Rising Violence in Schools - Research Paper Example

? Rising Violence in Schools Introduction Public schools in the twenty-First Century have turned out to be very unsafe places – fromelementary schools to campuses. This is because there are many incidences where children as young as ten and eleven have shocked many people by killing their teachers and fellow students in school. There are many cases of deadly occurrences of juvenile aggression among all social classes and races. Harmful drugs and unconstructive youth gangs have extended to every facet of the society. Although there are metal detector systems in the entries of schools and campuses, estimates indicate that 28% of boys in America come to school daily equipped with knives, guns, and other hazardous gadgets for their own defense (Hattal & Hattal, 2002). It emerges that murders in the school are claiming more lives per event although they are unusual occasions. The media have publicized these multiple-victim occasions and in some cases, they have exaggerated the events. As a result, there are changes in the public discernments of school security and in laws and strategies that affect the lives of children and youth every day. Due to the publicity of these events, many people have cited them as a foundation for school expulsion or labeling of youngsters. Consequently, this may cause unfavorable effects on their learning opportunities and perhaps on their social performance and personality development (Verlinden et al., 2000). Redding and Shalf (2001) argue that impressive school shooting occurrences have contributed to students and parents' declining sense of safety in the schools. More and more students have been feeling very insecure while at school or campus since 1989. Studies indicate that 4% of students fear that their fellow students might attack them on the way to or from school while 5% feel that other students might attack them while at school. In addition, 8% of students admit carrying a gun to school during most school days. Moreover, eight percent of students cite oppression by their fellow students at school and fear of school aggression keep 4% of all high school students home from school at least one day a month. These statistics clearly shows that there is a lot of fear in most schools and cases of shooting are highly increasing. Kimmel and Mahler (2003) indicate that in spite of the notable similarities between the sexes on most violence occurrences, the most pigheaded gender disparity in aggression is the motivation to see it as a lawful means of resolving conflict and its real use. For instance, four times more adolescent boys than adolescent girls believe violence is suitable “when someone cuts to the front of a line.” Moreover, half of all adolescent boys engage in a physical fight each year. This is because they think that fighting is the best way of releasing hurt feelings and sentiments. Society laments over the unusual hostility of its children, while experts and parents strive to comprehend the causes of such deeds. In responding to the rash of school murders experts have endeavored to shape prospectively aggressive children psychologically. This would help teachers, experts and parents to recognize them before they instigate violence. Another response to the violence has been to typify the executors in a sociological framework to comprehend better the reasons for their anger (Lockwood, 2000). The consequential condition of fear in schools and campuses is having a great impact on the readiness and capacity of students to learn as well as employment and maintenance of teaching personnel. They also affect student rights to confidentiality, the emotional health of students and teachers, sincerity and openness of the campus and the general quality of the learning atmosphere. This has led to changes in school discipline strategies and processes, local and state laws as well as feelings and insights of youth and children concerning their security in school and in society in general (Verlinden et al, 2000). Causes of School Violence Gun control advocates indicate that easy access to guns by youths is the single most source cause of increased shootings by schoolchildren. Studies indicate that there are roughly 192 million firearms with the American people. It is certain that the availability of guns makes anger more deadly hence could cause brutal shootings. For instance, the Columbine High School Massacre of 1999 could not have caused lethal killings if there were only baseball bats or knives accessible. The presence and availability of guns made the incidence more dangerous. Nevertheless, there has always been an overabundance of guns in America hence most schoolchildren have easy and cheap access to these lethal weapons (Hattal and Hattal, 2002). Other studies indicate that guns are the second principal cause of death to children between age 10 and 14. For instance, 80% of youthful executions in 1994 used a gun while 50% did in 1984 (Kimmel & Mahler, 2003). Moreover, other studies indicate that assailants took the guns from their own home or that of a family member in over two thirds of school shooting cases. In addition to this, over half of the attackers had knowledge with utilizing of guns. When parents use the internet to buy a gun the child can carry out the same search by visiting the same Web site. Moreover, a child can put in key words in a Web browser search window and perform his or her own search (Twemlow, 