Student Misbehaviors Confronted by Academics and Their Coping Experiences

This study aims to put forth student misbehaviors confronted by academics and their experiences of coping with these behaviors with respect to types of student misbehaviors, setting, student characteristics, academics’ responses, students’ reaction to intervention, academics’ feelings, attributions to possible causes of misbehaviors, and precautions to prevent repetition of misbehaviors. In this phenomenological study, the data were gathered from 19 academics working at different departments of various universities in Turkey through a semi-structured interview form in which they were asked to narrate a memory about a student misbehavior. Descriptive analysis was employed in analysis process and the codes were constantly compared. Interrater reliability of the coding was found as .80. Some of the main findings of the study include; student misbehaviors are grouped into categories of interfering with teaching of a lesson, not being interested in the lesson, inappropriate behaviors towards the academic, inappropriate behaviors towards peers, and disobeying the rules. The ratio of misbehaviors conducted by ‘problematic’ students is close to students who are perceived as ‘unproblematic’ or ‘agreeable’ students by the academics. The academics’ responses to student misbehaviors include verbal warming, ignoring, imposing sanctions, resorting to violence, making changes about the class and leaving the setting. The students continued misbehavior, quitted misbehavior, resorted to violence or left the setting. Academics’ attributions to misbehaviors are outof-class causes (family-related, society-related and school administration related) and in-class causes (students-related, academic-related and curriculum/ school system related). With this study, it is aimed to contribute to research in the literature on academics’ classroom management.


Introduction
Education aims to rehabilitate undesired student behaviors as well as to help students gain positive behaviors (Özer, Bozkurt & Tuncay, 2014). Realizing these aims necessitates effective classroom management skills to create a sound learning environment. In the formation of this environment, the behaviors performed by each stakeholder in the classroom play significant roles for a positive teaching-learning atmosphere. Behavior is the act, react or function of an individual driven by one's motives and intents (Johnson, 2003). Behavior involves affective, intellectual and psychomotor reactions against stimuli and includes feelings, attitudes and mental processes which are not directly observed as well as overt physical actions (Ada & Baysal, 2018;Özel & Bayındır, 2008). Teachers try to foster positive student behaviors and dissolve undesired ones. Undesired student behaviors are mostly referred to as student misbehaviors. Teachers try to eliminate student misbehaviors to create a well-managed classroom where interaction, affect and immediacy are high and discipline problems are rare (Richmond, Wrench & Gorhan, 2009).
Student misbehaviors are behaviors that hinder teaching-learning process or affect it negatively (Başar, 2009;Celep, 2008). These behaviors also threat positive classroom behaviors (Bingham, Carlson, Dwyer & Prisbell, 2009). Korkmaz (2013) lists the characteristics of student misbehaviors as hindering learning, risking safety, giving damage to properties and blocking socialization. Yiğit (2018) groups student misbehaviors as individual behaviors such as being unprepared for the lesson, not paying attention to the lesson, talking without permission, lying; behaviors towards peers such as holding a grudge of their success, complaining, giving nicknames, bullyragging; and behaviors towards the teacher such as not fulfilling a duty, opposing, and sitting inconveniently. Student misbehaviors are categorized as active or passive, as well (Richmond, Wrench & Gorhan, 2009).
There are various reasons for student misbehaviors. While some stem from in-class characteristics, some other stem from out-of-class causes. Student misbehaviors may be associated with family-related issues, physical properties of classrooms, curriculum-related problems or teacher's classroom management abilities. Coping with these misbehaviors requires effective classroom management strategies. McLeod, Fisher & Hoover (2003) groups classroom management strategies as prevention and intervention. Prevention strategies include positive reinforcement (social, privilege and tangible reinforcers), negative reinforcement (nonverbal and verbal) and extinction while intervention strategies include demand, consequence (restitution, restoration, restriction and reflection), individual intervention plan and outside referrals (administrators or outside professionals). However, it should also be noted that classroom management in the 21 st century requires proactive discipline measures which suggest preventing conflicts and problem behaviors as opposed to punishing misbehaviors when they arise (McLeod, Fisher & Hoover, 2003). Furthermore, the types and reasons of student misbehaviors vary according to the level of education and they are up to various variables. Therefore, it is not possible to suggest a single remedy for preventing or resolving these problem behaviors (Ada & Baysal, 2018). As student misbehaviors may also lead to other and potentially more problematic behaviors, they need to be resolved when they occur as well as taking measures before they show up. The intricacy of dealing with student misbehaviors unearths the significance of teachers' classroom management skills. A well-managed classroom is the first step in providing effective instruction.
The literature on classroom management with regard to students misbehaviors is ample; however, the research studies mostly focus on pre-school, elementary and secondary levels (Aksu, 1999;Çankaya & Çanakçı, 2011;Sadık, 2006;Siyez, 2009;İflazoğlu & Bulut, 2005) and there is limited research as to student misbehaviors confronted by academics at tertiary level (Al Qahtani, 2016;Bingham et al., 2009;Meyers, Bender, Hill & Thomas, 2006;Murphy, 2010), particularly in Turkish context (Güleç, 2013;Sapancı & Kuyumcu Vardar, 2018;Üstünlüoğlu, 2013). Sapancı & Kuyumcu Vardar (2018) identified the frequency of student misbehaviors encountered by academics and their levels of disturbance due to these behaviors. Güleç (2013) identified student misbehaviors at English preparatory classes at a university. Üstünlüoğlu (2013) determined misbehaviors at university level, strategies used by academics and possible causes of these behaviors and compared the results with American counterparts. Research is needed in this field because as well as being scarce in Turkey, the available studies are quantitative, except for one, and focus on only one aspect of student misbehaviors such as frequencies of the behaviors. Beside the student misbehaviors, the academics' responses, the effect of their response on students, the setting of the problem behavior, the characteristics of students with misbehaviors, the feelings of academics, possible causes of the problem behavior and precautions for preventing reoccurrence of misbehaviors are to be studied. Therefore, this study aims to put forth student misbehaviors confronted by academics in instruction process and their experiences of coping with these behaviors. To this end, the research questions to be answered in this study are as follows: 1. What are the characteristics of university students' misbehaviors? 2. How do the academics cope with student misbehaviors?

