Is Bullying a Part of Growing up or a Serious Problem - Essay Example

Bullying - a part of growing up or a serious problem? Bullying behavior among children can have long term effects on both the bully and the victim. “It is surprisingly common; there is evidence that over half of children have been victimized and over half have been bullies. It causes immediate harm and distress to the victim and has negative long-term consequences for the victim’s mental health. It also has negative consequences for the bully” (Farrington, 1993: 382). Evidence suggested in numerous studies indicates that bullying behavior in school can provide some indication of an individual’s participation in criminal behavior as an adult. In addition, children who are consistently targeted for victimization by bullies in school have a higher risk for later maladjustment. Some well-meaning ‘experts’ believe bullying is a normal part of social development and actually aids children in coping with overbearing, dominating types throughout their lives. “Youngsters must learn to cope with teasing and name-calling so they are able to handle awkward situations as adults.” (Coping, 2007). I believe that bullying is a serious problem and not one to be tolerated. It’s a legacy that should be controlled and eliminated as much as possible. The outcomes of bullying could be very severe; from depression to suicide. We could all benefit from acknowledging that bullying is a real problem and not just a part of growing up. Thankfully, because bullying behavior typically occurs on a recurrent basis between two individuals who know each other, it can also often be identified and prevented much easier than more deviant behavior in later years, perhaps with the result of a reduction in criminal behavior among adults. Some argue that bullying is relatively harmless, prepares kids for adulthood and that the issue is hardly at the top of priorities for parents, teachers and students. “The extent of bullying is being exaggerated by over-protective parents and teachers, who apply the label to childhood squabbles which were previously assumed to be part of growing up.” (Coping, 2007). However, studies conducted looking into the naturalistic behavior of children on the playground indicate that those children who experience low acceptance levels among their peers tend to “engage in more aggression and disruptive behavior and/or more solitary behavior, whereas high accepted children to participate in more pro-social activities and group games” (Boulton, 1999: 944). Therefore, it becomes important for teachers to recognize the social structures developing in their classroom to be in better position to head off any dangerous behavior before it gets out of hand. Intervention strategies can then be used to assist at risk children in learning how best to handle difficult social situations. Studies conducted in the field have identified several groups that have a higher risk of experiencing bullying behavior as either the aggressor or the victim, which can help teachers in determining when and how intervention is appropriate. The boys will be boys argument is commonly used before dismissing the bullying issue altogether. Those ‘bleeding hearts’ are looking to stifle normal human activity. “A few years ago, interactions that would have just been seen as (boys being boys) are now treated as something much more sinister and troublesome that we have to stop.” (Coping, 2007). Those ‘bleeding hearts’ simply understand the complexities of the issue and wish to right a wrong. They understand the issue cannot be explained with a cliché, it’s more complicated than that. Because boys tend to be involved in bullying behavior more often than girls, it is important to recognize the unique issues facing children of this gender group. It has been found that boys who are able to achieve some sort of academic success typically become associated with the feminine among the other boys, leading to them more often becoming the victims of bullying because of a perceived lack of masculinity evidenced by this achievement. A study looking into the various ways in which boys perceive school support the conclusion that most boys consider studious behavior to be feminizing, or at the very least, risky for social acceptance. Activities identified as risky include being quiet, being seen in settled study and visibly working hard at a given academic task. Other activities that threaten a young boy’s sense of masculinity within the school setting include reading, being seriously concerned with reported grades and/or publicly acknowledging school is cool. “By engaging or perceived to be engaging in any of these activities/body postures, boys potentially leave themselves open to verbal abuse and ridicule, and are positioned daily as ‘swots’, ‘geeks’, ‘nerds’ and ‘squares’. Two-thirds of the boys went to great lengths to avoid studious behaviors, particularly boys who were deemed high achievers” (Renold, 2001: 373). Common methods these boys used to try to deflect attention from their academic prowess included initial bullying behaviors such as teasing and ridiculing as well as participating or initiating disruptive, rule-breaking behaviors. Teachers who bring attention to a boy’s studious methods, thinking they are handing them praise, could actually be inflicting more harm than good upon this student. Children living in impoverished conditions