During the second half of the twentieth century, urban became a pejorative word for the problems caused by the large numbers of violence occurs. This can be interpreted as a reaction of young people facing exclusion (Akhdar & others, 2009). Such negative associations profoundly affect education and shape the nature of urban schooling. The social incivility (Peiró, 1993: 169ss) coincides with violence in schools’s context appear to be major intervening factors, more than other personal characteristics or the school environment (Carbonero et alii, 2002). These are causing a cycle of violence’s spiral (Fenning & Rose, 2007). Analysing urban, rural and small cities, Singler and others (1995) mentioned several types of misbehaviour: urban 52,45%; rural 47,30, and small cities 52,7. Flannery (1997: 12) states high levels of violence are not confined to urban schools; increasingly, they characterize suburban and rural schools. This occurs in México (INEE, 2007): indigenous 15,5 outside school vs 3,5 inside school, rural 2,3 vs 8,9, urban 9,6 inside vs 8,4, private 3,8 vs 8,4. These data contradict Conti (et alii, 2009): rural students reflected morest performance attitudes and less aggressive training. This contradiction is because rural is closed areas (Qiang & Jiandong, 2006). Although were found educational disadvantage in urban populations and education in Australia (Pierides, 2006). Americans state reports that violence in rural schools are few by contrast with those in urban and suburban schools (Bachus,1994). The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (20/11/1989), and the Australian Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission -2000- defend every person receive the education that allows them to participate in social issues. USA Congresses mandated the role of schools in addressing societal issues (Goodland, 1984), and so on in UE. A way to improve consists on restructuring Boards of Education, but it isn’t enough. Not only restructuring structures we achieve students’ values and selfcontrol. A way for reducing schools’ violence is to create a more positive school culture-climate(Dupper & Meyer-Adams, 2002: 350ss). Teachers are of utmost importance to their students, because educators' strategies and lesson plans must aim towards helping each student learn to his or her highest capacity, while using many strategies and pedagogies in order to keep the classroom fun and exciting (AcaDemond, 2004).The last ECER-2010 we found a whole view of teacher’s styles to undertake scholar incivility, the mores elected was “negociater” and “supporter”. If as effectiveness shall define like to extend coexistencial objectives rightly (Erledsson, 2002), being this not a neutral criteria, depending of educational values that are defining the teaching-learning processes (Vlasceanu, 2004); as ECER-2011’ issue, and our target theme is around the incivility in schools, our problem for this research consist on to try to see if school could be similar convival and teaching styles in such kind of cities. For getting those goals, it’s necessary to compare and correlationate variables and types of teachers’ actions.
