Teachers’ Perspectives on Disruptive Student Behaviors: The Interconnectedness of Environment and Early Childhood Education in Pakistan

Abstract

This study describes teachers’ perspectives on disruptive student behaviors in early childhood education classrooms in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Using an ecological model, this paper describes interviews with 26 teachers working in early childhood education. The findings show that home, school, and society do not play optimal roles in children’s education, which leads to disruption in classrooms. Illiteracy and socioeconomic problems at home prevent parents from playing their required roles, and schools are often overcrowded and have unattractive classrooms. Teachers are minimally qualified and have few teaching-learning materials at their disposal. Fear of violence is another factor. These factors do not support the behavioral development of young children. The three major circles (home, school, society) that comprise a child’s ecology are inadequate, which leads to classroom disruption, lack of motivation, and poor behavior that endangers the continuation of education.

Plain Language Summary

The reasons for students’ disruptive behaviors in early childhood education

This study is focused on 26 teachers’ perspectives about disruptive student behaviors in early childhood education classrooms in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. The findings show that home, school, and society do not play optimal roles in children’s education, which leads to disruption in classrooms. Illiteracy and socioeconomic problems prevent parents from playing their required roles, and schools are often overcrowded and have unattractive classrooms.

Keywords

early childhood education challenges disruptive behaviors Pakistan

Introduction

Early childhood education (ECE) can have either negative or positive impacts on the lifelong character and behaviors of young children (Arshad & Zamir, 2019). These characteristics and behaviors also have wider social, economic, and political impacts (Hellman & Lauritsen, 2017). Behavioral development is strongly influenced by ECE (Ghumman & Khalid, 2016), which has its own ecology that consists of teachers, students, books, learning materials, and activities (Parsonson, 2012). Well-managed ECE improves socio-emotional functioning (Isaacs, 2012) and leads to the development of good behaviors and peer relations and solves many day-to-day problems (Bashir et al., 2014). Students who do not reside in the type of environment that promotes their educational and social development will create disruptions and facilities may disrupt the environment (Ward, 2007). Robichaux (2016) defined disruptive behaviors as actions that are incompatible with an effective classroom. Some examples of disruptive behaviors include gross motor movements, noise-making, aggression, and verbalization. Negative behaviors, such as being habitually late, displaying disinterest, and eating or sleeping inside the classroom, may be either intentional or unintentional (Douglas et al., 2016). Trying to analyze disruption without identifying the underlying reasons for this behavior is like “putting the cart before the horse” (Dunbar, 2004).

ECE in Pakistan has undergone developmental stages where disruption has often been extreme (Sayeed, 2011). To achieve effective ECE, specific programs have been implemented to improve literacy and good behaviors in Pakistan. These programs include the Teachers’ Resource Center, a nongovernmental organization working on the implementation of ECE, and Releasing Confidence and Creativity, a program funded by USAID in collaboration with the Aga Khan Foundation that focuses on ECE learning. The Aga Khan University Institute for Educational Development has also organized ECE courses, and UNICEF and Save the Children have lobbied for the development of ECE in Pakistan. However, the sector still faces many struggles. For example, the majority of the stakeholders in schools—teachers, parents, and communities—do not realize the significance of ECE. There is no well-defined policy, rules, or laws for ECE regarding children, parents, teachers, and syllabi (Hunzai, 2006). Because of weak ECE, more than 26% of young children in the province of KPK discontinued their education during the 2017 to 2018 academic year (IMU, 2018, p. 25).

Therefore, the disruptive behaviors of students are of great importance, and teachers hold a major role in facing disruptive student behaviors. With this aim, this study is designed to find the teachers’ perpectives on students’disruptive behaviors, and how their understandings can help the schools and society to improve their practices.

Disruptive Student Behaviors in the Classroom

Disruptive behaviors in the classroom mostly occur due to issues linked to bad peers, socio-economic problems, and under-resourced and under-trained teachers. These types of behaviors are critical because they lead to drop out and sometimes feeds into the school-to-prison pipeline (McDermott et al., 2019). In the ECE classroom, these actions are called challenging, inappropriate, and problem behaviors (Albritton et al., 2019). The behaviors of young children who are enrolled in ECE predict their future academic achievement (Ansari et al., 2019) and behavioral problems that occur later in life (Blank & Shavit, 2016). Common disruptive behaviors in ECE classrooms include talking excessively during instruction, throwing things around, walking in and out of the class without permission, all of which affect the instructional practice of teachers (Müller et al., 2018). Some scholars believe that these behaviors are linked to the personal characteristics of students, such as attention deficit disorder (Müller et al., 2018) while others have stated that they are the result of peer influence (Shin & Ryan, 2017) and the quality and strategy of instruction (Clunies-Ross et al., 2008). In the short term, disruptive behaviors affect students’ learning outcomes and self-regulation. In their early school years, children learn to understand and regulate their emotions, behaviors, and attention. Without this knowledge, they can develop mental health disorders (Blewitt et al., 2018) and poor relationships with their teachers (Loomis et al., 2023). Failure to learn these basic skills can also have a negative impact on the physical, psychological, and psychosocial state of students in the future (Ttofi & Farrington, 2008)

The Development of ECE and Disruptive Student Behaviors in Pakistan

ECE obtained formal status in Pakistan in the 1980s, but funding and authority attention remained extremely limited (Ahmad, 2011). Basic questions were raised about the optimal place and space for children, learning resources and practices, and the relevance that ECE has for different spheres of life (Alam et al., 2022; Sayeed, 2011). The National Plan of Action (2001–2015) emphasized the need for a specific curriculum, rooms, teacher training, learning materials, and teaching kits (Ashraf, 2019; Shami et al., 2015). The National Education Policy 2017 (2017, p. 27) highlighted ECE’s shortcomings in the following way:

…[Pakistan has] not provided all standardized facilities. Education Departments in many provinces have not realized the need of development of teaching-learning materials. Pre-service teacher training courses and regular in-service teacher training workshops do not cover learning needs of children. Primary school teachers are not trained in interactive methodologies of teaching to foster joyful learning among children of pre-primary level.

Parsonson (2012) stated that classroom ecology influences student behaviors. According to Khan et al. (2017), Pakistan’s National Education Policy 2017 alloted a specific budget for ECE teacher training and other associated resources. However, these provisions have not been distributed, and training that was meant to take place over a two year period lasted only a week. Vygotsky and Piaget described behavioral development as the outcome of classroom practices (Isikoglu et al., 2009) and identified space and place for every child as prime elements (Rodriguez, 2017). Classroom environment, the teacher-child relationship, and parents’ interest all affect student behaviors (Ashraf et al., 2021; Fredriksen & Rhodes, 2004; Koca, 2016; Mashburn et al., 2008). Disruptive behavior is the main problem in ECE classrooms in Pakistan, and is closely linked to a child’s domestic, educational, and social environments. Malik et al. (2021) highlighted the progression of ECE in Pakistan (Table 1), but it is clear that the sector still faces many challenges that hinder effective implementation.

