- Home
- Find a Therapist
- Topics
- Tests
- Magazine
- Psych Basics
- Blogs
- Diagnosis Dictionary
In my last blog entry, I wrote about a recently published book, Reclaiming Childhood: Freedom and Play in an Age of Fear, by developmental psychologist, Helene Guldberg. Read More
Teachers, Bullies
I agree with the general points you both made, but I will continue to question the idea that teachers these days are equipped to deal with bullying. They are, unwittingly I'm sure, bullies themselves and probably do more to create bullying situations than most experts are aware of, for they aren't looking in that direction. Teachers are stressed, depressed, put-upon, and mostly there because they can't get a better job. The days of a "calling" are mostly long-gone. Most teachers sit in the front of their classrooms working on their masters or phds, or sending emails to their pals on their laptops. When they pay attention to students, it's typically to ridicule or punish in an effort to keep the class quiet. Students are left to "work" in groups or in silly empty busy-work. My son, who has been severely bullied (and for the most part is now bully-free, thanks to Dr. Kalman's good advice) was most viciously -- physically and verbally -- attacked **while in the classroom** not in one teacher's class, but instead all but ONE teacher's class, each semester, for two years in a row, out of 7 classes. I don't think the Columbine and other sorts of mass violence are solely instigated by students. The complicity of teachers needs to be investigated and understood by someone. Note how many bizarre teacher-abuse cases have been coming to light? It's no coincidence. Schools are out of control.
Let's see some concrete, empirical evidence.
There is some validity in what you are saying with regards to the fact that current anti-bullying policies are making victims out of people who are not necessarily victims by conveying the wrong message (I believe you alluded to the self-fulfilling prophecy above).
Ideally, I think your approach should work; however, in the real world, telling a child that by simply ignoring the taunting, harrassing, and abuse of bullies that they will stop being victimized is extremely oversimplified and, to some extent many would argue (including me), dangerous.
I read your manual for children who are being bullied in which you offered 8 ways, I believe it was, to eliminate bullying without really trying. As I said before, ideally, theoretically, and on paper, yes, your approach should work: change your attitudes and opionions towards bullying (and thus, your response) and people will stop bullying you. However, I highly doubt that this would dramatically reduce bullying as much as a whole school approach where everyone (teachers, students, and parents, and the community) are on board. Furthermore, not every bully victimizes people for the same reason. If you ignore a bully you may in fact inadvertently entise them to bully you even more.
It's easy to tell someone "don't let it bother you", and ideally, if they don't there problem and the negative emotions associated with that problem will diminish. But if that was the case then we wouldn't need psychologists to help us with our life problems.
If you claim that the current approach is ineffective, then I would like to see some empirical evidence supporting your approach. You assert that current anti-bullying policies and programmes are not working but you are factually incorrect. Some programs, such as the Steps to Respect Program and Olweus's anti-bullying program, have been emipircally proven to reduce bullying in schools. The literature is there, just look it up. Moreover, you should't group all anti-bullying programmes under the same title because they are not entirely homogenous.
Empirical evidence
I am happy to offer my experience -- the basis of "empirical evidence."
My son attends a large magnet school for academically-talented kids. The first year he was bullied I reported it to the vice-principal, who said, in no uncertain terms, that he would take care of it. He handled it according to policy (they have a "whole school policy") and things grew worse, for now not only was the group of 8 other boys bullying him but they let other kids know that they had gotten in trouble for it. Soon other kids joined in to bully him, and along with them an administrator/teacher who felt that my son deserved to be bullied. (One thing administrators don't get is that bullied kids often look as if they are troublemakers, because they are responding to being punched in the back, stabbed with pencils, books thrown to the floor, etc). In fact, this teacher started viciously bullying my son herself. Then I had to intervene with her and threaten action (she got quite out of hand with her bullying). When this happened, she mocked my son one last time and warned other teachers that my son was a "troublemaker." So then he was labeled by teachers and ostracized and bullied by kids, and it mushroomed and mushroomed out of control, including physical, verbal, cyber- and cell-phone bullying. His accounts were hacked, he was receiving ugly text messages and phone calls. Awful.
