Bullying: Revealing theHiddenFaceof SchoolViolence - Research Paper Example

 Bullying: Revealing the Hidden Face of School Violence Abstract On March 5, 2001, Charles Andrew Williams, a 15-year old student from California, perpetrated the shooting in his school where two students were killed and thirteen were wounded. After his arrest, the told investigators that the reason he committed the crime was because he was “tired of being bullied” at school. He is currently serving life in prison without the possibility of parole for 50 years. The abovementioned case is just one of the few incidents in schools where bullying often results to school violence in the United States. As a repeated form of violence, bullying is a persistent societal problem, especially in schools where a large number of children and youth have experienced different types of bullying during their educational experience. Because of this, it has been known to influence young people to instead commit violence as a reaction to mistreatments and harassments acted upon them. One of the dire forms of violence caused by bullying is the school shootings that have taken place in different parts of the United States. A recent report by the US Secret Service revealed that over two-thirds of school shootings were caused by attackers who experienced some form of bullying prior to the incident. Having experienced teasing, bullying, and harassments for a long period of time, young people react so violently to the abuse up to a point of committing crimes themselves. Hence, this paper aims to reveal that rampant school violence which have plagued the country in recent years have mainly been caused by bullying. As such, different examples and high-profile cases of school violence will be examined to provide a solid grounding on how bullying contributes to the proliferation of violence in schools. By looking at different perspectives of bullying, we will able to examine the phenomenon of harassment, oppression, and violence caused by bullying. The analysis provided in this paper will also enable us to make sense out of why most children and young adolescent engage in bullying. Introduction An Overview of Bullying at Schools Bullying is a growing and significant problem in many schools around the world. Bullying involves “a person’s or a group’s intentional and hurtful action towards one person or more than one person and involves a complex interplay of dominance and social status” (Sutton, Smith, & Swettenham, 1999). Physical violence, slander, and verbal intimidation are just of the few manifestations of bullying. Incidence of bullying are so prevalent in schools that a national estimate of more than 1.5 million students bullying and being bullied on a weekly basis in the United States (Nansel et. al., 2001). By surveying more than 15, 000 students in grades 6 through 10, the researchers found that one in seven students is either a bully or victim. This research was also supported by different self-methodological reports which generally yields that a wide range of bullying prevalence estimated with as many as 75% of youth reported that they are being the target of peer harassment at least occasionally (Olweus, 1993; Cowie & Dawn, 2004; and Sanders & Phye, 2004). Such harassment may include physical contact, verbal assault, making obscene gestures or facial expressions, and being intentionally excluded. Although numerous programs have been created to decrease the violence and harassment occurring at school, there are indications from numerous studies that provide startling results about the frequency of bullying in schools. Such statistics suggest that bullying is quite common and not decreasing (Olweus, 1991; Glew et. al., 1997, and Bradley & Daniels, 2011). Because of this, there is a need to examine the implications of aggression, violence, and bullying among children and young adults across the country. Reactive and Proactive Bullying Because of the growing concerns of the prevalence of bullying in schools, researchers have begun to distinguish between two general types of bullying occurring in schools: proactive and reactive bullying. This distinction has taken its roots from clinical and developmental studies on the measurements of aggression in psychology (Dodge, 1991). Children and young adults commit proactive bullying when they display aggressive behaviors without provocation. In other words, proactive bullies commit bullying even if they do not feel threatened by someone. On the other hand, reactive bullying refers to the display of aggressive behavior when a student feels provoked or threatened by someone. These behaviors have been described as impulsive and defensive in nature (Dodge, 1991). Reactive bullying is also followed by intense physical reaction such as hitting, kicking, and may escalate to a more serious form of violence. Reactive