Table 1.

The Progression of ECE in Pakistan.

Year	ECE in the National Education Policy and plan
1947	In the first education plan, nursery was considered as a joint portion of mainstream education
1950–1980s	For the first time, “katchi” (Pre-primary) class was introduced to familiarize children with the school environment and setting
1992	Katchi class—now called ECE—was proposed as part of mainstream education. It was considered a compulsory portion of primary education
1998–2010	The urgent need for ECE was mandated, and ECE was included in the top three priorities of the Ministry of Education for achievement of the 15 year National Plan of Action
2001–2015	The National Plan of Action and Education for All charted a complete plan for the implementation of ECE as part of formal education and focused on fundraising and support from the private sector
2002	The first National Curriculum for ECE was developed
2001–2004	An Education Sector Reform-Action Plan was devised for the implementation of ECE with funds allocated by the Federal Government
2007	The ECE curriculum was revised
2009	The National Education Policy stipulated implementation of ECE in almost all primary schools
2017	Sustainable Development Goal: by 2030 every child should have access to quality ECE education. At least 1 year of pre-primary education is compulsory for every child aged 4–5 for their holistic development
2020	A single national ECE curriculum was developed

Theoretical Framework: Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Model and Disruptive Student Behaviors

Interconnection Between Environment and Students

This study adopted Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model as a theoretical framework. Bronfenbrenner (2005, p. 44) noted that “we must be prepared to see a complex of differentiated regions, some embedded in others, some interconnected, others isolated, but all interacting to steer the behavior and development of the person.” Ontologically, the ecological model is based on a relativist approach that highlights the contentual importance of identifying the nature of a phenomenon as a joint function of the environment and the individual (Walls, 2016). This concept is important to the study of ECE because children and their context function together to achieve developmental outcomes that are supported by phenotype, genotype, and environotype (Attekal & Mahoney, 2017). When a child is born, its parents and community are responsible for providing behavioral guidance (de Freitas Bissoli, 2014). The exact nature of these responsibilities vary according to personal, social, and ethnic backgrounds (OECD, 2012). Poor ECE conditions are more likely to cause behavioral disruptions (Memon, 2006).

Children’s operant behaviors stem from what they observe (Bereiter, 2005). Place, setting, and community relationships influence their behavior (UNICEF, 2007) because social response and conflict augment their ability to be disruptive (Farmer, 2000). A child’s environment is thus crucial to their growth and development (Skinner, 1953; Watson, 1928; and Bandura, 1977 in Krishnan, 2010). Bronfenbrenner combined key theories and concluded that learning and behaviors are shaped by an interrelated system that includes family and society as proximal processes. Individuals not only interact with each other but also with objects and symbols (Rosa & Tudge, 2013). Vélez-Agosto et al. (2017) noted that the ecological model consists of two major layers. The upper layer is linked to home, school, street, and playground, and the supportive layer denotes the system around children, such as physical and geographical settings and institutional contexts that include information about home, school, and society. Figure 1 shows the ecological model and its interconnected layers.

Figure 1.

Interconnection in the ecological model.

The Influence of Teacher-Parent Relationships on Student Disruption

The relationship between home and school is the basic principle of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model (Benjamin, 2015). It describes students’ individual needs while capturing distal and proximal influences and environmental interactions (Walls, 2016). Students’ social relationships, self-esteem, and general mentality are the outcome of teacher-parent relationships (Fagbeminiyi, 2011). Disruptive behaviors cannot be addressed by teachers alone (Yigzaw, 2019). The interests of teachers combined with parental scaffolding help develop children’s socioemotional skills (McDoniel & Buss, 2018). Parental collaborations foster students’ interest in school (Goodall & Vorhaus, 2011) and support learning and good behaviors (Rodriguez, 2017). Classroom behaviors and achievements are influenced by how parents treat their children (Jeffries, 2012). UNICEF and OECD declared parental involvement as a fundamental right of young children (Kerman, 2012), but this right is often jeopardised by low levels of literacy and socioeconomic problems experienced by parents (Adegbami & Adewole, 2013; Grantham-McGregor et al., 2007).

School-Based Influences on Student Disruptions

Proximal processes include school-based factors that can challenge students and lead to disruptive behaviors. First, teachers’ in-service training may promote pedagogy that stimulates specific student behaviors (Lawless & Pellegrino, 2007). Pedagogical content knowledge plays a key role in the professional development of teachers and may help teachers understand the context and situations that their students face (Van Driel & Berry, 2012), ultimately allowing them to make sense of student behaviors (Al-Amarat, 2011).

Second, in Pakistan, overcrowded classrooms are a serious but often forgotten issue that hinders the effectiveness of ECE (Ahmad et al., 2015). Overcrowded classrooms are more prone to student disruptions (Khan & Iqbal, 2012). In contrast, a comfortable and attractive environment promotes clear thinking and orderly behavior (Rodriguez, 2017), which means that issues of space and place deserve consideration in schools (Holloway et al., 2010). Bronfenbrenner described teacher-student interaction as a dyad (Konza, 1999), which is a relationship that cannnot be supported in overcrowded classrooms in Pakistan (Pardhan, 2012). Walls (2016) considers how Bronfenbrenner’s proximal processes emphasize the importance of classroom settings and peer relationships, which are directly linked to the learning and behavior of students and ultimately influence dropout rates.

The quality and content of teaching-learning materials are other areas of concern for ECE development in Pakistan, where learning often depends on abstract experiences (Saeed & Wain, 2011). Effective learning cannot take place with ineffective materials (Korpershoek et al., 2014), and this lack of resources, in turn, influences behaviors (Skinner et al., 2009). ECE has limited resources and materials in Pakistan (Arshad & Zamir, 2019) even though they are fundamental to the behavioral and cognitive development of children (Morabito et al., 2018). According to Zahid (2014), classrooms that contain a variety of high quality learning materials help prevent disruption, which is a premise that is often ignored in Pakistani ECE.

Society-Based (Local Community) Influences on Student Disruption

In the ecological model, contextual variables and neighborhood factors are basic components of young children’s behavioral development (Krishnan, 2010) that are supported by family and community participation (UNICEF, 2012). Young children observe their environment as part of their behavioral development (Khalil et al., 2016). Vygotsky stated that the social origins of learning make individuals and society interdependent (Artiles et al., 2000). Human knowledge and behaviors are supported by practices (Moll, 2013) that influence mental functioning (Balakrishnan & Claiborne, 2012). In Pakistan, the gap between how families and society approach young children’s education leads to weak ECE and disruptive student behavior (Arshad & Zamir, 2019).

