonly observed at each grade level and were applied by teachers to deal with either misbehaviour or challenges or to establish a positive environment.
3.4. Classroom Dynamics and Student Interaction
In addition, students’ interactions were meticulously documented at 10-min intervals throughout the lesson period in each class. The subsequent analysis of the data revealed that there was no statistically significant difference in student interactions prior to and following the lunchtime period in the primary school setting. However, a marginal increase in the moderate level of student interactions was observed after lunchtime. Students’ interactions were slightly reduced by 10% after lunchtime from a high level to a moderate level. After lunchtime, students appeared to be more reluctant to engage with their peers and demonstrated a more disengaged approach to learning and classroom work. Below (in Figure 3 and Figure 4) we present a graphical representation of student engagement before and after lunch.
4. Discussion
After analysing the data from the study, we can see some important aspects.
Firstly, as mentioned above, the school in which the study was carried out already had a Positive Discipline culture, meaning that teachers recognised the behavioural goals of their students and responded accordingly by applying Positive Discipline techniques (encouragement, behavioural redirection and the application of logical consequences). As previous researchers (Tshabalala et al., 2024) point out, a whole-school approach to Positive Discipline is important. A positive approach is democratic, with emphases on a positive classroom climate and encouragement (Bear et al., 2022), and it also meets the essential needs of students with regard to social belonging. International research also confirms the importance of good relationships. Results of the Teaching and Learning International Survey (TALIS) show that the more teachers report nurturing good relationships with students, the more students perceive them as enjoying teaching, and the better it is for the classroom disciplinary climate (OECD, 2021). Dreikurs et al. (2004) stated that teachers need to teach not only specific positive behaviours, such as kindness, respect and democratic decision-making, but also to cultivate the emotions and thoughts that support prosocial behaviour. Teacher–student and student–student relationships should be supportive, caring and respectful of each other (Nelsen et al., 2000).
Secondly, the number of incidents of misbehaviour by students that were recorded during the study was relatively low, and the drop in student engagement after lunch was not significant. We would assume that this is also related to the age of the students. Other research shows that discipline problems increase in the older grades (secondary education). For example, 20% of students across OECD countries reported that they could not work well in most or all lessons (OECD, 2023). It is, therefore, necessary to continue further research and to find out how Positive Discipline is expressed in the upper grades.
Finally, we would like to point out that the Positive Discipline Approach is a universal intervention tool that can be applied in many schools. A quasi-experiment conducted by Soheili and co-authors (Soheili et al., 2016) showed that following this approach and applying its techniques can improve classroom efficiency; that is, it can help students achieve higher levels of achievement and, most importantly, increase students’ satisfaction with the learning process. It is this latter aspect that seems to us to be very important, as all modern theories of motivation tend to emphasise and build on the individual’s internal resources to promote intrinsic motivation for learning. The need for competence, belonging and autonomy are considered essential for self-determination and intrinsic motivation. If these needs are met, an individual will experience personal and social well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2000) and will be encouraged to engage in the learning process (Jang et al., 2010; Reeve, 2012; Reeve et al., 2004).
Recognising the strengths of Positive Discipline helps students to accept responsibility and take positive control of their behaviour; however, we must also acknowledge some of the limitations of this research. This study presents practitioner research, which sought to uncover how teachers implement Positive Discipline in order to appropriately manage student behaviour. The results thus obtained do not prove the effectiveness of Positive Discipline, as the study was not experimental (with no control group). Therefore, there is a clear need for further research to answer the questions of what the challenges and fundamental success determinants are in the implementation of Positive Discipline techniques, as well as whether and in what way these techniques can align with other classroom management tools in various contexts.
5. Conclusions
The results of this practitioner research revealed that the most common reasons for student misbehaviour in primary classes are attention-seeking, power-seeking and inappropriate behaviours, such as signs of demotivation, distraction and discouragement. In response, teachers use Positive Discipline techniques, including encouragement, behaviour guidance and logical consequences. The school involved in this study adopts the Positive Discipline approach, which has been found to respond appropriately to students’ discipline problems and helps to understand the purpose of their misbehaviour. We would argue that the approach fosters students’ intrinsic motivation to learn and lays the foundations for their higher achievement and social belonging.
