Agitation, opposition, withdrawal, anxiety: so-called “problematic” behaviors among children are on the rise at school. However, according to psychiatrist Anne Raynaud, author of This child who is disruptive at school at Marabout editions, these manifestations are not disorders in themselves, but very often responses to fear. A fear that the educational institution struggles to recognize, partly because it no longer looks at the child, but at the student. Through her work and her clinical analysis, she calls for a rethinking of school from a child’s perspective, before the consequences become irreversible.
When the word “student” erases the child
For Anne Raynaud, vocabulary is never neutral. “The word “child” disappeared from institutional language at the age of 3. We’re talking about students, it’s chilling“, she writes. This semantic shift reflects a profound transformation of the school: the child is no longer primarily a developing being, but a learner subject to performance objectives.
From kindergarten onwards, academic expectations increase, particularly with the kindergarten plan which emphasizes the learning of language and mathematics, accompanied by regular assessments. However, recalls the specialist, this almost exclusive focus on the cognitive ignores an essential dimension of development: emotional security. “We are only talking about the cognitive part of learning. All the psycho-emotional is put aside, and this is a major error“, she warns.
Behaviors that speak of fear, not trouble
In her office, Anne Raynaud receives children described as “oppositional”, “agitated” or “unmanageable”. However, according to her, this reading is too superficial. “We only see the tip of the iceberg: opposition or aggression, without asking how the child actually feels.“
In a society marked by instability and pressure, children experience constant emotional insecurity, without having the necessary tools to regulate their fears. These are then expressed through disturbing behaviors. “We talk about an epidemic of opposition, but it is mainly about children who are afraid, and whose threats sometimes come from the same adults who are supposed to keep them safe.“
To avoid hasty labels, the psychiatrist insists on three fundamental pillars: consistency, predictability and the emotional commitment of adults. “If we simply asked ourselves this question: “What if this child were afraid, how would I react?”, everything would change. »
Evaluating too early, a risk for mental health
The question of early evaluations is central. According to attachment theory, a child’s brain has an alarm system in place from birth when faced with danger. When this system is repeatedly activated – through academic pressure, high expectations, or evaluations – the child is no longer available to learn. “When I’m afraid, I can’t explore. It’s organic“, recalls Anne Raynaud.
Beyond the brain, chronic stress leaves its mark on the body via cortisol, with long-term effects on the immune system and cardiovascular health. “This is a real public health issue“, she insists, even describing the kindergarten plan as “criminal”, repeating the words of the Quebec Minister of Education with whom she spoke.
Children who are “too good” are, according to her, the big forgotten ones in this system. Discreet, withdrawn, they often carry an extremely high level of stress. “They go under the radar, until the suffering becomes depressive. Some can go so far as to have suicidal thoughts, sometimes very early on.”
Rethinking school from a child’s perspective
For Anne Raynaud, it is urgent to move away from a binary vision opposing development and learning. Many Nordic countries have chosen to delay the teaching of fundamental knowledge until age 6 or 7, prioritizing socialization and emotional development first.
“We could send children to school from the age of 3, but to play, create connections, learn to live together. Formal learning would come afterwards.” Today, she observes, the consequences of the current system are visible: suffering of children, exhaustion of teachers, dismay of parents. “We cannot accept suicidal thoughts from the age of 4 or 5, nor suicides from the age of 9. It is not a question of guilt, but of collective responsibility.”
Rethinking school from a child’s perspective, she concludes, does not mean renouncing academic requirements, but creating the necessary conditions for learning to really take place.