Methodology

This study used qualitative approach, which epistomologically based on phenomenology. Creswell et al. (2007) suggest that this type of approach is an attempt to connect and balance different areas of a study through the use of data from several people. The experiences of individuals are described in a way that is not influenced by the personal views or ideas of the researcher (Creswell & Poth, 2018) to answer “what” and “how” questions about their experience of a phenomenon (Moustakas, 1994). The study asked the following guiding question: How do teachers understand the challenging factors that emerge in young children’s ecology and their influence on disruptive student behaviors in ECE classrooms in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan

Participants

Data was collected in Peshawar, capital city of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa provice in Pakistan, and distributed to participants at male and female primary schools located within 10 circles (locations). From each circled area, we selected one male and one female public primary school. Each of the schools that we selected were leading the other schools in their circle in terms of the levels of guidance and the resources that they provided. The selected school also held detailed records about all the other schools in their circle. ECE in Pakistan occurs in primary schools, and one ECE teacher per school was interviewed in this study. In terms of the type of school building and physical resources, urban (city area) schools are more satisfactory compared to rural (village) schools (Tayyaba, 2012). In the Peshawar district, there are a total of 268 primary schools in urban areas and 771 schools in rural areas (IMU, 2018).

In order to invite participants for this research, we used a mixture of random and purposive sampling technique. The rational for using mix samling techniques is that these sampling methods could help the researchers with the identification and selection of cases with good information by effectively using of limited resources (Palinkas et al., 2015). This technique involves finding and selecting knowledgeable participants and experienced with a phenomenon of interest. In addition, this technique helps the researchers to know participants’ willingness and availability to participate, and their ability to share their reflections and experiences in an expressive manner are another important factors in the research process (Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2007). In random sampling, we sent an invitation letter for participating in the research to the teachers in each school, and a reminder letter was sent to the schools after three weeks interval. In purposive sampling, we contacted the teachers in each school by looking at their profiles, by focusing on their teaching experience in ECE, as well as by focusing on their region and school.

ECE in Pakistan occurs in primary schools where one ECE teacher from each school was interviewed. Interviews with the respondents were conducted in two phases, November 2018 to March 2019, and March to April 2022. During the first phase, 20 interviews were conducted, and an additional six interviews were conducted during the second phase, which brought the total number of participants to 26. Education policy and ECE practices have remained the same since 2017 in the province of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan (Mangrio & Tabassum, 2020). Data was collected from ECE teachers because a teacher has the ability to perform classroom management tasks, including conducting interactions with students, setting guidelines for the class, establishing expectations, and controlling student disruptions (Lazarides et al., 2020). Challenging and disruptive student behaviors are matters of great concern for teachers because they impact their work (Patnaik et al., 2022). The 26 particpants included 13 male and 13 female ECE teachers.The 14 participants (7 male and 7 female) were from rural areas, and 12 (6 male and 6 female) were from urban areas. Twelve of the 26 participants held master’s degrees (equal to 16 years of education), and the rest were less qualified and older. Only three participants had received ECE teaching certifricate, and one was in progress. The rest of the participants had no ECE certificate (Table 2).

Table 2.

Teachers’ Demographic Information.

Pseudonym	Gender	Age	Rural/Urban	ECE certificate	Qualification	Experience/Years
Abbas	Male	45	Urban	No	Master’s Degree	17
Aisha	Female	49	Urban	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	28
Asma	Female	35	Rural	No	Master’s Degree	7
Asif	Male	58	Rural	No	Higher Secondary School Certificate + PTC	29
Sadaf	Female	44	Urban	No	Master’s Degree	18
Asad	Male	29	Urban	Yes	Master’s Degree	4
Sana	Female	51	Rural	No	Higher Secondary School Certificate + PTC	26
Asim	Male	55	Rural	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	27
Salma	Female	41	Urban	No	Master’s Degree	15
Amin	Male	56	Urban	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	24
Johar	Male	57	Rural	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	28
Mahjabeen	Female	58	Rural	No	Higher Secondary School Certificate + PTC	27
Waseem	Male	46	Urban	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	21
Kalsoom	Female	38	Urban	Yes	Master’s Degree	6
Ahmad	Male	53	Rural	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	25
Khalida	Female	47	Rural	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	18
Mehmood	Male	59	Urban	No	Higher Secondary School Certificate + PTC	28
Noreen	Female	53	Urban	No	Higher Secondary School + PTC	26
Kashif	Male	28	Rural	Yes	Master’s Degree	3
Safna	Female	30	Rural	No	Master’s Degree	2
Waheed	Male	39	Urban	No	Master’s Degree + PTC	9
Shazia	Female	28	Urban	In progress	Master’s Degree	3
Mashal	Male	37	Rural	No	Master’s Degree + PTC	11
Nazia	Female	49	Rural	No	Higher Secondary School Certificate + PTC	24
Imran	Male	42	Rural	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	18
Nagin	Female	46	Rural	No	Bachelor’s Degree + PTC	23

Note. A Master’s degree is equal to 16 years of education. A Bachelor’s degree is equal to 14 years of education, and Higher Secondary School Certificate is equal to 12 years of education. PTC = primary teaching certificate in Pakistan.

Stages of thematic analysis	Strategies for establishing trustworthiness
Stage 1-Familiar with the data	Engagement with data Triangulation of different data collection methods Documentation of theoretical and reflective thoughts Keeping records of all data, and data field notes
Stage 2-Creating initial codes	Peer examining of the data by all researchers Development of coding framework Researchers’ triangulation in examining the data and development of coding framework Documentation of all research team meetings and peer examining
Stage 3-Developing themes	Making sense of the initial codes Diagramming the connections between initial codes Transfer similar codes into themes Documentation of all detailed notes about the development of concepts and themes
Stage 4-Review and define the themes	Researchers’ triangulation in each task Themes and sub-themes examined by all members of research team Team consensus on themes Documentation of team meetings
Stage-5. Producing the report	Describing the methods and analysis in detail Checking and confirmation of themes and report by all team members Detailed descriptions of the context and framework

Data Collection

Data was collected through semi-structured interviews. Interviews are considered most effective tools in qualitative research, as they are helpful in explaining, understanding, and exploring participants’ opinions, experiences and phenomenon about a particular research topic. In this research, the interviews covered information pertaining to home, school, and society in order to answer questions about the aspects of young children’s ecology that cause disruption. The interview questions were intended to reveal teachers’ perspectives about the disruptive behaviors of students, in-service ECE training, overcrowded classrooms, teaching-learning materials, teacher-parent relationships, and the role of the local community and its influence on student disruptions in ECE. The questions probed for information about parents/home, school, and society. Each interview lasted between 60 and 90 minutes. The following core themes were prioritized during data collection,

(1) Teachers’ perspectives on disruptive student behaviors in ECE classrooms.

