Disruption in the classroom is a major challenge for teachers and children alike. Around the world, teachers spend about 13% of their time just trying to keep order. Evidence from Ecuador shows that children who themselves struggle with their behaviour can have a significant negative effect on their classmates’ attainment, reducing scores in subjects like mathematics and languages.
My recent research – co-authored with Yyannú Cruz-Aguayo, Francesca Salvati and Norbert Schady – explores a unique situation where thousands of children were assigned to different classrooms by a lottery every year, from kindergarten through to 6th grade (ages 10-11). By following these children over seven years, we identify exactly how much one child’s behaviour affects the learning of everyone else in the room. While most children do well, a very small number of pupils who find it hard to follow rules can have a lasting impact on their peers (Carneiro et al, forthcoming).
Measuring disruption in the classroom
Our research focuses on 202 schools in coastal Ecuador where children were randomly reassigned to new peers and teachers every year. To identify who was truly disruptive, we looked at teacher reports over several years. We define a poorly behaved child as one who teachers consistently rank among the most difficult pupils for three years in a row. These children, who make up only 2-3% of the pupils in the study, have a measurable negative effect on the attainment of their classmates.
The number of disruptive pupils also matters. Having one lowers everyone’s scores slightly, but having three or more in one room leads to much larger drops in learning. In fact, the loss from having three or more disruptive peers is about half as large as the benefit of having a top-quality teacher.
But not all peers who struggle cause these problems. Our study also looks at ‘slow learners’ – children who have the biggest difficulties with their schoolwork. These pupils do not slow down their classmates at all. The problem is linked specifically to behaviour that interrupts the flow of the lesson. Age also plays a big role. The negative effects of disruptive peers are nearly three times larger for younger children in 3rd and 4th grade (ages 7-9) than they are for those in 5th and 6th grade (ages 9-11). And these setbacks are not just a one-year problem: the drop in mathematics and language scores persists for at least two years after a child has been in the room with a poorly behaved peer.
Clarify what most constrains children from succeeding in school
Our research helps to clarify what factors prevent children from succeeding in school. For a long time, people have debated whether having pupils with different academic abilities in the same room is a problem. We show that children who struggle to learn do not harm the progress of others: it is the disruption of the teaching process itself that causes the damage.
As part of our work, we look at ‘non-cognitive’ skills – such characteristics as a child’s self-esteem, their grit and how they feel about their future. While a single disruptive peer does not seem to change these traits, having multiple poorly behaved classmates significantly reduces a child’s ‘growth mindset’ – the belief that they can improve their skills through hard work. This suggests that classroom chaos can change the way in which children think about their own potential.
Another discovery concerns the ‘passing around’ of children with behavioural issues. We find that children with persistent behaviour problems are more likely to move from school to school. New arrivals in a school are also more likely to be reported as poorly behaved by their new teachers. This suggests that schools may be encouraging difficult children to leave rather than helping them, which simply moves the problem to a different classroom.
Policies to prevent long-term learning losses
The findings suggest that school systems need to move beyond simply reshuffling children between schools. Because younger children are the most sensitive to disruption, early intervention is essential. Providing teachers with better tools to manage behaviour in the early grades could prevent longer-term learning losses for entire groups of children.
Our research also raises difficult policy questions. For example, should children with persistent behaviour problems be kept in regular classrooms or do they need specialised support? In countries with limited resources, such as Ecuador, finding the money for such staff is a major hurdle. But our study makes it clear that doing nothing has a high cost.
Classroom observations are a powerful way to predict how much children will learn. Instead of just looking at test scores, school leaders should use tools that observe how teachers interact with pupils and manage their classrooms. Future research should follow these children into their adult lives. We need to know if being in a disruptive 3rd grade classroom affects a person’s chances of graduating or their future earnings. Understanding these long-term effects will help policy-makers to decide how much to invest in classroom support today.