Bullying and Violence Bullying has been shown to have negative implications on those being bullied. As supported by studies on bullying (Nansel et.al., 2001 & Olweus, 1991), constant exposure to bullying behaviors has been related with the emotional and behavioral stress detrimental to a person healthy development. According to Moore (2003), cyclical prevalence of aggression and bullying in schools are likely to result in violence against others. Victims of constant bullying at schools report that “feelings of vengefulness and hostility were determined after the bullying incident” (Skiba & Peterson, 2000). More explicitly, the child travels the hurtful path of bullying, he/will become irritable and angry. This irritability and anger seem to stem from feelings of entrapment, stress, helplessness, and poor self - esteem. Because most children prefer not to have these feelings, children and young adults may “repress her anger toward herself; toward those who ignore, encourage, or reinforce the bullying; and toward those who bully her” (Beane, 2008). As a result of internalized anger, victims of bullying often respond with retaliation which results to the perpetuation in the cycle of violence against other (Dodge, 1991). Bullies and Violent Behavior For years, researchers have taken interest between the connection of being a bully and engaging in more violent offending (Glew et.al., 1997). Interestingly, recent researches have supported the relation between bullies and subsequent violence. Studies showed that children who engage in bullying behaviors are also at increased risk of committing potentially aggressive and violent behavior in the future (Bradley and Daniels, 2011). The findings were backed up using a nationally representative sample of sixth through tenth graders in the United States, Nansel and her colleagues (1993) investigated whether bullying is a risk factor for more serious violence. Results indicate that both bullying and being bullied are strongly related to more serious behavior, such as fighting and weapon carrying. These relationships, however, were stronger for the bullies than the victims. Students who bullied others were more likely to be involved in frequent fighting and to carry weapons (Nansel et al., 2003). Other research findings indicated that as bullies consistently learn to react to conflict with immediate violence, their aggressive behavior often leads to criminal activities by their late 20s (Dodge, 1991). Bullying as it Relates to School Violence One of the factors that have increased the studies about bullying in schools is the proliferation of lethal acts of violence happening at schools across United States. For instance, school violence has come into the public eye after deadly multiple shootings in such places as Littleton, Colorado; Jonesboro, Arkansas; Santee, California; Red Lake, Minnesota; Nickel Mines, Pennsylvania; and Cleveland, Ohio. The possibility of school shootings has become an issue for urban, rural, and suburban communities alike. Because of the rampant incidents of school violence across the US, many researchers have begun looking at bullying as a factor which can “contribute to the climate of fear and unhappiness for millions of school children” (Harries & Pettrie, 2003). At its worst, bullying enables young people to retaliate by committing grave acts of school violence as a reaction to the mistreatments and intimidation acted upon them. According to Moore (2003), high-profile cases of shootings at US schools have showed that the youth school shooters have experienced bullying at schools. By looking at few school rampages and shootings that have happened in Colorado (1999), California (2001), and Virginia (2007), we can examine the motivations of youth to commit violence. Columbine School Massacre Dubbed as the nation’s deadliest school shooting, twelve students and one teacher were killed at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado on April 20, 1999. Eric Harris, 18, and Dylan Klebold, 17, had plotted for a year to kill at least 500 and blow up their school. At the end of their hour-long rampage, they turned their guns on themselves. After the incident, authorities have centered their attention on bullying as the rationale for the killings at Columbine High School as both shooters are victim of constant bullying in their school (Brooks & Merritt, 2002). The so-called ‘bullying climate’ at Columbine has already distressed teachers and administrators prior to the attack. Additionally, it was also reported that various remarks on being homosexuals were directed at Klebold and Harris during their encounters at the school. As a result, these name-callings and harassments have triggered violence response of the young shooters. A year after the massacre, officials from the US Secret Service released a study that out of 37 premeditated