(2) Teachers’ perspectives on teachers’ in-service training and qualifications and disruptive student behaviors.

(3) Teachers’ perspectives on overcrowded classrooms and disruptive student behaviors.

(4) Teachers’ perspectives on teaching and learning materials and disruptive student behaviors.

(5) Teachers’ perspectives on teacher-parent relationships and disruptive student behaviors.

(6) Teachers’ perspectives on the role that the local community plays an important role in the education of young children and its influence on disruptive student behaviors.

Data Analysis

For the data analysis, and in order to summarize the key findings and offer a rich interpretation of the data, thematic analysis method guided by Levitt (2019), Nowell et al. (2017), and Creswell et al. (2007) was applied to analyze the data collected through semi-structured interviews. In this method, interview data were demarcated into meaningful units based on psychological reflection and synthesized into general structural descriptions (Levitt, 2019; Nowell et al., 2017). At first, data analysis involved descriptive coding, during which the relevant materials were highlighted and annotated with brief comments. All interview data were assessed and reviewed to trace similarities and differences for open coding. Many different coding themes emerged instinctively at the beginning of data analysis, however, many other themes were developed carefully after reading the data several times. Then, data analysis followed interpretive coding, during which descriptive coding was trasforemed into meaning interpretations in the way that it ensures that the data were related to the research questions. In the final stage, data analysis was centered on identifying the overarching themes that emerged from the data as a whole. Here, the deriving themes from the data were identified, and compared these themes with the earlier literature. In addition, the triangulation of the data anlysis performed by integrating all themes through a narrative form, and by complementing and assisting each other.

In addition, we adopted different strategies provided by Nowell et al. (2017) to ensure the trustworthiness of the qualitative data by following the guidelines. First of all, the researchers checked the credibility of the qualitative data. The researchers who checked the credibility were born and lived in the same society, and they have been part of the same educational system since their childhood. After this, the authors addressed the reliability and dependability of the data by planning the research desing and its application in fieldwork (Nowell et al., 2017). In the next stage, the authors checked for transferability of the data by confirming external validity, wherein the results of one study are useful to the other situations. Finally, the authors ensured the confirmability of the collected data, which includes steps to confirm that the results of the study are presented as the ideas and experiences of the informants, rather then the preferences and descriptions of the researchers. Therefore, these different measures ensured the credibility of the qualitative data.

Research Ethics

Ethical guidelines were followed during the research process. All interviews were conducted in Urdu, a national language of Pakistan and the language of instruction. However, Pashto, the native language of most teachers and students, and English were also used during conversations with teachers. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Beijing Normal University, China, and permission was obtained from school authorities. All teachers were informed about the study objectives prior to their interviews, and sample questions were sent to participants so that they could become familiar with the aims of the study. All of the teachers also signed a consent letter that indicated their voluntary participation in the study. Interviews were conducted in a relaxed environment where the views of participants and the information that they provided were given appropriate attention. The researchers aimed to remain neutral and not express their personal likes and dislikes or shift the participants’ attention. Pseudonyms were used for the teachers in order to respect their privacy (Hafaiedh, 2009).

Findings

Parental Roles in Disruptive Student Behaviors

Almost all of the teachers indicated that student disruption was an expected phenomenon caused by weak home, school, and social support networks. The majority of teachers revealed that parents are illiterate, economically poor, and ignorant of the urgent need for young children’s education. Disruption becomes normal for young children when they follow the disruptive approaches that they observe at home and school or in society more generally. These types of behaviors can be reduced when children are placed in a supportive environment that is conducive to their wellbeing:

In the character of young children, the dominance of disruption is vibrant, and the reason is that the home environment is not conducive to their educational growth due to parental illiteracy and weak economical conditions. (Abbas)

According to the respondents, in the absence of a conducive environment, every action that young children take can lead to disruptions, such as not paying attention, making noises, laughing, whistling, shouting, shrieking, sleeping, fighting, hitting others, calling each other names, and abusing or stealing classroom equipment such as books and pencils. Further causes of disruptive behavior were described as follows:

Students in ECE are younger than 5 years and are not socially well-trained at home. If they receive little attention from their parents, then they become disruptive, for example, by snatching books, colors and pencils etc. from one another. (Amin)

Disruptions in ECE are the result of the challenges that hinder effective education, which parents and school authorities do not pay enough attention to. (Asma)

Teachers’ In-Service Training in Disruptive Student Behaviors

Almost all teachers mentioned that receiving in-service training allows ECE teachers to engage students in activities and the learning environment:

Teaching is not about controlling students in the classroom. It is about engaging and guiding them in a healthy environment that promotes learning and character-buidling, which is only possible through the in-service training of teachers. (Asif)

The participants of the study said that they do not currently receive any specific type of in-service training. Older and less qualified teachers are typically selected to teach ECE classes in primary schools. The Provincial Institute for Teacher Education (PITE) and international NGOs (for example, Save the Children) started organizing workshops and in-service training for ECE teachers (Shah et al., 2019). However, these offerings were soon discontinued, and the teachers who joined these workshops typically did not apply the skills that they gained in actual classrooms either due to a lack of advanced teaching-learning materials or the absence of monitoring over teaching practices. In some cases, teachers who attended ECE workshops had nothing to do with ECE. Asad shared the following impression of ECE.

Typically, older teachers who cannot teach other classes monopolize preprimary classes. Because of their minimal qualifications, they also do not attend training sessions about ECE and send someone else from among the teachers at the school to attend instead (Asad).