At this point other administrators got involved, and it continued to escalate until one day my son received a terrible death threat, detailed and gruesome, so ugly that he feared going to school. I reported it to the school and they followed procedure and brought the two boys together for "conflict resolution." Good lord. Now the kid who threatened my son became a hero, and more kids began to threaten and mock my son. Every intervention made things worse: mine, teachers, administrators, psychologists, on and on, auditorium programs, ridiculous health class exercises, classroom visits from high school kids. Meantime, I was madly reading everything I could lay my hands on about bullying -- I was up days and nights researching -- (I have a Ph.D. so know my way around the library). I also sought professional help--child psychologists, well-regarded--and their advice was the same as the literature: ineffective.
What I came to learn, personally and from the mountain of research I read, is that they DO NOT WORK. They exacerbate the problem. They make the bullied kid feel terrible about himself, and they excite and expand the ranks of the bullies.
And when you watch your child sinking, helpless, into suicidal thoughts, panic, despair, I cannot tell you how terrible that is. Changing schools, in his condition, made little sense and was a huge gamble since, given the world we live in, the bullying was quite likely to find its way to any other school he attended, and I wasn't in a position to move out of the city.
In my son's darkest hour, I happened upon Dr. Kalman's website. It sounded crazy to me, but I was out of answers. He was the only one to sound a different note--it's remarkable how homogenous the bullying literature is. There was also a kind of common sense in his approach, a practical wisdom and understanding that the bullying literature simply doesn't have. The bullying literature is, in effect, literature about literature rather than observation and analysis of specific cases, generally. Those that look at empirical evidence invariably conclude that the approaches don't work.
But I can't say that I approached Dr. Kalman's method with great confidence. It seemed too straightforward.
My son tried it and it worked. It worked instantly. One day he was bullied, the next day it stopped. He didn't even have to wait it out the way Dr. Kalman predicted. Kids immediately (weirdly, almost magically) lost interest as soon as my son acted nonchalant in response to their mockery. Frankly, this experience has had a terrible effect on my own feelings about human beings: we are a bunch of monkeys, easily aroused and easily manipulated.
Let me add that Dr. Kalman's advice is not to "ignore" bullying. That's a naive reduction. Its real force is that it empowers the victim, teaches him not to take the attacks personally, not to own it. You must learn to respond to provocation with a different, empowered attitude--nonchalant, unaffected, even mildly amused or surprised by the bullying behavior. That's easier said than done when your self-esteem is being pummeled, but somehow my son managed. He pulled it off and it worked like a charm. Truly, like a charm. It has been several months now, and he is no longer the object of assault. Now and again he gets teased, but he blows it off and, as Dr. Kalman observes, the teasing moves on in search of another victim. He has learned to roll with, or roll off, the punches.
He's stronger, sadly, and less open to people, less the outgoing, funny, popular kid he was before all this brutality. No more panic attacks,no more depression. But he's back on honor roll, he is making--very tentatively--a few friends. He's taking an interest in his appearance and doesn't dread going to school, or no more than any teen-age boy.
I have the feeling that Dr. Kalman saved my son's life. So while I quibble with him about teachers--and how someone needs to research their culture, which I think is deeply problematic--I have nothing but respect for his work and his dedication to it. Bravo, Dr. K. Glad to hear that someone is joining in this important work. Perhaps soon you can accumulate enough "empirical evidence" to have an impact on monkey island.
Fair enough. In your case Izzy's approach has worked.
First off, I would like to say that I'm deeply sorry that you and your child had to go through that; victimization is an adversity that no person, let alone a developing child, should ever have to experience. Furthermore, I'm glad that your son has been able to overcome the problem and, as a result, move on with his life (and I hope that he continues to improve). In your case, Dr. Kalman's approach worked beautifuly for your son, and that's all that matters. The only detrminant of whether an anti-bullying program is effective is if in the end, it eliminates the problem (and, in your case, it did).
