VIOLENCE IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

    0

     

    VIOLENCE IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

    Student’s Name

    Institutional Affiliation

     

     

    Introduction

    School violence has become grave in the recent years in most countries. In most cases, public school violence has been associated with laxity on the side of administrators in being reactive rather than being proactive in their duties. Others fear reporting cases of violent assaults in their schools to the necessary authorities. Although most of students who involve themselves in school violence rarely intend the outcome of their actions, they finally suffer for the consequences of their actions. For example, they can be victimized or punished for being the aggressors. School violence has had severe consequences, especially, if it involves weapons like knives, guns and hand grenades. In most cases, school violence occurs among students or worse still students attack the school staff. This paper will discuss the prevalence, causes, impacts and ways of curbing violence in public schools.

    Public school violence is an international phenomenon. It has touched schools from across the world. According to Chilcott and Odgers (2008), in Australia, 55,000 students were suspended from public schools for physical delinquency in 2008. The ABC news (June 26, 2009) also reported that in 2008 alone, 128 cases of students and teachers being attacked violently were reported in South Australia. According to Geland et al. (2007), most teachers cited school violence as the major reason for exiting the teaching profession in Belgium. According to Kostadinov reports (June 2009), teachers in Bulgaria were given powers to be able to punish any unruly student in schools. This was to include student who were drunk, inappropriately dressed or even having mobile phones in school.  Similarly, according to Linchfield (January 27, 2000), in France, the minister for education reported that 39 public schools out of the total 75,000 state schools could be regarded as being seriously violent, while 300 of them were violent. Reports by the Warsaw voice (December 20, 2008) said that any teacher who failed to report any act of violence in school would be imprisoned in Poland. In South Africa, the BBC news (March12, 2008) reported that 40% of students interviewed by the South Africa Human Right Commission had encountered violence in school. In the United Kingdom, reports by the department of education and science and the welsh office (1989) said that 2% of teachers in United Kingdom had faced violence at school.  In addition, according to the National center for education statistics and Bureau of Justice Statistics in United States (2007), in 2003, about 7% of teachers were subjected to threats by students.

    Causes of public school violence are also diverse. They range from school related causes, environmental predisposition to poor parenting. First, according to Bandura (1983), students can learn to be violent from observing other people perform violent acts. This means that a student can become violent through external influence, for example when they observe others kick, pinch or even punch their colleagues. This behavior can be learned in school or even outside the schools. A student who joins a public school with high prevalence of violence is therefore likely to learn how to be violent and end up being violent.

    Secondly, the individual character of that student also predisposes him/her to violence in school. For example, according to Petterson et al. (1998), students who become antisocial at a later stage are less aggressive than those who began being antisocial at an early stage of their lives. This means that if a child has an antisocial trait, they are likely to be violent at school. In addition, according to Hirschi (1977), students who have a lower level of IQ are more violent than their counterparts with a higher IQ. Therefore, a school which admits many students who score lowly in IQ is likely to experience many cases of violence. In addition, according to Moffitt (1990), boys who have an early problem in attention difficulties, motor skills and even reading difficulties are likely to be violent in future. Therefore, there is a likelihood of a higher rate of violence in the schools that enroll many students who shows these problems.

    Thirdly, a student’s home environment can also predispose them to become violent at school. According to reports by the Constitutional Rights Foundation of the United States (1997), when students are persistently exposed to alcoholic parents who may have domestic violence, sexual abuse and physical abuse, they learn that violence is an acceptable vice. Such students are likely to get involved in violent activities like rape, arsons and assaults in school.

    Fourthly, according to Sampson and Laub (1993), students exposed to harsh parents when disciplining them are also likely to be aggressive. This means that if the parent is violent when punishing their children, the children are likely to be violent event at school. Such students will react in a very violent manner when they are provoked by others at school: they can kick, and punch or worse still shoot. If children are exposed to too much viewing of television, they are also likely to be violent at school.

    According to Bushman and Huesmann (2001), exposure to violence common in television programs increases violence, especially on children. This will lead to violence transferred to school. Moreover, students exposed to watching of violent games are also likely to be violent even at schools. According to Anderson and Bushman (2001), violent exposure of students to violent games on the video will make them violent.

    In addition, if students are exposed to corporal form of punishment, they are likely to become violent. According to Straus (1991), corporal punishment will always increase the rate of children being aggressive. Using corporal punishment when disciplining students will therefore yield dismal results.

    The neighborhood of student can also expose them to violence. According to Casteel et al (2007), students assaulting teachers was increasing in high crime areas. Students are also likely to learn violence from their neighbors, if the neighborhood has high crime rates and drug use (Johnson et al., 2011 p.331). In addition, exposure of students to violent peers will also make them violent. Exposure of students to deviant peers will make them violent, because of peer-pressure.