Majority of the participants stated that in the absence of in-service training, a teacher cannot understand student needs, which gives rise to different forms of disruption, including a lack of interest, shouting, quarrelling, abusing peers, and even running away from school. One teacher described the situation in the following way:

Teaching ECE is difficult without in-service training because teachers have to engage students in the class and attract their attention to reduce instances of disruption. (Shazia)

Overcrowded Classrooms in Disruptive Student Behaviors

Habib (2015) emphasized that the standard class size in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan is 40 students. However, according to the teachers in our study, the actual number of students per ECE classroom is between 48 and 80 children. They described the difficulties that a single teacher in an overcrowded classroom faces as they attempt to carry out various activities, focus on individual students, or record their assessments. This type of environment is often noisy with the sounds of children fighting, crying, and playing, and many children will remain outside the classroom for the entire day. Asad described the consequences of this type of disruption during his interview:

Large numbers of students in a single class prevent teachers from checking the progress of every student, which could help control disruption. (Asad)

As another participant stated, the proximal processes related to the people, process, context, and time scenario in an overcrowded classroom mean that there is no positive value for the healthy development of young children:

Because I do not have a proper place and space for each and every student in my ECE class, most of the students are not regularly coming to school and remain absent or discontinue education. (Kashif)

Lack of Teaching and Learning Materials in Disruptive Student Behaviors

The ECE teachers interviewed in this study said that they still follow traditional “talk and chalk” methods in the classroom. In some of the schools, basic equipment, such as color charts, boxes containing letters and numbers, abacuses, maps, and clocks are provided but are not always used by teachers. Books are freely provided by the government, but due to their poor socioeconomic status, parents cannot buy other writing materials, such as colored crayons and pencils (Siddiqui et al., 2020). According to the respondents, there are no toys or digital materials available to attract students’ attention. Almost all of the schools have different teaching and learning materials at their disposal. The sampled schools relied on materials provided by the government, which are not sufficient:

I have a little bit of funding provided by the government to buy some low-cost materials for my ECE, but the headmaster of the school does not allow me to buy [them] because he believes that the funding insufficient. (Asim)

Some of the teachers provide low-cost materials at their own expense because they believe that the government does not provide enough support and parents are unable to buy these items themselves:

The teaching and learning materials that I use in my ECE classroom are old-fashioned and not suited the lessons. But I try to provide some low-cost materials from my own pocket like balls, balloons, coloring pages, and a wall clock. (Imran)

Some of the teachers use innovative methods to engage students in activities and control disruptive behaviors. Johar emphasized this point when he made the following statement:

I am not provided with any type of toys etc. for the interest of young children in the class. To fill the gap, I am using little pebbles, beans, and drawing circles on the ground to engage children in different activities to make them better understand. (Johar)

Limited Teacher-Parent (Home-School) Relationships in Disruptive Student Behaviors

In his research, Rahim (2017) describes the Parent-Teacher Associations that exist in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa for the purpose of engaging parents in the education of young children. This system was renamed Parent-Teacher Councils during the 2007 to 2008 school year and includes influential people who play an authoritative role in school affairs. ECE teachers stated that the results of councils are unsatisfactory because only 10% to 15% of the parents attend the monthly meetings. In Pakistan, only poor children attend public schools, and their parents are often not even aware of how their children’s development is progressing due to limited literacy and socioeconomic problems:

The causes of poor results and weak education in public schools are the parents’ insufficient role and cooperation. (Johar)

I see parents only once, and that is when they are admitting their kids to us. After that, they do not even ask whether their kids are coming to school or not. (Waseem)

Teachers discussed instances in which they attempted to convince parents to attend council meetings in order to help them feel more involved. Lack of parental engagement can cause children to not take interest in the class and behave disruptively. One teacher described parental influence in the following way:

If the parents do not inquire about the progress and routine of their children in the classroom, then their children do not come to school regularly. If they come, they do not take interest in class and behave disruptively. (Mashal)

Lack of Society (Local Community) Interest in Disruptive Student Behaviors

The participant ECE teachers stated that young children are keen observers who enjoy mimicking the behaviors of the adults who serve as their role models. First of all, in the local community, there are few social work services, limited effective health services, and no recreation facilities that can positively influence the behavioral and cognitive development of young children (Alam et al., 2022). The local community also does not cooperate with or support teachers because of issues related to illiteracy, socioeconomic problems, and fear of violence, which have negative effects on the behavior of young children. Some children work in workshops, tea hotels, and tailor shops due to the socioeconomic status of their families. In such environments, they learn language and habits that are antisocial. They then maintain those same behaviors in the classroom, which causes them to become disruptive:

In the workplace, young children see grown-ups around them who are abusing, calling names, and quarrelling, which are behaviors that they then bring inside their classrooms and use to disturb the whole environment. (Waseem)

If the community is teaching children unsocial behaviors, how can we expect a positive social outcome? (Ahmad).

Teachers also indicated that the local media and injustice in the community negatively affect the behavior of young children. Young children watch local dramas and then act the same way inside the classroom while repeating certain dialogues and behaviors. This finding aligns with the work of Christakis and Zimmerman (2007), who claimed that watching violent television programs and games triggers aggressive behaviors in young children. Terrorism in Pakistani society also negatively affects the student perspectives:

Young children have fear in their mind as they have the living example of extremist attacks, for example, Bacha Khan University, and Army Public School, where many innocent children were killed. (Safna)

Discussion

This study described the challenging factors in young children’s ecology that trigger disruption in classrooms. The teachers interviewed in this research identified various types of disruptive student behaviors and suggested that these problems can be addressed if children are placed in an encouraging environment. However, the current weaknesses in young children’s ecology generate disruption. According to Price and McCallum (2015), Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model shows that the perceptions of teachers are influenced by the organizational context that they are working within, which sheds lights on the following points about disruptive behaviors.

The importance of ECE has been neglected by both school authorities and policy makers. Findings indicated that there is no specific budget allocated for the development of ECE, which prevents teachers from using relevant teaching-learning materials. Classrooms are overcrowded, and ECE teachers are often older and poorly qualified individuals who have received no in-service training and lack appropriate teaching-learning materials. In Pakistan, ECE classes take place in primary schools and have resources that are not suited to the developmental needs of the students. Because ECE teachers normally teach an entire class by themselves and receive little support from the school headmaster and policy makers, it is difficult for them to use developmentally appropriate methods. ECE teachers, headmasters, policy makers, and parents are not united in the quest to develop young children’s education and behaviors. Parents do not communicate with teachers about their young children’s education. Teachers do not receive support from the headmasters, and policy makers do not make effective policies or allocate an appropriate amount of the budget toward ECE. This type of situation leads to disruptive student behaviors because there is minimal ecological support in the proximal processes.

Pakistan is a developing country where almost all of the public school students belong to poor families. This study highlighted the issues that stem from illiteracy and socioeconomic problems in homes and local communities. These two factors prevent parents from visiting schools or attending council meetings to discuss their children’s progress or problems. Children often attend school irregularly because their needs are not being met. Society also fails to motivate young children to persue their education and practice good behaviors, and children adopt inappropriate habits and use bad language. According to Sekaran et al. (2017), Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system describes the influence of the immediate setting on the behaviors of students. Chepkonga (2017) has argued that the learning environment, which is supported by resources and infrastructure, is important for quality education. Artiles et al. (2000) supported Vygotsky’s view and claimed that individual learning and social processes are interdependent. In order to develop good behaviors and engage in school, young children need to experience motivational activities and encouragement at home, in educational institutions, and within their local community. The local media does not play a supportive role in the education of young children because it only focuses on fighting and negative dialogues that encourage further disruption. According to Walter (2007), extreme fear makes a child disorganized and hyper-aroused. In such a state, children are more prone to be aggressive and lack behavioral control. Pakistan is badly affected by terrorist attacks that create fear in children who are either reluctant to go to school or have phobias that disturb their actions and practices inside classrooms. This study aligns with the work of Artiles et al. (2000) and Hedegaard (2004), who support Vygotsky’s cultural historical stance that society influences student learning and behaviors.