However, as convincing and inspirational as your story may be, there is one flaw in it with respect to "empirical evidence"- it is an anecdote. There are many other personal stories in which a child has attempted to change their attitudes, and thus their responses, to bullying and yet the problem still persists. In the latter case, what would you do (as either a parent or an administrator)? Continue to tell the child to "keep your head up", "don't let it bother you" and "act as if the bullying has no effect on you"?( which is essentially what Dr. Kalman's manual for children who are bullied suggests. For example, he rocommended that children should respond to a rumour by asking the person who reported it to them, do you believe it? And if the person responds "yes" your are supposed to say "then you can believe it". This may work at the elementary school level in which the rumours children pass are fairly innocuous, but teenagers in highshool are able make up fairly vicious rumours that even someone with the right mindset may have difficulty ignoring.) Okay, perhaps for people who are able to control their emotions (like me, for example) this approach works great, but what about for children who have intrapersonal problems? Support only goes so far. The school has to do something in response to increased bullying or drug abuse or teen pregnancy, whatever the problem may be.
The point I'm trying to make here is that there has to be some school intervention because if there isn't, you create a dangerous and destructive environment in which children get to determine what is appopraite and inappropraite behaviour. Moreover, students become desentisized to victimization and perceive it as something that is completeley normal (which is a myth that is in desperate need of being dispelled).
The steps to respect program, for example, is not so much about direct intervention or punishment, per se, as much as it is attitudinal education. These types of programs attempt to change children's attitudes and opinions about victimization by building empathetic and perspective taking skills. For example, many anti-bullying programs encourage schools to incoporate the topic of victimization into their curriculum (i.e, a novel in which a child is bullied or victimized, a movie, a guest speaker). Teachers would then initiate class discussions about the issue and then relate it to bullying in their school.
Evidence, of which I'm sure you are well aware since you have read all the literature on bullying, shows that about 85 % percent of the time in which a child is being bullied, there are bystanders present. Most bystanders either activately participate in the bullying (i.e, laughing) or chose to ignore it. Some do intervene but in most cases they intervene aggressivley instead of assertively. This is where the "whole school apporoach" comes in to play. Teachers and students should, if possible, intervene during a bullying episode and it is incumbent upon the school and the parents to equip students and teachers with the skills necessary to do so. Bullies perceive bystanders silence and indifference as evidence that what they are doing is appropriate,condoned, and, in some cases, encouraged. Moreover, if no one intervenes the victim also perceives this as evidence that what is happening to him/her is approved of by their peers.
Imagine how comforting it would have beeen had a fellow peer intervened while your son was being bullied.
Unfortunately, your experience has left you with a bitter bias towards children (and teachers) and their ability, or I should say lack thereof, to handle the problem of bullying. There are schools, however, in which an anti-bullying policy is implemented that is approved by the teachers and the rates of bullying decrease significantly.
Empirical Evidence
There were kids now and again who tried to speak up, but they were bullied and in fact they made it worse for my son, just as the evidence suggests: every intervention inflames the bullies. It makes them angry at the victim, and it makes them feel badly about themselves, and it excites them.
Dr. Kalman doesn't say that you just let things go. He suggests that you *try* his approach. It's a whole lot simpler and more effective than a bunch of incompetent people meddling with a very volatile situation. And words cannot describe how incompetent teachers and school administrations are at dealing with bullying, despite all these anti-bullying dog and pony shows.
It's clear that you are a caring person, but you just don't get it. I'm guessing that you were bullied as a kid (who wasn't?) and you want to legislate or teach it out of existence, but you cannot eliminate the raw aggression of kids. It eventually sublimates, for most of us, but not until somewhere in high school or college. I think it's developmental, and primitive.
I also think that a lot of teachers haven't reached that stage themselves and that's why they're still in school. I'm not bitter, by the way, I'm appalled. I teach.