Method
This is a qualitative phenomenological study. Phenomenological study design is based on unearthing the lived experiences of several participants related to a common phenomenon (Creswell, 2013). In this study, the phenomenon of classroom management is explored with a focus on Turkish academics' classroom management experiences regarding students' misbehaviors. To this end, the participants were asked to tell one of their memories about student misbehaviors that they regard as the most important or unforgettable one.

Participants
The participants are 19 academics working at different departments of various universities in Turkey selected through convenience sampling. Data were demanded from academics with various teaching backgrounds. Demographics of the participants are provided in Table 1.

Data collection and analysis
The data in the study were gathered through a semi-structured interview form developed by the researchers based on the studies in the literature. Through the interview form, the participants were asked to narrate a memory about student misbehaviors and questions included what these behaviors are, the setting in which misbehaviors occur, characteristics of misbehaving students, academics' coping strategies with these behaviors, their feelings in this process, students' reaction to academics' intervention, potential reasons of these behavior and precautions taken to prevent repetition of similar behaviors. The data were gathered in the fall semester of 2018-2019. Descriptive analysis was preferred in data analysis and constant comparison method was employed in this process. The data were analyzed in parallel with research questions and reported with direct quotations.

Validity, Reliability and Ethics
To provide validity and reliability, the data were coded by the researchers with constant comparison and were cross checked when needed during the process. Besides, direct quotations were presented here in the study. None of the names or any other information that would reveal the identity of the participants or the students from the memories were used. The participants were coded as P1, P2 etc. To ensure the consistency between coders in the data analysis, Miles & Huberman interrater reliability coefficient was calculated. According to Miles & Huberman (1994), the reliability was found to be .80 which means there is a consistency of the data coded by the researchers.