school shootings in US, there are 24 cases or approximately two thirds of the attacks were triggered by bullying (Boodman, 2006). Santana High School Shooting On March 5, 2001, Charles Andrew Williams, a 15-year old student from California, perpetrated the shooting in his school where two students were killed and thirteen were wounded. After his arrest, the told investigators that the reason he committed the crime was because he was “tired of being bullied” at school. Reportedly, fellow students and even his peers at skateboarding events started to call him names because of his bizarre attitude in front of many people. In a report by ABC News (2001), two skateboards were stolen from him prior to the shooting. Because of this, Williams took his father’s Arminius .22 caliber revolver from the locked gun cabinet in their apartment and started shooting students at his school. Virginia Tech Massacre Considered as the most deadly shooting rampage in history, the Virginia Tech massacre was a clear example how bullying can affect the mindset of young adults. Cho Seung-Hui, a 23-year-old Virginia Tech student killed 32 people before committing suicide on April 16, 2007 at Blacksburg, Virginia. According to the Virginia Tech Review Panel's report (2007), the South Korean migrant was often described as introvert and frail by his peers. During his eighth grade, Cho was diagnosed with depression and social anxiety that have enabled him to acquire difficulties in speaking. Because of this, it was reported that Cho has been bullied by his classmates in middle school. As recalled by one of his classmates at Westfield High School in Chantilly Virginia, he noted that Cho almost “never opened his mouth and would ignore attempts to strike up a conversation”. He also recalled that after a teacher threatened him to give a failing mark for participation, Cho started having strange voice and manifested some reading difficulties. One classmate even pointed out that after he started reading, the whole class started to laugh and bullied, ‘Go back to China.’ (NBC News, 2007). US School Shootings in Relation to Bullying As the public grew more concerned about these rare yet extreme school shootings, one of the many hypotheses proposed to explain these events drew upon the bullying experienced by the shooters at Columbine, Virginia Tech, and Santana High School (Sanders & Phye, 2004). Many believed that school shootings that have plagued most U.S. Schools were acts of retaliation of previous victims of bullying. To investigate this and other hypotheses, the National Research Council and Institute of Medicine (2003) conducted a case study examining seven post-Columbine school shootings. When investigating the bullying experiences of the offenders, it was found out that although bullying was a problem in many of the schools, the hypothesis that most shooters were victims of bullying seeking revenge did not hold. Interestingly however, as four of the eight shooters from different shootings incidents across the United States had been victims, but it was also true that four of the eight shooters had also been bullies (National Research Council and Institute of Medicine, 2003). In another study conducted by Safe School Initiative (Fein et. al., 2002), it was found out that “almost 75% of school perpetrators felt persecuted against, bullied, threatened, attacked, or injured by others”. It was also revealed that in some situations, the young attackers experienced severe long-term bullying and harassment at their respective schools. In some cases, the assailants’ experiences of being bullied appeared to be a significant factor in the decision to make an attack at school. However, it is also important to note that there are also reports that many of the school shooters were not bullied, but were instead the bullies (Bradley & Daniels, 2011). In any case, whether school shooters were bullied or bullies, there definitely is a link to be considered when it comes to bullying and developing a safety environment at schools. Bullying & Violence Prevention The fact that most school shooters had been harassed and bullied by their peers, it is important to highlight the importance of attending to bullying in schools. Bullying is prevalent in schools where “more than 1.5 million students bullying and being bullied on a weekly basis in the United States” (Nansel et. al., 1991). Even with the high number of bullying incidents reported in schools, recent analysis conducted by Bradley and Daniels (2011) showed that “level interventions do not appear to be sufficient to bring bullying under control”. Instead, it takes a whole community effort, including school intervention, parental supervision, and individual action to decrease the trend of harassment, maltreatment, and other abuses at schools. The researches on school violence (Skiba & Peterson, 2000; Bradley & Daniels, 2011) suggested that bullying and violence prevention should first raise awareness of teachers, parents, and students in the form of forums, programs and other means of discussion. Also, according to the recommendation done by Safe & Responsive Schools Project (Skiba and Peterson, 2000), “school administrators should initiate a comprehensive security assessment survey of their school’s physical design, safety policies, and emergency procedures. In other words, the entire assessment should be conducted in cooperation with law enforcement, school security staff, physical facilities personnel, fire and other emergency service personnel, teachers, staff, students, and other school community members. Anti-Bullying Programs in the U.S. Since many studies show the correlation between bullying and school violence, most schools around the United States have taken necessary steps to reduce and prevent harmful incidents in the academic environment. It is widely recognized that well-designed bullying prevention programs can reduce, eliminate, and prevent bully-victim problems, and significantly improve overall school climate. This is the reason why numerous actions were taken by different schools in the US to represent some of the strategies and relevant activities used in preventing further school violence from happening across the country. Individual Level Strategies. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, universal & school-based prevention programs have been found to reduce rates of aggression and violen tbehavior among students. These programs are delivered to all students in a school or a particular grade and focus on many areas, including emotional self-awareness, emotional control, self-esteem, positive social skills, social problem solving, conflict resolution, and teamwork. Relationship Level Strategies. Parent- and family-based interventions are designed to improve family relations. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (2010), there is growing evidence that these interventions, especially those that start early and recognize all the factors that influence a family, can have substantial, long-term effects in reducing violent behavior. Research has shown that mentoring, when implemented correctly, can significantly improve school attendance and performance, reduce violent behavior, decrease the likelihood of drug use, and improve relationships with parents and friends. Community Level Strategies. Strategies at this level focus on modifying community characteristics, including school settings that either promote or inhibit violence. Schools have made numerous efforts to improve the overall environment and to reduce negative outcomes, such as violence. These include improved classroom management practices, promoting cooperative learning techniques, teacher/staffing practices, student monitoring and supervision, and reducing bullying by involving parents/caregivers (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2010). Indeed, bullying prevention programs use measures at the school, classroom, and individual levels to send a message that bullying is not acceptable behavior and will not be tolerated. Such programs have been found to be effective in reducing bullying incidents by as much as 50%, while decreasing general antisocial behavior and increasing students’ satisfaction with their school. Schools seeking to implement bullying prevention programs should conduct an assessment of the problem in their individual school and plan training, materials, and curricula accordingly. Through ongoing implementation and evaluation, administrators can adjust policies and track effectiveness of their program, while maintaining a school-wide commitment to reduce or eliminate bullying and violence. Conclusion Bullying is a serious matter involving a substantial number of students. No one knows at this point exactly what caused students such as Charles Andrew Williams, Eric Harris, Dylan Klebold, and Cho Seung-Hui others to shoot and kill their fellow students at school, but bullying is frequently mentioned as a possible contributor. The report released by U.S. Secret service that two thirds of school shootings have been caused by attackers who experienced bullying clearly showed how grave the bullying climate at US schools is. Although bullying is not a factor in every case of school violence since not every child bullied at school will engage in serious violent acts, it has only been recognized that within the last few years that schools, communities, and parents around the US should act against the serious implications of bullying at schools. Comments such as “boys will be boys” or “just to tough” cannot anymore be tolerated by concerned and educators as constant passivity have resulted to the incomprehensible loss of lives among the country’s young population. As a society, we