For whatever reasons, it seems that this topic blinkers us, makes us believe somehow that children are better and wiser than adults, and yet also more receptive and dutiful to their notions. We imagine in just this one instance we can explain to a large group of peers (and do know that peers are far more important and powerful to adolescents and teens than adults are), but we are going to tell a schoolful of kids how to act and why to act and voila! they will do that. They see the light and peace and prosperity will fill the land. Where does all their aggression go, what do they do with it, in the "whole school model"? This is not a problem the "whole school model" or any of the bullying literature addresses, other than Dr. Kalman, interestingly enough.
We have to teach our children how to avoid victim status.
The brilliant paradigm shift introduced by Dr. Kalman is the move to focus on the victim rather than the bully. I've read some of the research on victims of bullying, and it ties in nicely with Dr. Kalman's theories -- they are kids who come from certain types of backgrounds (overprotective parents, for example) who were not given the ego strength to deal with teasing.
As for "empirical evidence," it has been well established that empirical evidence is nothing more than anecdotes stripped of their context. You can't study bullying in a laboratory. All the studies are based on humans observing other humans, nothing scientific about it. Humans pay attention to what they set out to see, so if they aren't expecting teachers to play a role in bullying, they won't be looking at the role I think teachers are playing, these days, and indeed I think the escalation in bullying is tied to the deterioration of the the quality and commitment of teachers, whose time is spent on master's theses, internet surfing, and administering tests.
As far as the research on "whole school programs" -- my son attends one. They have programs and exercises ad nauseum where kids are supposed to stand up, etc. We have to face reality. These kids watch South Park. Check out an episode or two and watch them gut these condescending programs. They are comedy for our kids. No one takes this stuff seriously. They don't take adults seriously. They incorporate our rhetoric *into* their bullying, in fact, because that makes it more comical. They see us as hypocrites, talking about bullying while dropping bombs on Iraqis and Afghanis.
Prior to this school for academically-gifted students, my son went to Quaker schools, which are genuinely "whole school" because the entire theology, the ethos, the curriculum of these schools is organized around conflict resolution. Alas, there was plenty of teasing and downright bullying in those schools as well. The kids are expert conflict resolvers: great vocabulary for expressing their feelings, a repertoire of strategies for ending conflict -- the whole shebang.
Response
Most of the experiments measuring the efficacy of "whole school approaches" do not use naturalistic obeservation; they use peer and teachers reports. But, needless to say, reports and questionaires are not always reliable. It is also quite clear that there simpy isn't enough current research to justify the adoption of "whole school" approaches to the exclusion of others (such as Izzy's).
I am a psych major and, consequently, becoming all to familiar with the fact that a large portion of the literature on psychology-related topics is, well, for a lack of a more sophisticated term, completely and utterly irrelevant BS. A majority of it is, as you pointed out before, literature about literature. However, that doesn't mean that psychologists cannot work together with schools to address the problem of bullying or that they have nothing valuable to offer. A lot of what we know about children's behaviour (such as Bandura's observational learning theory) was discovered in the very labratory setting you so callously referred to as being unscientific. Furthermore, you are making broad generalizations about teachers and administrators being incompetent which is clearly shows that you are, in fact, bitter towards the issue ( and rightly so, as you have been touched by bullying). But how many children have benefited from whole school approaches of whom you are not aware? You cannot assert that such programs are entireley ineffective, or that the people who develop them are incompetent boobs.
"but you cannot eliminate the raw aggression of kids"
Children are not born with this "raw" aggression you speak of. It's not innate, it's not normal, and very few children who are overly aggressive grow up to be respected, competent adults. It's also not a developmental phase through which all children pass; it's largely enviornmental. There may be some children who are biologically predisposed to aggression but for the most part, the average child is not aggressive insofar as to labell them a "bully".
"so if they aren't expecting teachers to play a role in bullying, they won't be looking at the role I think teachers are playing, these days.."
