Beyond Being "Managed": How Student Resistance Demands Freedom

Author and Text: Carla Shalaby, Troublemakers: Lessons in Freedom From Young Children at School (Preface and Introduction)

Reflection:

Reading the preface and introduction to Carla Shalaby's Troublemakers felt eerily similar to what I see every day in my work as a non-traditional educator, and in my own experiences as a student.  Shalaby's core argument is that the students we label as "troublemakers" are actually warning us of an environment that's not working.  As educators we can't help but notice their challenging behaviors. These behaviors don't mean children are broken, bad, or less valuable. Instead, they show us that something deeper is going on.  Our "troublemakers" are our best warning systems. 

In my post last week, "Managed Not Taught," I explored my own experience of moving to a school system that didn't know how to handle my boredom and ended up physically isolating me to be an "aide" in a Pre-K classroom during math blocks.  Looking at this experience through Shalaby's lens, it becomes even clearer that my teacher viewed my boredom as defiance because the system prioritized compliance over engagement. 

What I found equally powerful in this chapter was Shalaby's focus on children's natural tendencies toward imagination and freedom. Schooling often demands that students suppress their natural curiosity to fit into a rigid, standardized box. 

In my own teaching practice, I emphasize student-led learning wherever possible because I consistently see that students labeled as "behavioral" are simply understimulated or disconnected from a curriculum that ignores their needs.  Resistance from children isn't always a lack of discipline or respect -- it's a student fighting for their own autonomy. This directly parallels what I expored in my previous post on Lisa Delpit's work on power dynamics, where the system frequently misinterprets cultural pushback as a lack of discipline. Shalaby challenges us to shift our gaze from "fixing" children to examining the system itself.  When students are given the space to lead their own learning, have agency over their environment, and solve real community problems, those heavy "behavioral" labels often disappear.  

People often ask me how this is possible in large groups or how we can achieve required learning standards.  They fear that this style of education won't adequately prepare children for the "real" world.  However, offering choice doesn't mean giving students total free reign. In the younger years, it simply means offering options that you, as the educator, are fine with either way (would the class like to do math or reading first?) When we ask students what their goals are, who they want to be, and what skills they need to achieve their dreams, our job becomes guiding them toward those skills rather than simply managing their time.

A Question for the Class:

In my work, I find that giving "behavioral" students agency and leadership completely changes their engagement and attitude towards learning.  How can we, as educators in traditional systems, shift power back to students to prevent the boredom and understimulation that leads to these harmful labels?