2002). Movies, television, music, and video games have greatly contributed to a violent culture and this has influenced the children to behave violently. Children may slowly accept violence as a means of solving problems by becoming immune to the horror of violence while copying violence they watch on television. In addition, the children and adolescents may interact aggressively with classmates, friends and even strangers because of media violence. This susceptibility is likely to peak during early adolescence (Verlinden et al., 2000). There are several ways in which violence can cause a greater threat, including if it is put into a humorous context, if it is repeated using a conventional weapon, or if it is morally justified in some way. This is because as many as one third of all violent programs present evil characters who are always free. Characters that have the very qualities that make them attractive role models start almost 40 percent of violent episodes on television programs. If they happen in real life, nearly half of the violent incidents showed on television would result in lethal or incapacitating injuries (Hattal & Hattal, 2002). In addition, there is a major connection between the young killers who have terrorized American schools since 1990 and the time the youth spend alone on the computers learning how to spread chaos and death. In cases of loneliness and isolation, these young people make their computers their companions. There are reports that sometimes a few lost boys would get each other on the net and planned together, mostly for a murder/suicide at school. In addition, they strengthen their sense of power through faceless intimidation by sending hate messages and warnings to other students. Although technology teaches the important life lessons of compassion, patience, true affection, responsibility for others, understanding, and courage, it provides a way for the young to avoid face-to-face social interaction (Hattal & Hattal, 2002). Other factors that contribute to violence include high population turnover, high housing density, and low socioeconomic status. These factors reduce a neighborhood’s capacity for social organization and its ability to exercise informal social control. It is evident that people in lower income neighborhoods are likely to have more problems creating the formal and informal social ties within the community essential to prevent crime and violence. For those neighborhoods described with a high number of single parents, they are likely to have fewer social resources and networks essential for maintaining and developing local institutions that help parents discourage children from violence and delinquency (Verlinden et al., 2000). In addition, altering the social-cognitive processes may be a major factor in the cause of juvenile violence. On the other hand, it is evident that attribution biases lead juveniles to misinterpret neutral social acts as provocations directed to them triggering behaviors that act as a motivation for aggression. Other factors that cause violence among males include antisocial beliefs and attitudes, attitudes favorable to violence, hostility toward police, and dishonesty. However, it is unclear whether antisocial attitudes influence individuals to violent behavior or whether these attitudes are symptoms of the same underlying construct as violence (Verlinden et al., 2000). The school’s response to fixed patterns of ostracism, bullying, and teasing among different groups in the school is frequently ignored. It is worth noting that a school climate that puts up with physical and relational aggression particularly by popular groups for example athletes or economic elites is at high risk for violence (Twemlow, 2002). Presently, there are an increased number of out-of-wedlock births per capita in the upper and middle classes of society, a condition that was previously a problem among teen, minority, and poor populations. When an older, professional woman decides to become a single parent, bear a child, and raise it alone, that child gets the world already minus one parent, a male role model that is a major source of love and attachment. Although single parent families may succeed financially, they are ignoring the psychological wholeness in terms of male responsiveness to the child and active male modeling which nature gave to the fathers to provide (Hattal & Hattal, 2002). In addition, violence in youths would be because of harsh discipline, an authoritarian parenting style, a passive neglecting attitude, parental disagreement about child rearing, and poor parental supervision. It is evident that there is a strong relationship between the effects of parenting practices and the child temperament factors. For instance, a child with a resistant temperament may come from a family which uses a fewer restrictions, for instance scolding, and prohibitions in response to prospective harmful actions (Verlinden et al, 2000). Sociologists and criminologists have asserted that different life pressures and difficulties, strains, may bring about criminal behavior. Students who fail to achieve their set goals due to diverse reasons experience stress and might eventually acclimatize to this unsatisfactory situation with diverse forms of unusual and criminal behavior. The failure to attain positively valued goals and the disjunction of anticipations and success are the main sources of strain. Although some of them may feel they hate school and feel