Dan Olweus, a leading expert on bullying, acknowledges that perhaps the most significant determinant of whether an anti-bullying program will work is if the teachers are on board. I agree with you. Teachers are somewhat responsible for increased bullying and one could even argue that they are, whether advertently or inadvertently, perpetuating its existence. But let's not portray teachers as being incapable of being trained in addressing bullying. In fact, I think that that's part of the problem; we are not adequately educating teachers about bullying or ADHD or other childhood related problems. Too many teachers still hold myths about such issues (such as, for example, sugar casuses ADHD, bullying is normal, all children are agrressive).
I've watched southpark, and many other similar cartoons such as family guy, many many times. I'm only 20 years of age so if any one of us is apt to relate to modern media violence, it would be me. I also play extremely violent video games in which the sole objective is to kill as many other people as possilbe. But let's not blame media violence for our children's apparent increase in aggressive behaviour. As you pointed out above, there are some underlying similarities among frequen victims of bullying as much as there are among children who bully.
Many of the current anti-bullying programs ( at least the ones in my school; that is in Canada) include counseling for victims and aggressors, but this cannot be possible unless the bullying episode is brought to the school's attention. The school has to be involved; whether its offering counseling to those who are being bullied or productive forms of discipline for those who bully.
I was bullied for a while; but then again I bullied others as well. In my experience though, as a bully and a victim, I perceived the school's indifference to what was happening as evidence that it was tolerable. I bullied for peer approval; I picked on someone who was socially inferior to me. I can assure you that if other children intervened and disapproved of what I was doing (or what others were doing to me) the situation would have been diffused.However, most children don't; they perceive it as something normal, which is unfortunate becuase they are, in a sense, becoming desensitized to victimization. The school's atmosphere needs to be changed. As arduous as the latter task may be, it's neccessary if we want our children to become caring and respectful human beings.
My question to you, or Izzy for that matter, is what if even after a child has received Izzy's advice the bullying continues to persist? What if it gets worse? What if the child's indifference to the bully agitates the bully and results in harsher bullying? Does the school get involved? Do the parents? Don't simply me tell that the latter is not possible (which is exactly what you did in the last post), because I've seen it happen first hand.
Besides, we are sending the wrong message to out children-they should be able to report to a teacher about a problem. Many fights at my school were stopped before they even started because someone had reported it to a teacher.
I suppose what I'm trying to convey is that regardless of what you may think, Izzy's approach, like any other, isn't impeccable. If teachers and school administrators are, as you have vociferously argued, too incompetent to deal with bullying , to whom does the child turn for help when all else fails?
Your long letter
I cannot possibly respond to everything you write here. But you are a graduate psychology student. Since you should be thinking like a scientific psychologist, I suggest you read my essay: http://www.bullies2buddies.com/Whats-Wrong-with-the-Psychology-Underlyin...
Thanks
Thank you. I will be sure to read it and share my thoughts.
Response to Justin
Dear Justin,
You pretty much misread and misinterpreted everything I wrote (e.g, review what I said about South Park -- never in the least suggested that media caused violence), and contradicted yourself in the process (e.g., check out your own experience with bullying and your--forgive the characterization--ill-considered response to my position on aggression). Aggression is not a synonym for bullying. Please do a little research. Your superficial reading and hasty responses to these serious issues are, to me, symptomatic: indeed, part of the problem.
Characterizing my position as "bitter" is, I think, beneath anyone who intends to do advanced work in any field, much less psychology.
Here's to reasoned discourse or rather, its extinction.
Response
"And words cannot describe how incompetent teachers and school administrations are at dealing with bullying, despite all these anti-bullying dog and pony shows"
If anyone partaking in this conversation is to be considered "hasty", it would be you. However, we are not here to pass juedgements or disparage each other, because the issue at hand here is not our petty differences, but rather bullying. I apologize if you were offended by my calling you "bitter".
Let's get back the original discussion. Barring Izzy's approach, you haven't made one suggestion as to how the situation (bullying in schools) can be improved; all you have done (at least in the posts I've read) is complain, criticize, and attack anti-bullying programs (which, despite what you may think, are not all homogoneous).