Conclusion

Using Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model, this study concluded that home, school, and society are not fulfilling their respective roles, which causes young children to behave disruptively in the classroom. Policy makers and school authorities are ignorant of ECE classroom practices, especially with respect to the teaching training and learning resources that are available, and there is also a lack of communication between teachers, parents, and policy makers about effective education and ways to gain control over student disruptions. Born into an illiterate and economically weak society, young children work with tailors and mechanics after school and learn language and habits that are not conducive to effective classrooms. According to Chepkonga (2017), student disruptions stem from issues linked to learning resources, infrastructure, and facilities, but these problems can be addressed through motivational activities that take place within different areas of a young child’s environment; however, offering motivational activities and gaining control over student disruptions in ECE classrooms is difficult in KPK, Pakistan because of numerous challenges that converge in that area

Implications and Recommendations

This study aimed to describe ECE in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, where teachers confront a myriad of challenges in young children’s ecology that lead to classroom disruptions. Both proximal and distal processes in young children’s ecology lead to shortcomings in the provision of ECE. The home, school, and social sectors all neglect ECE, which leads to disruption and discontinuation of education in a child’s early years. In order for ECE to be successful and meet the material needs of teachers and students, policy makers must set aside a specific budget for this sector. ECE should also be separate from primary school, where it is currently being poorly implementented, in part because teachers are poorly qualified and receive no in-service training. Parents and members of the local community should also have the opportunity to attend workshops that center on the importance of ECE.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Muhammad Azeem Ashraf

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

References

Adegbami

Adewole

O. S.

(2013). Early childhood training and education neglect and its implication on children’s future achievements, national peace and development: A critical review of literature. Journal of Education and Practice, 4(22), 43–50.

Ahmad

(2011). Early childhood education in Pakistan: An international slogan waiting for national attention. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 12(1), 86–93. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2011.12.1.86

Ahmad

R. N.

Anjum

Rehman

(2015). Early childhood education in Pakistan: Issues and challenges. International Journal of Sccience and Research (IJSR), 4(3), 413–415.

Alam

Ashraf

M. A.

Tsegay

S. M.

Shabnam

(2022). Early childhood between a rock and a hard place: Early childhood education and students’ disruption in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, Pakistan. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(8), 4486. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19084486

Al-Amarat

M. S.

(2011). The classroom problems faced teachers at the public schools in Tafila province, and proposed solutions. International Journal of Educational Sciences, 3(1), 37–48.

Albritton

Mathews

R. E.

Anhalt

(2019). Systematic review of early childhood mental health consultation: Implications for improving preschool discipline disproportionality. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 29(4), 444–472.

Ansari

Pianta

R. C.

Whittaker

J. V.

Vitiello

V. E.

Ruzek

E. A.

(2019). Starting early: The benefits of attending early childhood education programs at age 3. American Educational Research Journal, 56(4), 1495–1523.

Arshad

Zamir

(2019). Situational analysis of early childhood education in Pakistan: Challenges and solutions. Journal of Early Childhood Care and Education (JECCE), 2, 135–149.

Artiles

A. J.

Trent

S. C.

Hoffman-Kipp

López-Torres

(2000). From individual acquisition to cultural-historical practices in multicultural teacher education. Remedial and Special Education, 21(2), 79–120.

10.

Ashraf

M. A.

(2019). Exploring the potential of religious literacy in Pakistani education. Religions, 10(7), 429. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel10070429

11.

Ashraf

M. A.

Turner

D. A.

Laar

R. A.

(2021). Multilingual language practices in education in Pakistan: The conflict between policy and practice. SAGE Open, 11(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211004140

12.

Attekal

Mahoney

J. L.

(2017). Ecological system theory. In Peppler

(Ed.), The SAGE encyclopedia of out of school learning (pp. 239–241). Sage.

13.

Balakrishnan

Claiborne

L. B.

(2012). Vygotsky from ZPD to ZCD in moral education: Reshaping Western theory and practices in local context. Journal of Moral education, 41(2), 225–243.

14.

Bashir

Naveed

Jawwad

Shujaat

Saqib

(2014). School social behavior of hearing-impaired adolescents from public and private schools. Bulletin of Education and Research, 36(1), 37–54.

15.

Benjamin

M. D.

(2015). Teacher and parental influence on childhood learning outcomes [Doctoral Thesis, Walden University]. https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2777&context=dissertations

16.

Bereiter

(2005). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Routledge.

17.

Blank

Shavit

(2016). The association between student reports of classmates’ disruptive behavior and student achievement. AERA Open, 2(3), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858416653921

18.

Blewitt

Fuller-Tyszkiewicz

Nolan

Bergmeier

Vicary

Huang

McCabe

McKay

Skouteris

(2018). Social and emotional learning associated with universal curriculum-based interventions in early childhood education and care centers: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open, 1(8), e185727.

19.

Bronfenbrenner

(2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Sage.

20.

Chepkonga

M. C.

(2017). Influence of learning facilities on provision of quality education in early childhood development centres in Kenya. International Journal of Education and Research, 5(6), 15–26.

21.

Christakis

D. A.

Zimmerman

F. J.

(2007). Violent television viewing during preschool is associated with antisocial behavior during school age. Pediatrics, 120(5), 993–999. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-3244

22.

Clunies-Ross

Little

Kienhuis

(2008). Self-reported and actual use of proactive and reactive classroom management strategies and their relationship with teacher stress and student behaviour. Educational Psychology, 28(6), 693–710.

23.

Creswell

J. W.

Hanson

W. E.

Clark

V. E. P.

Morales

(2007). Qualitative research designs: Selection and implementation. The Counseling Psychologist, 35(2), 236–264. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000006287390

24.

Creswell

Plano Clark

V. L.

(2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research[M]. SAGE Publications.

25.

Creswell

J. W.

Poth

C. N.

(2018). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage.

26.

de Freitas Bissoli

(2014). Development of children’s personality: The role of early childhood education. Psicologia em Estudo, 19(4), 587–597. https://doi.org/10.1590/1413-73722163602

27.