have also been identified as being of a particularly higher risk of aggressive behavior than others. While it is true that certain populations demonstrate an increased level of bullying behavior when placed in impoverished conditions, it is important that teachers not be too quick to associate a student as a possible bully or victim based solely on their economic status. A study (Barbarin, 1999) working to demonstrate the detrimental effects of poverty on specific populations compared behavior of African American children with the behavior of South African children to determine whether the effects of poverty were consistent across major cultural groups. Despite these obstacles, teachers working to help prevent bullying behavior must understand it is important to trust his or her instincts regarding a child’s intentions for aggression. Most teachers can reliably and validly distinguish between proactive (bullying) aggression and reactive aggression (intended to protect). Many teachers, though, especially in the upper grade levels, tend to expect students to solve their own interpersonal problems with classmates. This reluctance on the part of teachers to interfere in the development of children serves to reinforce the reported reluctance students feel regarding approaching adults for help when they are unsure of how to handle peer conflicts (Hopmeyer & Asher, 1997). This is significant because many children who are harassed by their peers will react in either passive behaviors, which serve to escalate the violence as it perceived they will not defend themselves, or in other ways that only serve to heighten the danger presented Advice issued as early as 1928 (James) indicate that the best way to deal with bullying behavior is to first give the offending student an oral reproof upon their first offense followed by removal of privileges if the behavior continues. However, few studies are available today that offer real-life workable strategies for intervention of the bullying cycle, whether the student is the aggressor, the victim or both. Because of this teachers are left with an enormous burden in terms of seeking a proper course of action. That some action needs to be taken, however, is evident in the numerous studies that have linked juvenile ‘deviant behavior’ with future criminal activity. By reviewing the available literature, it can be determined that bullying is a growing issue in schools throughout the developed world, with teachers, parents and other officials reporting the problem as among the highest detrimental issues they have to deal with. In addition to the physical danger this places individual children in when they are merely attempting to learn what they need to know for a future career or at least to fulfill state mandates, the problem of bullying has long-term consequences for the bully, the victim and society at large. In many cases, it has even been shown that students can experience the detrimental effects of being both bully and victim, becoming socially ostracized and entering an unending cycle of detrimental self-image. While some of these issues are started at home, in the form of abusive family relationships or impoverished conditions, they are continued and exacerbated in the classroom and on the playground, gradually increasing as children grow older and enter pre-adolescence. Students with low acceptance levels among their peers are known to be at greater risk of being a participant in bullying behavior, as the aggressor, victim or both. These social patterns have been shown to be established relatively quickly and consistently among playgroups and can possibly provide a means of identifying those children requiring greater attention or instruction in appropriate social integration techniques. Detractors believe social integration would be better served if kids were allowed or even encouraged to victimize other kids. “We are running the risk of children growing up who are not going to be able to look after themselves in social situations.” (Coping, 2007). They seem to be justifying assault for a subjective concept. ‘What doesn’t kill little Billy will make him stronger’ one supposes is this group’s misguided argument. References Barbarin, Oscar A. (November-December 1999). “Social Risks and Psychological Adjustment: A Comparison of African American and South African Children.” Child Development. Vol. 70, N. 6, pp. 1348-1359. Boulton, Michael J. (July/August 1999). “Concurrent and Longitudinal Relations between Children’s Playground Behavior and Social Preference, Victimization and Bullying.” Child Development. Vol. 70, N. 4, pp. 944-954. “Coping with the bullies is part of growing up, says child expert\” (October 28, 2007) Accessed November 14, 2009 from Farrington, David P. (1993). “Understanding and Preventing Bullying.” Crime and Justice. Vol. 17, pp. 381-458. Hinde, R.A. (1980). Ethology. London: Fontana. Hopmeyer, A. & Asher, S.R. (1997). “Children’s Responses to Peer Conflicts Involving a Rights Infraction.” Merrill-Palmer Quarterly. Vol. 43, pp. 235-254. James, H.W. (October 1928). “Punishments Recommended for School Offenses.” The Elementary School Journal. Vol. 29, N. 2, pp. 129-131. Renold, Emma. (September 2001). “Learning the ‘Hard’ Way: Boys, Hegemonic Masculinity and the Negotiation of Learner Identities in the Primary School.” British Journal of Sociological Education. Vol. 22, N. 3, pp. 369-385. Read More