ABSTRACT
In the 1970’s the education system in England and Wales created a new category of pupil, “the disruptive child”. It was rather like the creation of the ploughman’s lunch made famous in the film of that name. What now seems like a traditional and appetizingly earthy part of our gastronomic culture, stretching back into the mists of medieval folklore, was actually a concept put together by an advertising agency less than fifteen years ago. Similarly, the word disruptive is now applied by educators to pupils as if it signified a well-known type of child. The category now has the authority of the familiar, of the educationally accepted. It is this acceptance that we wish to challenge. At the outset it might be best to assert boldly that there is no such thing as a disruptive pupil. Certain pupils behave disruptively in some lessons, with some teachers, in some environments at certain times of the day or week. Some pupils behave disruptively in corridors, playgrounds and staircases. Do any pupils behave disruptively with all teachers? in all lessons? in all contexts? And if they did, would disruptive any longer be the best way of describing them? Disruptive is a word better applied to forms of behaviour or to situations than to pupils. Most labels simplify life for the person doing the categorising. For the person who is categorised, however, they may have pernicious and long-term consequences.