Findings
Findings regarding the student misbehaviors reported by the academics Student misbehaviors as reported by the academics can be listed alphabetically as abusing the academic's goodwill and making fun of her; not sitting in one's place; being disrespectful to the academic; being late to class and demanding not to be recorded as absent; being late to class repeatedly; cheating; chewing gums in a disrespectful manner despite being warned; dealing with stuff not related with the lesson such as listening to music on the phone; getting into classroom without permission and taking a student out; inappropriate sexual affair; insulting; sleeping in the class; rejecting criticality and demanding package knowledge; talking among themselves; talking irrelevantly without permission; threatening the academic; trying to attract attention and getting into power struggle with the academic; violence against peers.
These student misbehaviors can be grouped into five main categories. The first one is interfering with teaching of a lesson. Not sitting in one's place, trying to attract attention, talking loudly and giving irrelevant answers to academic's questions are examples of this category. P11 and P14 report these behaviors as: "I had to get a student out of the classroom as she insisted on talking loudly in way that hinders my teaching although I warned her many times." (P11). "One of the students was giving irrelevant answers to all discussions in the class and he was doing this without permission and he didn't allow others to speak at all". (P14) The second category is not being interested in the lesson. These behaviors include dealing with irrelevant objects such as mobile phones, sleeping or not engaging with the lesson. P12 narrates such a behavior as: At that time, I was fully against students' using mobile phones during the class and I importunately told them not to. I could not take it kindly if students used mobile phones particularly when I was teaching an important subject. Just like this, I was teaching present perfect tense diligently and I noticed one of my students playing with his mobile phone. We caught each other's eye and he continued playing the phone although he noticed I was trying to warn him. I got really angry with his reckless manner. (P12) Though these behaviors do not directly interfere with the instruction process going on, they affect the classroom atmosphere negatively.
The third category is inappropriate behaviors towards the academic. Being disrespectful, insulting, threatening and making fun are examples of this type of student misbehaviors. An unordinary case was reported by P2 as follows: I was going to teach about Tevfik Fikret (a Turkish author) and I planned the lesson beforehand and made preparation for it. When I entered the classroom, one of my students, (normally a popular and respectful student), was holding ten banknotes of 100 USD and swinging it like a handheld fan. First, I ignored it and started the lesson, but he was still doing the same thing. I told him to put those banknotes into his wallet so that we could go on the lesson. He then threw the banknotes towards me and said: "Keep on teaching, teacher. Chill, OK?!" Similarly, P17 reported a student swearing at him and attacking physically. In some cases, these behaviors are not physical but create trouble for the academic. For instance, P19 reported that she believed in one student that his mother had a physical disability and reprehended other students for making fun of that student. However, it came out that his mother was healthy, and they were making fun of the academic. These behaviors challenge the authority of the academic as well as hindering the instruction process.
The fourth category is inappropriate behaviors towards peers such as inappropriate sexual affair and violence. In one of the cases, the academic reported that he saw two students having intercourse in an empty classroom while in another case one of the students was using violence repeatedly against his peer. The last category is disobeying the rules. Cheating in the exams, being late to class and entering the classroom without permission are some of them.

Findings regarding the settings in which student misbehaviors occurred
The participants were asked in which settings the students displayed misbehaviors. As most of the interaction among the students and academics take place in the classrooms, most of the participants (16) stated that the misbehaviors occurred in the classroom during the instruction process. In two of the cases, the misbehaviors were reported as during exams. One student cheated in an exam and the academic was a proctor. In the second case, one student rejected sitting in the desk the proctor had asked him to in an exam. The last case happened again in the classroom but not during the instruction process. The academic went to the class early for some preparation to find two students having intercourse in the classroom.

Findings regarding the characteristics of students with misbehaviors
Analysis of the data reveal that of the 19 cases, 14 were individual misbehaviors while 5 misbehaviors were displayed by a group of students. Of the 14 individual misbehaviors, 11 were acted by male students while 3 were by female students. This distribution shows that boys tend to display misbehaviors when compared to girls.
Regarding their general behavior patterns, 6 students were reported to be problematic students whereas 5 students were reported as unproblematic and well-mannered students in general. The students perceived as problematic by the academics were described as "student with strange behaviors", "unsuccessful", "careless, unlikable and spoiled", and "having behavioral disorders".
P5 describes the students as: I don't remember exactly but that class was the worst class of that year academically and morally. She was an unsuccessful student. She wouldn't pass the class mathematically, but she attended classes in order not to fail the class due to absenteeism as they could pass the class if they did not have any problem with absenteeism.
The students perceived as normal and unproblematic by academics were described as "respectful in general", "normal", "quiet and calm" and "actually, he was a good student" and so on.
P2, for instance, described the student as: "Normally, he was a popular student among his friends. His father was a tradesman. He sometimes worked at his father's shop. He never disrespected elderly.".