I have at least come up with some possible solutions to the problem (whether or not they are viable has yet to be proven, though)which address the fundamentals of human behaviour (I believe Izzy accused supporters of anti-bullying programs of failing to apply basic psychology)I also have acknowledged that Izzy's approach instills the right mindset in the victims of bullying as well as teaches them valuable social skills that can be extrapolated to other parts of their life. However, what about the rest of the children, including bullies? Should they not receive any education?
Allow me to use an analogy to help illustrate my point. Let's say instead of discussing bullying in this forum we were addressing racism or sexism. What message would we convey to society if our approach to solving the problem(i.e., racism or sexism) is to teach the victims how to deal with it? Yes, I understand victims need to relinquish the "victim" mentality and learn how to effectively deal with bullying (or racism or sexism), but teaching someone how to deal with a societal problem is not going to actually eliminate it (which, I hope, is our ultimate goal).
You are correct in that aggression is not akin to bullying, but the majority of children who bully are aggressive, so if were are to "solve" the problem of bullying we must understand the nature of it (which is mostly aggression, not knowing how to conduct oneself in a proper manner, disregarding other's rights, and lacking prosocial skills)
Again, I posed a simple question for both you and Izzy and not one of you had the decency to at least give me some answer. Questions are bound to arise, then, when the creator and the supporters of a program won't even acknowledge, let alone admit, that there may be a flaw in their approach. Once again, I will pose the question: What do children do if, even after receiving Izzy's training, the bullying still persists?
The problem with Izzy's approach is that it is based on the assumption that it is impecabble, that it will invariably work. This is analogous to the philosopy of the very anti-bullying programs of which you so vehemently disapprove.
I will post the question again in case it slipped your mind: What do children do if, even after receiving Izzy's training, the bullying still persists? Do the school's proceed to get involved? If so, how? You've made it quite clear that, in your opinion, school administrators are too incompetent to deal with the problem, so who is left (after Izzy) to deal with it?
To Concerned Parent
Dear Concerned Parent:
Could you please contact me through email directly. I would like to ask you something confidentially. You can contact me directly at the following page: http://www.bullies2buddies.com/contact
Let me know you are "concerned parent."
Thanks,
Izzy Kalman
Problems and Solutions
Justin, I just absorbed the fact that you are only 20 years old. Forgive me--I somehow got the impression that you were a graduate student in psychology. Your question is, "What if Dr. Kalman's approach doesn't work?" That's a legitimate question.
While I think it is the question that should be asked of the "whole school/Olweus" approach--and I think there is now plenty of evidence to supply the answer that it *isn't* working, how about this:
If Dr. Kalman's approach doesn't work, then try Olweus's!
Since Dr. Kalman's approach works, that should solve the problem and the issue.
Of course, if a situation has taken on criminal proportions (death threats, physical violence, etc) there are criminal laws and process to address such cases, and Dr. Kalman is the first to suggest that these be pursued in situations where laws are being broken.
Now, back to my original point: Dr. Kalman's approach is terrific for kid-on-kid bullying, but is not effective for teachers who bully kids. Here's the sad ending to my son's terrible year. After a miraculous recovery, in which he has moved from grievous bullying and ostracization to no more bullying and some friendships being formed, delicately, for it takes a certain amount of courage on the part of other kids to befriend someone who has been tainted by victimization, well, my son was actually looking forward to the end of the year school party, a gala affair, in middle school terms. For two weeks he talked about it. Then, yesterday, he forgot to bring back one of his books. His teacher called me and I told him I'd bring it right down. Nonetheless, in front of my son's classmates, this teacher called him an "idiot," told him that he was "sick and tired of him," and that "the world didn't revolve around him"-- and that he'd pay the price: he gave my son a two-hour detention that would take place during the party. So my son, after an entire year of social deprivation and abuse, spent his last day in school, alone, at a table removed from the other kids, watching them have a party. A few even tried to speak on his behalf, but over time they just made an object of their jokes.
Bitter? No. Outraged.
