From ABCs to ADHD: the role of schooling in the construction of behaviour disorder and production of disorderly objects

Abstract

Discussion of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in the media, and thus much popular discourse, typically revolves around the possible causes of disruptive behaviour and the ‘behaviourally disordered’ child. The usual suspects—too much television and video games, food additives, bad parenting, a lack of discipline, and single mothers—feature prominently as potential contributors to the spiralling rate of ADHD diagnosis in Western industrialized nations, especially the USA and Australia. Conspicuously absent from the field of investigation, however, is the scene of schooling and the influence that the discourses and practices of schooling might bring to bear upon the constitution of ‘disorderly behaviour’ and subsequent recognition of particular children as a particular kind of ‘disorderly’. This paper reviews a sample of the literature surrounding ADHD in order to question the function of this absence and, ultimately, make an argument for an interrogation of the school as a site for the production of disorderly objects.

Acknowledgements

This manuscript was conceived and written while the author was enrolled in a Philosophy of Education doctoral program at Queensland University of Technology. It constitutes the first published chapter of a Thesis by Publication conferred in September 2007 and titled, ‘Schooling Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorders: educational systems of formation and the behaviourally disordered school child’.

Notes

1. Adderall is not available in Australia.

2. A major flaw in the research that looks to comparative studies of psychological therapy plus medication versus medication alone is that comparison of effectiveness against educational intervention alone is rarely performed.

3. For a discussion of the effects of psychological discourse in education policy, school management documents and media releases, see Graham (2005).

4. Differentiation between disorders is not made for girls in this report.

5. The date of the paper by Hodges is 1990, which admittedly is before the institution of inclusive education reforms in the late 1990s by Education Queensland. However, if the paper contents run counter to Education Queensland policy, then one would assume it would have been removed and not made available as a teaching resource?

6. Before the introduction of the preparatory year in 2007, in Queensland children begin Grade 1 the year they turn six years old. To date, Grade 1 has been the first formal schooling year in Queensland. Preschool has been offered on a five‐day per fortnight basis. The institution of the prep year is intended to transition young children better into the formal demands of schooling.