Conceptualization, M.H. and A.B.; methodology, M.H.; formal analysis, M.H.; investigation, M.H.; writing—original draft preparation, M.H.; writing—review and editing, M.H. and A.B.; visualization, M.H.; supervision, A.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
The research was conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Resolution of the Senate of Vytautas Magnus University No. SEN-N-17 of 24 March 2021, emphasizing the basic principles of professionalism and ethics regarding scientific research.
Informed consent was obtained from all teachers involved in the study. Permission from the head of the school was also obtained for lesson observation.
The datasets generated and analysed during the current study are not publicly available, due to privacy and ethical concerns, but are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
The authors are grateful to all the teachers and students whose lessons were observed.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Footnotes
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Figure 1 Illustration of the grouping of the common behaviours observed across all grade levels.
Figure 2 Illustrating the grouping of the common Positive Discipline techniques applied by primary school teachers.
Figure 3 Illustration of the data regarding student engagement before lunchtime.
Figure 4 Illustration of the data regarding student engagement after lunchtime.
Teacher characteristics.
| Category of Teaching Experience | Subject | Years of Experience |
|---|---|---|
| Up to 5 years | Classroom Teacher | 1.5 |
| Mathematics | 3 | |
| Classroom Teacher | 5 | |
| Primary English | 5 | |
| 5–10 years | Mathematics | 6 |
| Classroom Teacher | 6 | |
| Primary English | 6 | |
| Primary English | 7 | |
| Classroom Teacher | 8 | |
| Primary English | 8 | |
| Over 10 years | Primary English | 12 |
| Primary English | 18 | |
| Primary English | 22 |
The number of students in each grade level.
| Grade | Number of Classes for Each Grade | Number of Boys | Number of Girls | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grade 1 (7 years old) | 4 | 42 | 31 | 73 |
| Grade 2 (8 years old) | 4 | 23 | 30 | 53 |
| Grade 3 (9 years old) | 3 | 55 | 29 | 84 |
| Grade 4 (10 years old) | 4 | 27 | 25 | 52 |
| Total | 19 | 147 | 115 | 262 |
Bear, G. G. Gilman, R.; Huebner, E. S.; Furlong, M. J. The positive in positive models of discipline. Handbook of positive psychology in schools; Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group: 2009; pp. 305-321.
Bear, G. G.; Soltys, A. B.; Lachman, F. H. Allen, K.-A.; Furlong, M. J.; Vella-Brodrick, D.; Suldo, S. M. Positive psychology and school discipline. Handbook of positive psychology in schools: Supporting process and practice; 3rd ed. Routledge: 2022; pp. 365-379. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781003013778-29]
Caldarella, P.; Larsen, R. A. A.; Williams, L.; Wills, H. P.; Wehby, J. H. “Stop Doing That!”: Effects of teacher reprimands on student disruptive behavior and engagement. Journal of Positive Behavior Interventions; 2021; 23,
Cohen, L.; Manion, L.; Morrison, K. Research methods in education; Routledge: 2002.
de Lemos, A. R.; Mendes, S.; Leal, T. School misbehavior: Elementary students’ perspectives on typologies, attributions, and strategies. International Journal of School & Educational Psychology; 2023; 11,
Dinkmeyer, D. C.; Dreikurs, R. Encouraging children to learn; Psychology Press: 2000.
Dreikurs, R. Do teachers understand children?; 2025; Available online: https://www.carterandevans.com/storage/app/media/library/Adlerian-Theory/article-do-teachers-understand-children.pdf (accessed on 7 March 2025).
Dreikurs, R.; Cassel, P.; Ferguson, E. D. Discipline without tears: How to reduce conflict and establish cooperation in the classroom; Wiley: 2004.
Dreikurs, R.; Soltz, V. Children: The challenge; Hawthorn/Dutton: 1964.