should begin to look at bullying as a behavior fraught with inherent violence that can contribute to a horrific cycle of mayhem and at its worst, death of school children in the country. The information presented in this paper provides additional evidence of the need for elementary school personnel to implement bullying prevention programs, not only to prevent school shootings but also to prevent potential barriers to providing education: student feelings of lack of safety, belonging, and sadness. Bullying may be a barrier that impedes effectiveness of teaching, the primary mission of school personnel, yet recent studies found that evidence-based, whole-school approaches to bullying are rarely implemented in elementary schools. Implementing anti-bullying interventions in the elementary years, before bullying becomes a part of school culture, might improve schools’ ability to carry out their educational mission by improving students’ ability to focus on learning and establishing an atmosphere of respect early on. Well-conducted, comprehensive bullying prevention programs can be effective in reducing the number of bullying incidents and creating a climate that discourages bullying behavior. References Beane, Allan L.: “Protect Your Child from Bullying” California, USA: Jossey Bass, 2008. Print. Boodman, Sandra G. "Gifted and Tormented". The Washington Post. 16 May 2006. Print Bradley, Mary C. and Daniels, Jeffrey A. Preventing Lethal School Violence. New York, USA: Springer Science+Business Media LLC, 2011. Print. Brown, Brooks & Merritt, Rob. No Easy Answers: The Truth Behind Death at Columbine. New York, NY: Lantern Books, 2002. Print. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “The effectiveness of universal school-based programs for the prevention of violent and aggressive behavior: a report on recommendations of the Task Force on Community Preventive Services”. MMWR (2007): 1-12. Cowie, Hellen and Dawn, Jennifer. New Perspectives on Bullying. New York, USA: Open University Press McGraw-Hill, 2004. Print. Dodge, K.A. (1991). The stucture and function of reactive and proactive agression. In D.J. Pepler & K. H. Rubin (Eds.). The development and treatment of childhood aggression. (pp. 201- 218). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Glew, Gwen M., Fan, Ming-Yu et. al., “Bullying, Psychosocial Adjustment, and Academic Performance in Elementary School”. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. November 2005: 1026- 1031. American Medical Association. Web. 27 May 2011 Harris, Sandra and Petrie, Garth F., Bullying: The Bullies, the Victims, the Bystanders. Maryland, USA: A Scarecrow Education Book, 2003. Print. La Fontaine, Jean. Bullying: the Child’s View. London, UK: Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation,1991. Print. Nansel, T.R. Overpeck, M., Pilla, R.S., Ruan, W.J., Simons-Morton, S., & Scheidt, S. Bully behaviors among US youth: Prevalence and association with psychosocial adjustment. Journal of the American Medical Association (2001)., 285, 2094-2100. Moore, Mark Harrison. Deadly Lessons: Understanding Lethal School Violence : Case Studies of School Violence Committee. Washington D.C., USA: National Academies Press, 2003. Moore, Mark H., Carol V. Petrie, Anthony A. Braga, and Brenda L. McLaughlin. "Deadly lessons, understanding lethal school violence, Case Studies of School Violence Committee. (2003) National Research Council and Institute Medicine. Olweus, Dan. Bullying at School: What We Know and What We Can Do (Understanding Children's Worlds). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishers Ltd., 1993. Print. Sanders, Cheryl E., and Phye, Gary D., eds. Bullying Implications for the Classroom. London, UK: Elsevier Academic Press, 2004. Print. Schulte, Brigid and Craig, Tim. “Unknown to Va. Tech, Cho Had a Disorder”. The Washington Post. 27 August 2007. Web. 27 May 2011. Sutton,J., Smith,P.K., Swettenham,J. (1999). Bullying 'Theory of Mind': A critique of the 'Social skills deficit' view of anti-social behaviour. Social Development 8(1), 117-127. Skiba, R. J. & Peterson, R. L. “School discipline: From zero tolerance to early response”, Exceptional Children”. (2000): 66, p335-347. Web. Tarshis, Thomas Paul. Living with Peer Pressure and Bullying. New York, USA: Facts On File, Inc., 2010. Print. Virginia Tech Review Panel, Report August 2007, chapter IV "Life and Mental Health History of Cho", http://www.vtreviewpanel.org/report/index.html. Web. 28 May 2011. Vossekuil, B., Fein, R.A., Reddy, M., Borum, R., & Modzeleski, W. "The final report and findings of the Safe School Initiative: Implications for the prevention of school attacks in the United States" U.S. Secret Service and U.S. Department of Education. Washington, D.C. (2002). Web. "2 Dead, 13 Hurt in Calif. School Shooting". ABC News. 5 March 2001. Web. 27 May 2011. Read More