Findings regarding academics' responses to misbehaviors
The participant academics displayed a wide array of responses to student misbehaviors such as shouting, changing students' places, reminding school rules, beating and so on. The responses of the academic can be grouped into six main categories. The categories and sample behaviors are listed in Table 2. Making changes about the class Giving a break, asking students to make suggestions as to instruction process 3 Leaving the setting Leaving the class, withdrawal 2 The most frequent response category is verbal warning. Actually, it is mostly the entry level intervention type of academics. While in some cases, the academics' responses are limited to verbal warnings such as raising voice or reminding rules, in some cases they are followed by other types of behaviors. For instance, P14 found it adequate to warn him verbally: "I tried to ignore him. Then I warned him that his chattering and frivolousness would lessen respect to himself and tried to continue to ignore his behaviors.". However, when verbal warning does not solve the problem, other types of responses come after as in the case of P5: One student was chewing gum in a way that distracted my concentration. I asked her to quit but she told she wouldn't. I asked her a few times more but this time shouting but she insisted on chewing gum. I really got angry as she was overthrowing my authority. So, I left the classroom.
The data reveal that after verbal warming or ignoring, the most frequent responses are imposing sanctions such as marking the student absent or declassing the student. Though in two cases the academics first warned students before resorting to violence, in one case the academic (P15) attacked the students without warning due to an inappropriate affair: "With the surprise of the event, I angrily attacked the male student physically and the female student verbally. I had a burst of anger and hit him hard. Then I took them to administration and demanded an investigation.".
When the academics feel desperate, they prefer to leave the setting. In one case, the academic left the classroom and came back in the next hour but in the other case the academic totally withdrew from the class and didn't want to teach them anymore.

Findings regarding the students' responses back to the academics
The students reacted variously in response to academics' interventions to misbehaviors. While in some cases the misbehavior disappears, in some other cases the misbehavior continues. The students' responses are categorized into five main groups and listed in Table 3. When the students' responses to academics' interventions are examined, it is evident that the students quitted misbehaviors only in 7 cases. In 8 cases the students continued the misbehaviors.
Adding the resorting to violence and leaving the setting behaviors, the number of these cases increases up to 12. The misbehaviors which were abolished were comparatively minor problems. For instance, P6 reports his case as follows: Some of the students were trying to attract attention and getting into power struggle with me. I also witnessed them having arguments with their peers. I solved this problem through communicating with them in that they should settle their conflicts outside the classroom as it is normal to have disagreements. I preferred not to get into power struggle with them and they started to behave positively in just two weeks.
It is an interesting finding that the intervention types that abolishes the student misbehaviors for good are physical violence and serious verbal warning such as reprimanding the student firmly.
P18 reports his response when a student came late to class without knocking the door and sat at his desk directly: I took him out of the classroom and told him what he needed to do in a way he could understand (means reprimanding firmly). I told him that we were at university not at his former high school. Other academics hearing my voice also came out of their classrooms. After that, he never came late to school and also his other problematic behaviors disappeared. Besides, some other students also gave up their minor misbehaviors.
There are also cases in which the students responded physically to the academic or just left the class. These student behaviors left the academics in a desperate situation. One academic reported that after the class, the student came to his office, walked up to him and threatened him as well as insulting. Though these behaviors are in minority, they constitute severe problems for academics.

Findings regarding feelings when coping with student misbehaviors
The academics' feeling in coping with student misbehaviors are listed in Table 4 with respect to their frequencies. The most frequent feeling as reported by the academics is anger. This feeling mostly stems from students' disrespectful behaviors and risk of losing authority. P17 reported that he got really angry as the student was harming his authority in the class: I warned him many times not to ruin the peace in the class. He continued misbehaviors that undermined my authority…(after having physical trouble with the student but being obliged to disclaim request for discipline committee due to administration) I was devastated out of anger. My authority was completely lost in the class.
Following anger, the academics reported feeling upset and surprised. The feeling of surprise stems from misbehaviors from unproblematic students that the academics trusted. In two cases academics stated that they lost their control and attacked the students physically.

