The Culture of Labelling Students as Lazy: Are We Too Quick to Judge?

In daily life, behaviour is often judged by what is visible to others. When a student submits assignments late, rarely asks questions in class, or experiences a decline in grades, the easiest conclusion is to consider them lazy. Yet, what is seen does not necessarily reflect the actual situation. A student might be struggling to understand the material, losing confidence after a failure, feeling that their learning goals are unclear, or even facing problems outside the school environment. All these factors can affect their engagement in learning without being related to laziness.

Laziness and low motivation are not the same thing. In educational psychology, they are two distinct concepts. Through Self-Determination Theory, Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan explain that learning motivation is influenced by three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and relatedness. When students feel they have no control over their learning process, feel incapable of understanding the material, or do not receive support from their environment, their motivation to learn can decline. Not every student who appears passive in class or reluctant to do assignments is choosing to be lazy. In many cases, such behaviour can be a sign that their motivation is waning due to various issues invisible to others.

Every learner has a different background. Some may be facing family conflict, grieving a loss, experiencing economic pressure, struggling to adapt to the school environment, or feeling burdened by excessive expectations. These problems can drain emotional energy, making learning activities that previously felt light become much heavier to undertake. As a result, students may appear unenthusiastic in lessons, frequently procrastinate on tasks, or no longer show the same eagerness as before. From an outsider’s perspective, this behaviour indeed looks like laziness. However, upon closer inspection, what they are experiencing may not be a reluctance to learn, but rather a difficulty in gathering the energy and reason to get moving again. This is why it is crucial for educators not to rush into labelling. Before concluding that a student is lazy, there must be room to understand whether they are losing the will to learn or are actually struggling with issues that are not visible in the classroom.

This perspective aligns with Ki Hadjar Dewantara’s thoughts on the nature of education. According to him, education is a process of guiding the natural strengths of children so they can develop optimally. The meaning of ‘guiding’ indicates that a teacher’s task does not stop at delivering material or assessing learning outcomes. Teachers are also required to recognise the conditions of their learners, understand the obstacles they face, and create a learning environment that allows every child to develop according to their potential. From this viewpoint, when a student’s performance declines or they begin to lose their enthusiasm for learning, the appropriate question to ask is not just, ‘Why are they lazy?’, but also, ‘What is happening in their life that is weakening their motivation to learn?’ This shift in perspective may sound simple, but therein lies the essence of education. A teacher not only tries to correct visible behaviour but also seeks the root of the problem so that the help provided truly meets the learner’s needs.

Labels given continuously do not only affect how others view a student, but can also affect how students view themselves. Not all labels stop at being a mere utterance; some can develop into a belief that slowly influences a person’s self-perception. The label can even affect how others view a student, which will certainly impact the environment where the student is supposed to grow. Howard S. Becker, through Labelling Theory, explains that repeated labels can shape a person’s social identity. When a child is constantly called lazy, they may begin to accept that judgement as a description of themselves. Over time, they can lose the belief that their efforts can change the situation because they feel others have already defined who they are. This condition is an irony in the world of education. A teacher’s initial intention might be to encourage students to be more diligent. However, if labels are given more often than guidance, the reprimand intended as motivation can potentially erode self-confidence and the spirit to try again.

This does not mean that every unproductive behaviour should be tolerated or freed from responsibility. Discipline, responsibility, and consistency remain important foundations in the learning process. But it must be remembered that building discipline does not have to begin with labelling. It is far more meaningful if teachers first try to understand what their learners are experiencing. How can a student learn calmly and focus enough to achieve if their mind is divided by other problems beyond their control? Without guidance or direction, such problems will consume a great deal of the student’s learning time as a means of adaptation. Education is not merely about producing students who are obedient to rules.