Teachers operate in a vacuum, unobserved, and all too many abuse this power, like abusive parents, with no checks or balances. Indeed, I've come to wonder if, like the priesthood that attracts some legitimate candidates and some molesters, the vocation of teaching has come to be a major magnet for abusive people, and that those who remain in this rotten system are people whose psychological need to victimize is being satisfied by the structure. I am sure that people would be amazed by teacher behavior if, like me, one of their jobs was to work with teachers. Others who do have made the same observation: teachers are openly abusive toward children, not just verbally but in terms of excessive, irrational punishments, etc. I have the strong feeling that if the situations where kids have gone greatly out of control (such as Columbine) were carefully researched with an eye to the teacher/student relationships involved, we would learn a bit more about the escalating bullying in schools. I will continue to assert that the teachers play a significant if not central role in instigating and sustaining serious bullying.
Calling me names or characterizing me does not address the idea, nor the concern--and of course does nothing to investigate or address the problem. You might want, in fact, to do a bit of research on teachers as bullies. While not much has been done, it's quite suggestive. We would be wise to not make sacred cows of teachers or parents. Neither is immune from terrible abuses of power and teachers have been creating a culture that mutually condones and even encourages all sorts of ugly targeting of students and ugly behavior. Ask some teachers how and what and who they talk about in the lounge.
Response
Just to clarify, I'm not in graduate school (hopefully someday I will be, though); I’m only an undergraduate student majoring in psychology.
Back to the original discussion, I think we have finally found a point on which we both can agree: there simply isn't enough current research to justify the adoption of "whole school" or "victim based" approaches to the exclusion of others. The efficacy of a school's response to bullying (irrespective of the specific type) should be measured and evaluated by answering this simple question: has it significantly reduced school bullying? The only way a school can determine the answer to this question, however, is to monitor incidences of school bullying. Some whole-school approaches incorporate this in their response plan by either issuing peer/teacher/parent questionnaires and surveys or documenting reported incidences of bullying. I'm sure you, as a parent of a child who was bullied not only by other peers but by teachers as well, can attest to the fact that the majority of children do not report their bullying-related problems.
In Canada, specifically in British Columbia (where I live) we have this website called "PSST" (protecting surrey schools together) where children can visit and anonymously report incidences of bullying or fights and talk with school counsellors or other children who may be facing similar problems. In a sense it is like an "afterschool" program where children and adolescents can go for help, support, or to meet other people.
Here's the link.
http://www.psst-bc.ca/
In response to teachers bullying students, I wasn’t aware that it was such a prevalent problem. I've had a couple teachers who, I suppose, you could call “bullies”. Actually, one teacher, who I did not get along with, told me (a type 1 diabetic) that I had to ask her first if it was okay to drink juice when I had a low blood sugar. The moment my mother learned of this she immediately met with my teacher and “straightened” out the situation. Henceforth, though, it appeared that the teacher had it in for me. I remember once she told me that “I didn’t go to school for four years to be lectured by an adolescent”.
While searching for bullying-related journal articles on psych-info, I did notice that there was some literature on teachers and their role in bullying. I shall read those articles and get back to you.
generalizing from experience
A lot of science actually derives from generalizing from experience (Darwin, for example, and all who followed him, which is a rather massive population in the sciences). Surveys are a highly imperfect tool, which is why in the social sciences they are (re)introducing "qualitative research," by which they mean people's stories. A survey about bullying won't even ask about the teacher's role. It already has an overdetermined idea of what the "problem" is and what details need to be known to support the hypothesis. Correlation does not equal causality, and questionnaires by their nature exclude very important information if one is attempting to study social interaction.
But enough academicizing. I'm glad that you agree that we should try the Kalman approach, since the Olweus approach looks to be pretty ineffective, not to mention very risky. My heart goes out to all the kids who are being bullied, and whose bullies are being exacerbated, by such approaches.
Speaking of which, I went to that website link you gave and I'm sorry to say that I found pretty much the same sorts of futile and exacerbating stuff that my son and I desperately tried back at the peak of bullying. It brought back how awful that time was, and how useless such things are when you, or your child, are in that situation.