Findings regarding the academics' attributions as the causes of misbehaviors
The participant academics were asked what the possible causes of student misbehaviors might be. The possible causes stated by the academics can be grouped into two main categories: in-class causes, and out-of-class causes. In-class causes are also grouped into sub-categories of studentsrelated, academics-related and curriculum/school system related. Out-of-class causes are subcategorized into family-related, society related and school administration-related causes. The categories are presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Possible Causes of Student Misbehaviors Perceived by Academics
As present in Figure 1, the causes are in interaction with each other. In most cases, the participants provided multiple causes rather than one-single cause. Though family, society and school administration related causes are grouped as out-of-class causes, they highly interact with in-class causes and student misbehaviors. Family related causes are preference of departments to study by family pressure and family's lack of education. P14 attributes the student misbehaviors to family pressure as well as students-related causes: I guess the student was going through psychological problems and as far as I understood from our dialogues, he chose the department with family pressure and he was studying reluctantly. They forced him because ELT graduates can find employment and English is important.
Insufficient education level of family members is also perceived by the academics as one of the main causes of student misbehaviors. The second sub-category of out-of-class causes are society- related causes which are 'teacher perception in the society' and 'moral problems in the society'. One academic stated that teachers and academics are not valued in the society therefore the students do not respect them. Another academic suggested that as moral problems in the society are prevalent, the students think that it is normal to conduct immoral behaviors at school. The last sub-category is related to school administration. The academics criticize the administration for being loose in disciplinerelated issues and passing over problems. P17 reports a typical case of this kind: (after being exposed to physical violence and threats by the student) The principal talked to the student. He even offered tea to the student. Then he talked to me and told that the student was regretful and tried to reconcile us. His parents also called the rectorate. As a result, the administration had me withdraw my petition. I lost my authority in the class and the student committed violence against his friends many times later on.
Regarding in-class causes, the academics mostly blamed students for their misbehaviors rather than their own classroom management skills. Characteristics of students such as frivolousness and excessive self-confidence, attaching great importance to money, desire to attract attention, purposelessness, being used to teacher-centered instruction, having psychological problems, perception of university life are listed by the academics. P18 lists this kind of causes as the student's past learning experiences, urban legends about universities and the student's circle of friends. P1 also describes the student as frivolous and excessive self-confidence due to being a university student.
There are also academics, though few, who see their own characteristics as possible causes.
Looking young/ being close to students' ages, deficiency in classroom management, being new in the institution, not raising voice and not being authoritarian are thought to be potential causes. P17 gives a full explanation of possible causes of student misbehaviors due to her own characteristics as she faced misbehaviors by a large group of students: There are various causes of this case. First, there were many problematic students in the same class. The second is my inability in settling my authority as of the beginning of the semester. Third, I could not observe and get to know students adequately. Forth, I made concessions to discipline in order not to ruin class atmosphere or prevent students from hating me as a rigid, authoritarian teacher.
Fifth, I intervened to seating arrangement and thus, the bad students spoiled the good ones. Sixth, I was inexperienced both in human relations and in professional teaching. The last one is my lack of anger management.
Issues related to curriculum or school system is the last sub-category of in-class causes of student misbehaviors. As well as crowded classes or education system in general, the most apparent problem is about preparatory English classes where academic success is not needed to pass to departments unless the students do not have problems with absenteeism. This case results in a number of students who do not care about the instruction but need to stay in class. This problem was stated by four academics.

Findings regarding precautions taken by academics to prevent student misbehaviors
The academics were asked about the precautions they took to prevent repetition of the misbehaviors they confronted. It was revealed that the academics in six cases did not take any precautions to this end. Though some cases are extraordinary and cannot be prevented, such as students' inappropriate affair, some could be prevented but the academics did not care about them.
Regarding the 13 cases, the precautions vary depending on the case such as entering the exam hall a few minutes late so that the students have time to settle, trying to prevent copying through keeping the exam documents in a file or closing the window if the files are close to it, trying to be more considerate and patient in relationships with students and trying to give a serious image to students particularly in the beginning of the semesters to keep authority.
Though the precautions vary depending on the case, there are two major types of common precautions. The first one is setting rules or informing students on a certain issue at the beginning of the semester. This type of precaution was reported five times by the academics. For instance, P7 stated: "In the beginning of the semesters, I informed students that I would mark them absent if they were late to class.". Similarly, P16 requests her students to let her know if their attention is lost so that she could make an intervention. P18 stated: "In the following years, I set rules with the class and informed them they shouldn't be late to class.".
The other common precaution is trying to establish stronger communication with students and get to know them more. P19 provides a good example for this type of precaution: First of all, I am now trying to get to know my students and their families. I do this by giving students questionnaires or short essays about themselves at the beginning of the semester. This way, I learn about students' private issues before their friends and try to prevent any exploitations…