Douglas

Moyes

Douglas

(2016). The impact of disruptive behavior in the classroom: The student perspective. ST-6: Education Excellence, 5(3), 1–8.

28.

Dunbar

(2004). Best practices in classroom management. Michigan State University.

29.

Fagbeminiyi

F. F.

(2011). The role of parents in early childhood education: A case study of Ikeja, Lagos State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Human-Social Science Research, 11(2), 42–51.

30.

Farmer

T. W.

(2000). The social dynamics of aggressive and disruptive behavior in school: Implications for behavior consultation. Journal of Educational and Psychological Consultation, 11(3-4), 299–321. https://doi.org/10.1080/10474412.2000.9669417

31.

Fredriksen

Rhodes

(2004). The role of teacher relationships in the lives of students. New Directions for Youth Development, 2004(103), 45–54.

32.

Ghumman

M. S.

Khalid

M. I.

(2016). Effectiveness of teaching practices for student’s competencies development at early childhood education (ECE) level in Pakistan. Journal of Research & Reflections in Education (JRRE), 10(1), 93–103.

33.

Goodall

Vorhaus

(2011). Review of best practice in parental engagement. Department for Education. https://purehost.bath.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/146139638/DFE_RR156.pdf

34.

Grantham-McGregor

Cheung

Y. B.

Cueto

Glewwe

Richter

Strupp

Group

I. C. D. S.

(2007). Developmental potential in the first 5 years for children in developing countries. The Lancet, 369, 60–70.

35.

Habib

(2015). Teacher and school administrator incentives for improved education delivery in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Province, Pakistan. https://www.theigc.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Habib-2015-Working-Paper-1.pdf

36.

Hafaiedh

A. B.

(2009). Research ethics for social scientists: Between ethical conduct and regulatory compliance by Mark Israel and Lain Hay. International Social Science Journal, 60(197-198), 467-472. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2451.2010.01736.x

37.

Hedegaard

(2004). A cultural-historical approach to learning in classrooms. Outlines. Critical Practice Studies, 6(1), 21–34.

38.

Hellman

Lauritsen

(2017). Diversity and social justice in early childhood education: Nordic perspectives. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

39.

Holloway

S. L.

Hubbard

Jöns

Pimlott-Wilson

(2010). Geographies of education and the significance of children, youth and families. Progress in Human Geography, 34(5), 583–600. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132510362601

40.

Hunzai

Z. N.

(2006). A long-term investment in Pakistan: Early childhood education. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 7(2), 174–176. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2006.7.2.174

41.

IMU. (2018). Annual statistical report of government schools 2017-2018. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. http://175.107.63.45/NewIMUSite/images/reports/ASC2017-18Final_new.pdf

42.

Isaacs

J. B.

(2012). Starting school at a disadvantage: The school readiness of poor children. The Social Genome Project. Brookings Institution, Center on Children and Families. https://www.brookings.edu/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/0319_school_disadvantage_isaacs.pdf

43.

Isikoglu

Basturk

Karaca

(2009). Assessing in-service teachers’ instructional beliefs about student-centered education: A Turkish perspective. Teaching and Teacher Education, 25(2), 350–356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.08.004

44.

Jeffries

(2012). Increasing parental involvement in early childhood education. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a7e8/312ae4eb71f8028fd3cae71040d198f4c0ba.pdf

45.

Kerman

(2012). Parental involvement in early learning: A review of research, policy, and good practice. Bernard VanLeer Foundation.

46.

Khalil

K. A.

Ardoin

N. M.

Wojcik

D. J.

(2016). The company you keep: Networks in a community of informal education evaluators. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 51, 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2016.08.006

47.

Khan

Bhatti

M. A.

Hussain

K. S.

Bano

S. S.

(2017). Early childhood education in Pakistan. http://library.aepam.edu.pk/Books/Early%20childhood%20education%20in%20Pakistan%202017.pdf

48.

Khan

Iqbal

(2012). Overcrowded classroom: A serious problem for teachers. Elixir International Journal, 49, 10162–10165.

49.

Koca

(2016). Motivation to learn and teacher-student relationship. Journal of International Education and Leadership, 6(2), 1–20.

50.

Konza

D. M.

(1999). An effective teaching model based on classroom observations of students with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder [PhD Thesis, University of Wollongong]. http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2769&context=theses

51.

Korpershoek

Harms

de Boer

van Kuijk

Doolaard

(2014). Effective classroom management strategies and classroom management programs for educational practice. RUG/GION.

52.

Krishnan

(2010). Early child development: A conceptual model. Paper presented at the Valuing Care, Christchurch Convention Centre, Christchurch, New Zealand. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/8099/6bed2ef51e4128e5251f98242009888f4028.pdf?_ga=2.185501679.774071213.1570888973-979076779.1558945523

53.

Lawless

K. A.

Pellegrino

J. W.

(2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654307309921

54.

Lazarides

Watt

H. M.

Richardson

P. W.

(2020). Teachers’ classroom management self-efficacy, perceived classroom management and teaching contexts from beginning until mid-career. Learning and Instruction, 69, 101346.

55.

Levitt

H. M.

(2019). Reporting qualitative research in psychology: How to meet APA style journal article reporting standards. American Psychological Association.

56.

Loomis

A. M.

Freed

Coffey

(2023). Inhibitory control, student–teacher relationships, and expulsion risk in preschools: An indirect effects path analysis. Early Childhood Education Journal, 51, 179–188.

57.

Malik

Asghar

M. Z.

Khalid

(2021). Implementation of national early childhood education curriculum in Punjab: A qualitative study. International Review of Social Sciences, 9(6), 13–22.

58.

Mangrio

I. A.

Tabassum

(2020). Early childhood care and education in SindH: Comparative analysis with Punjab and KPK. New Horizons, 14(2), 75.

59.

Mashburn

A. J.

Pianta

R. C.

Hamre

B. K.

Downer

J. T.

Barbarin

O. A.

Bryant

Burchinal

Early

D. M.

Howes

(2008). Measures of classroom quality in prekindergarten and children’s development of academic, language, and social skills. Child Development, 79(3), 732–749.

60.

McDermott

E. R.

Donlan

A. E.

Zaff

J. F.

(2019). Why do students drop out?: Turning points and long-term experiences. The Journal of Educational Research, 112(2), 270–282.

61.

McDoniel

M. E.

Buss

K. A.

(2018). Maternal responsiveness protects exuberant toddlers from experiencing behavior problems in kindergarten. Early Education and Development, 29(5), 716–729. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2018.1442096

62.

Memon

A. S.

(2006). Education and class in Pakistan: The growth of the private sector. Journal of Independent Studies and Research (JISR), 4(2), 32.