Egeberg, H.; McConney, A.; Price, A. Teachers’ views on effective classroom management: A mixed-methods investigation in Western Australian high schools. Educational Research and Policy Practice; 2021; 20, pp. 107-124. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10671-020-09270-w]
Flynn, N.; O’Brien, E.; Kennedy, Y.; Greene, G. An ecological analysis of teacher perceptions of, and responses to, student unproductive behaviour in Irish primary schools. Irish Educational Studies; 2025; 44,
Gilmour, A. F.; Sandilos, L. E.; Pilny, W. V.; Schwartz, S.; Wehby, J. H. Teaching students with emotional/behavioral disorders: Teachers’ burnout profiles and classroom management. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders; 2021; 30,
Jang, H.; Reeve, J.; Deci, E. L. Engaging students in learning activities: It is not autonomy support or structure but autonomy support and structure. Journal of Educational Psychology; 2010; 102,
Lanas, M.; Brunila, K. Bad behaviour in school: A discursive approach. British Journal of Sociology of Education; 2019; 40,
Nelsen, J. D.; Lott, L.; Glenn, H. S. Positive discipline in the classroom: Developing mutual respect, cooperation, and responsibility in your classroom; 3rd ed. Three Rivers Press: 2000.
OECD. Positive, high-achieving students?: What schools and teachers can do; TALIS, OECD Publishing: 2021; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/3b9551db-en]
OECD. Results (volume II): Learning during—and from—disruption; PISA, OECD Publishing: 2023; [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/a97db61c-en]
Praetorius, A.-K.; Klieme, E.; Kleickmann, T.; Brunner, E.; Lindmeier, A.; Taut, S.; Charalambous, S. Towards developing a theory of generic teaching quality: Origin, current status, and necessary next steps regarding the three basic dimensions model. Zeitschrift für Pädagogik; 2020; 66, pp. 15-36. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.3262/ZPB2001015]
Reeve, J. Christenson, S.; Reschly, A.; Wylie, C. A Self-determination theory perspective on student engagement. Handbook of research on student engagement; Springer: 2012.
Reeve, J.; Jang, H.; Carrell, D.; Jeon, S.; Barch, J. Enhancing students’ engagement by increasing teachers’ autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion; 2004; 28, pp. 147-169. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:MOEM.0000032312.95499.6f]
Ryan, R. M.; Deci, E. L. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist; 2000; 55,
Schlesinger, L.; Jentsch, A.; Kaiser, G.; König, J.; Blömeke, S. Subject-specific characteristics of instructional quality in mathematics education. ZDM Mathematics Education; 2018; 50, pp. 475-490. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11858-018-0917-5]
Skaalvik, E. M.; Skaalvik, S. Dimensions of teacher burnout: Relations with potential stressors at school. Social Psychology of Education: An International Journal; 2017a; 20,
Skaalvik, E. M.; Skaalvik, S. Still motivated to teach? A study of school context variables, stress and job satisfaction among teachers in senior high school. Social Psychology of Education; 2017b; 20, pp. 15-37. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11218-016-9363-9]
Skaalvik, E. M.; Skaalvik, S. Teacher self-efficacy and collective teacher efficacy: Relations with perceived job resources and job demands, feeling of belonging, and teacher engagement. Creative Education; 2019; 10, pp. 1400-1424. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ce.2019.107104]
Soheili, F.; Alizadeh, H.; Murphy, J.; Bajestani, H. S.; Ferguson, E. D. Teachers as leaders: The impact of Adler-Dreikurs classroom management techniques on students’ perceptions of the classroom environment and on academic achievement. The Journal of Individual Psychology; 2016; 71, pp. 440-461. [DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/jip.2015.0037]
Toropova, A.; Myrberg, E.; Johansson, S. Teacher job satisfaction: The importance of school working conditions and teacher characteristics. Educational Review; 2020; 73,
Tshabalala, G.; Ndlovu, M.; Makola, S.; Schlebusch, G. Implementing Positive Discipline in Eswatini primary schools: A qualitative study of principals’ experiences. Issues in Educational Research; 2024; 34,
Wolff, C. E.; Jarodzka, H.; Boshuizen, H. P. A. Classroom management scripts: A theoretical model contrasting expert and novice teachers’ knowledge and awareness of classroom events. Educational Psychology Review; 2021; 33,
Wubbels, T. An international perspective on classroom management: What should prospective teachers learn?. Teaching Education; 2011; 22,
© 2025 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.
Details
; Brandišauskienė Agnė 2
1 Primary School Foreign Languages Department, Queen Morta School, LT-11332 Vilnius, Lithuania
2 Educational Research Institute, Education Academy, Vytautas Magnus University, K. Donelaičio Str. 52, LT-44244 Kaunas, Lithuania; [email protected]