Discussion and Conclusion
This study explores student misbehaviors displayed at tertiary level, which is mostly ignored in the literature, and academics' coping experiences with these behaviors with respect to type of student misbehaviors, setting, student characteristics, academics' responses, students' reaction to intervention, academics' feeling, attributions to possible causes of misbehaviors, and precautions to prevent repetition of misbehaviors. Depending on a descriptive analysis on data from 19 academics of various departments and universities in Turkey with different teaching backgrounds, the findings are reported in parallel with research questions. The results are discussed with the available studies in the literature.
The academics confronted various student misbehaviors such as listening to music on the phone; cheating, being disrespectful to the academic; being late for class and demanding not to be recorded as absent; insulting; talking irrelevantly without permission; violence against peers; threatening the academic and so on, which can be grouped into five main categories: interfering with teaching of a lesson, not being interested in the lesson, inappropriate behaviors towards the academic, inappropriate behaviors towards peers, and disobeying the rules. It can be suggested that these findings are in parallel with the findings of other studies on student misbehaviors at tertiary level. Sapancı & Vardar (2018) lists these behaviors as using mobile phone in the lesson, talking, sleeping, disrespect, and using slang. In addition to these, other reported misbehaviors are lack of interest in the lesson, resisting authority, violence and being late to class, plagiarism in homework and research (Al Qahtani, 2016;Üstünlüoğlu, 2013;Yumru, 2013). The findings of these studies overlap with the categories of student misbehaviors formed in this study.
The misbehaviors were mostly reported to be acted during the instruction period. This is due to the fact that academics' interaction with students are mostly limited to class time; however, the data also put forth that though the misbehaviors occur in the class time, the effects of it continues out of the class, as well. Some academics had to withdraw from the class or backdate the maternity leave to avoid seeing the students. Two other academics reported that the students they had problems with continued to disturb them in the following years by loud laughter or gazing at them.
Regarding the characteristics of students, males tend to show misbehaviors more. Given the socio-cultural characteristics of Turkey, male students tend to be more confident and extrovert. So, they are more prone to display misbehaviors. Female students' misbehaviors usually include not paying attention to the instruction as opposed to interfering with the instruction or acting violent behaviors towards academics or peers. Students may show misbehaviors individually or in groups.
Another interesting finding is that the ratio of misbehaviors conducted by 'problematic' students is close to students who are perceived as unproblematic or agreeable students by the academics. Yet again, the misbehaviors by the problematic students are more overt such as violence or insulting. Another significant result is related to the attributions to possible causes of student misbehaviors. Academics' attributions can be grouped into two main groups: out-of-class causes (family-related, society-related and school administration related) and in-class causes (studentsrelated, academic-related and curriculum/ school system related). It is evident in the findings that student characteristics are perceived as the main causes of student misbehaviors, which is followed by family and society related causes. Few academics associated the misbehaviors with their own classroom management skills. In the same vein, Üstünlüoğlu (2013) found out that the student misbehaviors were attributed to parents and students by both American and Turkish academics. Few American academics related them to their own characteristics. In studies on student misbehaviors at lower education levels such as secondary school, teachers also attribute to students and their parents as the main causes of misbehaviors (Görmez, 2016).
In some studies it can be seen that in Turkey, university students choose the university or departments to study not only according to the academical criteria but also there are some other factors such as parental or social involvement in the process of selection (Koçyiğit, Eğmir & Akçil, 2018) and moreover most of the times the goals of the higher education and the goals of the students do not overlap (Koçyiğit, Eğmir & Akçil, 2018;Koçyiğit & Eğmir, 2015). These also form a background for student misbehaviors in tertiary level. Hence, it can be seen that student misbehaviors may stem from various causes; however, academics' classroom management skills lead the way for potential misbehaviors. Therefore, academics should be aware of their own classroom management skills and its potential effects on student misbehaviors and classroom atmosphere, which is in direct connection with efficiency in instruction.
The experiences of student misbehaviors have affected most of the academics with respect to their classroom management skills positively. Depending on their experience, the academics have taken some precautions such as setting classroom rules or getting to know students in order to prevent similar misbehaviors either in that class or in following other classes. In this respect, these experiences have been didactic and practical for them.
This study has investigated student misbehaviors at higher education institutions through academics' narration of a significant memory for them. It was found out in the study that academics experienced such kind of misbehaviors mostly in the early years of their teaching career. This finding posits that experience is a significant factor in classroom management skills. Given that, unlike teachers at elementary or secondary levels, academics mostly do not need to go through a pedagogical training to be an instructor at universities in Turkey and research on student misbehaviors at tertiary level is rare particularly in Turkey, this study fills an important gap in the literature through providing data on student misbehaviors at tertiary level from various respects. Similar thorough studies, rather than providing just frequencies of student misbehaviors, are needed. Findings of these studies may serve for a needs-assessment to be used for designing in-service training for enriching academics' classroom management skills. These findings also address educational administrators and policy makers.