like outsiders in their classrooms or on the playground, they tolerate the negative experiences until graduation and then go on with their lives. However, many young people face family discord or even absolute abuse and neglect and yet do not turn to the extreme types of violence (Levin & Madfis, 2009). On the other hand, there is an evident link between academic failure and delinquent behavior. For instance, low academic attainment in elementary school forecast convictions for violence offenses later in life. In addition, there is a strong connection between violent or seriously delinquent behavior at age’s 15 to 25 and poor school performance and attitudes. This relationship is stronger for adolescents compared with that of younger children (Verlinden et al., 2000). Gang delinquencies are likely to be more serious, violent, and chronic than non-gang delinquency. There is a feeling of acceptance and encouragement for violent among these gangs and other deviant peer. For these young people, violence is a way of showing one’s toughness while on the other hand one establishes status within a deviant and antisocial peer group. It is also evident there are a number of other reasons that could make a child vulnerable to these gangs and other antisocial peer group including failing to achieve in school, approval of prosocial peers, satisfying family relationships, and a sense of persona efficacy (Verlinden et al, 2000). On the other hand, the issue of drugs being readily available for children even in schools that moves them to pick up guns is another cause. Many children and adolescents have embraced technology as their babysitters and companions in an attempt to curb their fear, emotional neglect, the pressure from educational systems for which they are ill prepared and immature or even isolation from family and peers. In order to fill a psychological void in themselves, the at- risk youngsters often look for affection of any kind, appropriate or not, numb out or get high from drugs, weapons ownership, and mastery of violent games (Hattal & Hattal, 2002). Mitigation Several strategies might help to manage and prevent school violence and shootings. There should be careful regulation of pawnshops, gun exhibitions and other unofficial secondary gun markets. In addition, such behavior can become socially intolerable through imposing fines for loaning or offering a firearm to a student in infringement of the law. Moreover, impressive public service publicity campaign can accelerate such sanction. The school management can also help to avert the use of firearms by those who carry them. They can do this by providing programs of social problem solving, anti-harassment, conflict management and anger management. However, the most efficient programs would be those that reduce the level of harassment and oppression in the schools and that offer a proper sense of security in the schools. This is because gun carrying is most frequently a reaction to fears of victimization (Redding & Shalf, 2001). Moreover, lessening the unceasing strains experienced by students who are prone to be aggressive might help to deter occurrences of multiple-victim shootings directed to students and teachers. Teachers can identify students suffering from chronic strain by assessing certain behaviors such as bullying, grave acts of animal mistreatment and isolation (Levin & Madfis, 2009). Conclusion There have been augmented cases of school violence starting from elementary school to campuses. These incidences, where a student shoots fellow students or a teacher have claimed very many lives. It is for this reason that professionals, parents and teachers have attempted to understand this behavior. There are many causes of this behavior including accessibility of guns by students, emulating of media figures, chronic stress and academic failure. Other factors include drug abuse and formation of youth gangs, poor parenting styles and several anti-social behaviors. All these factors lead to lethal situations whereby a student shoots a fellow student or even a teacher. In response to these consequences, there have been several measures to mitigate and prevent these occurrences. These include restrictions of guns ownership by youths, offering psychological interventions to correct behavior and ensuring security in the schools. References Hattal, G.R & Hattal, C.M. (2002). Battling School Violence with Mediation Technology. Retrieved from http://www.fmcs.gov/assets/files/Articles/Pepperdine/battllingschoolviolence.pdf Kimmel, M.S & Mahler, M. (2003). Adolescent Masculinity, Homophobia, and Violence: Random School Shootings, 1982-2001. American Behavioral Scientist, 46, 10, 1439-1458. Levin, J. & Madfis, E. (2009). Mass Murder at School and Cumulative Strain: A Sequential Model. American Behavioral Scientist, 52, 9, 1227-1245. Lockwood, L. (2000). Where Are the Parents? Parental Criminal Responsibility for the Acts of Children. Golden Gate University Law Review, 30, 3, 497-557. Redding, R.E & Shalf, S.M. (2001). The Legal Context of School Violence: The Effectiveness of Federal, State, and Local Law Enforcement Efforts to Reduce Gun Violence in Schools. Law & Policy, 23, 3, 298-328. Twemlow, S.W. (2002). Premeditated Mass Shootings in Schools: Threat Assessment. Journal of American Academic Children and Adolescents Psychiatry, 41, 4, 475-477. Verlinden, S. et al. (2000). Risk Factors in School Shootings. Clinical Psychology Review, 20, 1, 3-56. Read More