I only wish I'd read the Kalman website *before* my son attended school; it's really not just a guide for how to deal with bullying. It's actually a guide to parenting, to teaching a child how to socialize (the part they leave out of all those nice books) --particularly for overprotective parents like me, who I came to learn, through experience and through a consideration of Kalman's site, that I hadn't prepared my son for the real world. I had sheltered him from it, and led him to fear aggressive behavior because I feared and abhorred it.
He is now prepared, thanks to Kalman's work, but at what a cost!
Response
The Olweus bullying prevention program was actually highly effective in the Sweedish schools where it was originally implemented. The problem, however, is that such results have yet to be replicated in other schools in other countries. Researchers are now questioning whether the successful results were attributable to the actual program itself or the teacher's and school's initiative and willingness to improve the situation (European schools generally receive more money and support from the government).
As for your opinions about the website to which I referred you-I'm sure many other parents and students agree with you in that,despite having good intentions, anti-bullying approaches, such as the PSST website, do little to improve the actual problem of bullying. However, that being said, I'm sure that there are just as many parents and students who have found the website to be of some use. Perhaps in your experience these approaches didn't work but you don't speak on behalf of every child who has been bullied. Let's at least keep our minds open to different approaches because, as I've have reiterated elsewhere, there isn't one approach to bullying that appears to be most effective, at least to the extent that it should be apopted to the exlusion of others.
Questionnaires do have vast limitations but by virtue of the fact we can't "read" people's minds, they are the only valid tool we have to measure, for example, prevalence rates or opinions about a particular issue. Their limitations do not negate their advantages. Researchers take their limitations into account when interpreting and explaining results.
How I stopped bullying
As a kid I stopped other kids from bullying the mentally challenged kids in my school, as well as the "odd ducks" which were constantly bullied. I would walk up to the bully, grab him by the ankle and the shoulder, lift him over my head and carry him around the playground or through the corridors of the school. Then I would gently put him down. I was the biggest and strongest kid in school so I could do this regularly. I would tell the bully not to bother anyone again. They would stop so they could join my "gang" of good kids that stopped other bullies. Whenever someone was seen being carried around by me word was out and everyone knew that kid was no longer a bully. I also carried the victims around like that too just for fun.
If the bully I carried squirmed or tried to get away they would fall so after one such instance that stopped and anyone I grabbed just took the ride.
My experience is that the kids, when empowered to do so, will establish rules of conduct for the classroom and the shcolyard that are more draconian than anything adults could come up with. The schools I have had kids in that followed the "Positive Discipline" approach school wide had no bullying issues because every kid in the shcol got to vote on the rules and evey kid was authorized to call violations of the rules. Positive Discipline can be used as early as Kindergarten and the main difficulty was getting the kids to cut each other some slack. By the time the kids left 6th grade all of them had experience in conflict resolution and in middle school most the Conflict Resolution team was from my daughter's elementary school that had run on Positive Discipline.
I am totally against the helicopter parents trying to protect kids from all danger and pain and emotional turmoil. I actually wonder if bullying is worse in schools with no jungle gyms. Personally, I feel that there are not enough broken arms in elementary school. More outrageous physical outlets may help the kids that tend to bully because they will burn out some energy and get some yah-yah's out and also they will build their self-esteem by doing the most dangerous and challenging things. I remember playing tackle footbal with no pads all the way up through 6th grade. It was great and myself and all the other big guys became leaders and team captains and it did wonders for our self image and did wonders in teaching us responsibility early on.
Response to Dennis Speer
That's a fascinating story about your childhood school experience. It sounds to me like you were a good bully. We automatically associate bullying with "bad," but it ain't necessarily so. Many people got mad at me for calling police officers bullies, but the truth is I didn't mean it in a judgmental way, except for when they abuse their power (which is, unfortunately, too easy to do because we are mortals).
Kids will make their own justice, and will usually do a better job of it than when justice is imposed upon them by adults. And, as you say, there may be a correlation between schools having gotten rid of dangerous activities with an increase in bullying behaviors.
The Positive Discipline program sounds like a good one.
Post new comment