    Finally, the school environment can also be a predisposing factor to student violence (Meyer & Conner, 2008 p.221). Teachers are also likely to face high level of assaults if their schools have more male students and higher number of students from poor backgrounds (Casteel et al., 2007 p.932). Therefore, schools that receive more students from more sponsors experience more violent occurrences. This is because these students care less about the cost of their education, since they do not experience the real struggle that others go through in raising school fees.

    To prevent school violence, various ways of intervention can be applied. These include the school level prevention. These are deliberate moves by the school to prevent violence, for example, the school can use close monitoring of students, promote social learning among students, increase methods of class management and control, use second step curriculum that enhance impulse control or use the good behavior game that minimizes class disruptions.

    In the use of societal level prevention methods, the society imposes rules that change cultural and social conditions of the student’s environment, for example, social norms, redefining education curriculum and reducing violence in the media. Use of family relationship methods, involve changes by the parents, for example, parents reducing their aggressiveness to their children, reducing corporal punishment on their children, reducing drunkenness and spouse battering at home. Use of individual-level methods is centered around an individual student, for example, counseling the student on conflict resolution, team playing and social skills. The student is involved in a rigorous counseling program on evils of violence, its causes and the way to shun violence. Instilling fear on the student concerning the consequence of violence can also have a positive impact on the violent student.

    In conclusion, violence is prevailing in many public schools across the world. The major causes of violent are predisposition to violence at home, watching violent television programs and videogames, laxity of school administration, school environment, violent peers, corporal punishment, and individual predisposition like being anti-social or having a low IQ.

    References

    Bandura, A. (1983). Psychological mechanisms of aggression. In R. G. Geen & E. I. Donnerstein (Eds.), Aggression: Theoretical and empirical reviews. New York: Academic.

    Bushman, B. J., & Huesmann, L. R. (2001). Effects of televised violence on aggression. In D. G. Singer & J. L. Singer (Eds.), Handbook of children and the media (pp. 223–254). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. ISBN 0-7619-1954-6

    Casteel, C., Peek-Asa, C., & Limbos, M.A. (2007). “Predictors of nonfatal assault injury to public school teachers in Los Angeles City”. American Journal of Industrial Medicine 50 (12): 932–939.

    Constitutional Rights Foundation. (1997). Causes of school violence. Retrieved on April 20, 2009.

    Chilcott, T. & Odgers, R. (2009, July 9). Government can do more on school violence. The Courier-Mail, Brisbane.

    Easton, A. (2006, November 3). Polish drug use and suicide sparks school plan. BBC News Online, London.

    Galand, B., Lecocq, C., & Philipott, P.(2007).School violence and teacher professional            disengagement ” British Journal of Educational Psychology 77 (Pt 2): 465–477.

    Hirschi, T. & Hindelang, M. J. (1977). “Intelligence and delinquency: A revisionist review”. American Sociological Review 42 (4): 571–587

    Huesmann, L. R., Eron, L. D., & Yarmel, P. W. (1987). “Intellectual functioning and aggression”. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (1): 232–240.

    Johnson, S.L., Burke, J. G. & Gielen, A.C. (2011). “Prioritizing the school environment in school violence prevention efforts”. Journal of School Health 81: 331–340.

    Kostadinov, P. (2009, June 19). Little or nothing. Sofia Echo.

    Lichfield, J. (2000, January 27). Violence in the lycees leaves France reeling. The Independent. London.

    Loeber, R., Farrington, D. P., Stouthamer-Loeber, M., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., & Lynam, D. (1998). The development of male offending: Key findings from the first decade of the Pittsburgh Youth Study”. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review 7 (4): 273–297.

    Meyer-Adams, N. & Conner, B.T. (2008). “School violence: Bullying behaviors and the psychosocial school environment in middle schools”. Children and Schools 30 (4): 211–221. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7200/is_200810/ai_n32297587/pg_9/.

    Moffitt, T. E. (1990). “Juvenile delinquency and attention deficit disorder: Boys’ developmental trajectories from age 3 to age 15”. Child Development 61 (3): 893–910.

    Patterson, G. R., Forgatch, M. S., Yoerger, K. L., & Stoolmiller, M. (1998). “Variables that initiate and maintain an early-onset trajectory for juvenile offending”. Developmental Psychopathology 10 (3): 531–547.

    Sampson, R. & Laub, J. (1993). Crime in the making: Pathways and turning points through life. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0-674-17604-9

    School violence ‘dealt with’. (2009, June 26). ABC News Online.

    Straus, M. A. (1991). “Discipline and deviance: Physical punishment of children and violence and other crime in adulthood”. Social Problems 38 (2): 133–154.

    .

                                                                                                                                      Order Now