63.

Moll

L. C.

(2013). LS Vygotsky and education. Routledge.

64.

Morabito

Figueroa

J. L.

Vandenbroeck

(2018). Effects of high versus low-quality preschool education: A longitudinal study in Mauritius. Economics of Education Review, 65, 126–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2018.06.006

65.

Moustakas

(1994). Phenomenological research methods. https://methods.sagepub.com/book/phenomenological-research-methods; https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412995658

66.

Müller

C. M.

Hofmann

Begert

Cillessen

A. H.

(2018). Peer influence on disruptive classroom behavior depends on teachers’ instructional practice. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 56, 99–108.

67.

National Education Policy 2017. (2017). National education policy 2017. Ministry of Federal Education and Professional Training, Government of Pakistan. https://planipolis.iiep.unesco.org/sites/default/files/ressources/pakistan_national_education_policy_2017-2025.pdf

68.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J.

(2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 1609406917733847.

69.

OECD. (2012). Equity and quality in education: Supporting disadvantaged students and schools. OECD Publishing.

70.

Palinkas

L. A.

Horwitz

S. M.

Green

C. A.

Wisdom

J. P.

Duan

Hoagwood

(2015). Purposeful sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation research. Administration and Policy in Mental Health, 42(5), 533–544. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-013-0528-y

71.

Pardhan

(2012). Pakistani teachers’ perceptions of kindergarten children’s learning: An exploration of understanding and practice. Frontiers of Education in China, 7(1), 33–64. https://doi.org/10.3868/s110-001-012-0003-5

72.

Parsonson

B. S.

(2012). Evidence-based classroom behaviour management strategies. Kairaranga, 13(1), 16–23.

73.

Patnaik

Sharma

Subban

(2022). Who is responsible for students’ challenging behaviour?: A study of the causal attributions of teachers to challenging behaviour in primary schools in West Bengal, India. Disabilities, 2(1), 56–72.

74.

Price

McCallum

(2015). Ecological influences on teachers’ well-being and “fitness.” Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 43(3), 195–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2014.932329

75.

Rahim

(2017). Improving primary education in Pakistan: An examination of the association between school autonomy and children’s learning outcomes. FIRE: Forum for International Research in Education, 4(1), 94–112. https://doi.org/10.18275/fire201704011129

76.

Robichaux

N. M.

(2016). Effects of various seating arrangements on disruptive classroom behavior [Doctoral Thesis]. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_dissertations/3696

77.

Rodriguez

(2017). The kindergarten environment: Finding alternatives to reduce overcrowded classrooms. Walden University.

78.

Rosa

E. M.

Tudge

(2013). Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human development: Its evolution from ecology to bioecology. Journal of Family Theory & Review, 5(4), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1111/jftr.12022

79.

Saeed

Wain

K. U. R.

(2011). Status of missing physical facilities in government schools of Punjab. Journal of Research & Reflections in Education (JRRE), 5(2), 105–127.

80.

Sayeed

(2011). Early childhood education in Pakistan: Realizing the right to early start. http://aserpakistan.org/document/aser_policy_briefs/2011/ECE.pdf

81.

Sekaran

V. C.

Kamath

V. G.

Ashok

Kamath

Hegde

A. P.

Devaramane

(2017). Role of micro-and mesosystems in shaping an adolescent. Journal of Nepal Paediatric Society, 37(2), 178–183. http://doi.org/10.3126/jnps.v37i2.18307

82.

Shah

N. A.

Iraqi

K. M.

Barrech

(2019). The European Union’s (EU) multi-annual indicative program (MIP) around the world and in Pakistan. Journal of European Studies (JES), 35(2), 1–23.

83.

Shami

P. A.

Ahmad

Khyizer

(2015). Management of early childhood care and education in Punjab, Pakistan. Journal of Managerial Sciences, 8(2), 239–249. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.1879.7285

84.

Shin

Ryan

A. M.

(2017). Friend influence on early adolescent disruptive behavior in the classroom: Teacher emotional support matters. Developmental Psychology, 53(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000250

85.

Siddiqui

Bulsari

Gorard

See

B. H.

Dixon

Pandya

Saeed

(2020). Pilot study report 2020: Assessing early years schooling, access and student outcomes (AESAS): Establishing routes for sustainable education in Pakistan and India. https://durham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1168575

86.

Skinner

B. F.

(1953). Science and human behavior. Free Press.

87.

Skinner

E. A.

Kindermann

T. A.

Furrer

C. J.

(2009). A motivational perspective on engagement and disaffection: Conceptualization and assessment of children’s behavioral and emotional participation in academic activities in the classroom. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 69(3), 493–525. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164408323233

88.

Tayyaba

(2012). Rural-urban gaps in academic achievement, schooling conditions, student, and teachers’ characteristics in Pakistan. International Journal of Educational Management, 26(1), 6–26.

89.

Ttofi

M. M.

Farrington

D. P.

(2008). Bullying: Short-term and long-term effects, and the importance of defiance theory in explanation and prevention. Victims and Offenders, 3(2-3), 289–312.

90.

UNICEF. (2007). A human rights-based approach to education for all: A framework for the realization of children’s right to education and rights within education. United Nations Publications.

91.

UNICEF. (2012). School readiness: A conceptual framework. United Nations Childrens Fund. https://resources.leicestershire.gov.uk/sites/resource/files/field/pdf/2020/1/7/School-readiness-a-conceptual-framework-UNICEF.pdf

92.

Van Driel

J. H.

Berry

(2012). Teacher professional development focusing on pedagogical content knowledge. Educational Researcher, 41(1), 26–28. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11431010

93.

Vélez-Agosto

N. M.

Soto-Crespo

J. G.

Mónica

Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer

Vega-Molina

Coll

C. G.

(2017). Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), 900–910. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617704397

94.

Walls

J. K.

(2016). A theoretically grounded framework for integrating the scholarship of teaching and learning. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 16(2), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.14434/josotl.v17i2.20845

95.

Walter

(2007). The story of Matthew: An ecological approach to assessment. Scottish Journal of Residential Child Care, 6(1), 45–53.

96.

Ward

R. D.

(2007). A study of two urban middle schools: Discipline practices used to control disruptive behavior of students. Virginia Tech. https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/29293

97.

Watson

J. B.

(1928). The ways of behaviorism. Harper & Brothers Pub.

98.

Yigzaw

G. S.

(2019). The role of parents in improving the behavior of school’s students in Azena Primary School, Ethiopia. International Journal of Educational Research Review, 4(3), 334–349.

99.

Zahid

(2014). Direct and indirect impact of perceived school climate upon student outcomes. Asian Social Science, 10(8), 90–102. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v10n8p90