Click here to go back to issues list
Should schools be blamed for taking inadequate action against bullying?
Echo Issue Outline 2000 / 08: copyright © Echo Education Services
First published in The Echo news digest and newspaper sources index.
Issue outline by J M McInerney
What they said ...
'A community that sends its teachers into battle against bullying, armed with ministerial directives and counselling notes, but no live ammunition, should not be surprised that many decide discretion is the better part of valor and abandon the field to the bullies'
Elsie Johnson, a former teacher, in a letter published in The Age on January 20, 2000
'They (the teachers) just said: "Oh, forget it, don't worry about it, you'll live' ... those were the main responses I got'
A claim made by a private school student supposedly the victim of on-going bullying
A recent survey conducted by the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology among 415 state high school students had some 45 per cent of those surveyed claim to have been the victims of serious bullying (defined as abuse at least weekly). Only 15 per cent of the students surveyed believed teachers could protect them.
These survey results follow recent media reports of parents in both private and state schools considering legal action against either the Education Department or individual private schools because they claim their children were not adequately protected against bullies.
These developments have led to significant media debate regarding both the anti-bullying measures taken within schools and their adequacy.
Background
The Kids Help Line defines bullying as 'Deliberate psychological, emotional and/or physical harassment of one student by another, or a group, occurring at school or in transit between school and home. It includes exclusion from peer group, intimidation, extortion and violence.'
All government schools are required to implement anti-harassment and anti-bullying policies as part of their school charters. The policies are to follow guidelines supplied by the Department of Education.
Most Catholic and private schools have anti-bullying policies, however, the Victorian Department of Education has no power to influence what these policies are or how they are implemented.
There are a number of Internet sites that look at aspects of the problem of school bullying.
The Australian Kids Help Line has useful material on bullying. It supplies a clear definition of bullying, gives the results of national surveys on the incidence of bullying and offers advice on the importance of breaking the 'code of secrecy' that allows bullying to continue. It suggests the importance of a whole community response to demonstrate that bullying is unacceptable.
This information can be found at http://203.37.145.243/info7/bully.htm
The Kids Help Line aims to offer support to all children with problems, including that of bullying. They can be reached on 1800 55 1800
Dr Ken Rigby, an Adjunct Associate Professor of Social Psychology and an Educational Consultant at the University of South Australia, has written an article titled What children tell us about bullying in schools. This article provides a review of relevant Australian research between 1991 and 1996 conducted primarily by the author and co-workers, drawing particularly on school children's reports and experiences and their perceptions of what can be done.
It can be found at http://www.yrbe.edu.on.ca/~safeschl/bullying.htm
In 1996 the Australian Council for Educational Research published Dr Rigby's book, 'Bullying in schools- and what to do about it', the first major study of the problem in Australia.
Aussie Sport Action, a publication of the Australian Sports Commission, published an article on bullying in its Winter, 1995 edition. The article is titled Bullying in School Sport and can be found at http://www.ausport.gov.au/act630.html
Education World Magazine, an Australian publication for teachers and educators, has an Internet site which can be found at http://www.education-world.com/
One of the magazine's contributors, Colleen Newquist, has written an article titled, Bully-proof your school. It was published in 1997. It outlines procedures schools can follow to reduce bullying. It can be found at http://www.education-world.com/a_admin/admin018.shtml
There are also a number of useful sources of information from outside Australia.
The United States magazine for teachers and educators, Education Week, has an Internet site. This can be found at http://www.edweek.com/button1/
An article titled Beating The Bullies was published in the August/September 1997 edition of the magazine. It was written by Debra Viadero. It gives an overview of research findings on bullying from around the world. It can be found at http://www.edweek.com/tm/vol-09/01bully2.h09
The Phi Delta Kappan Magazine, September 1997 edition, published a special feature titled, Bullying in Schools: It doesn't have to happen. The article was written by Frank J Barone, the principal of Amsterdam High School, New York.
The article examines the scope of the problem, the nature of the problem and the effectiveness of various intervention programs and other management strategies. It makes reference to ground-breaking Norwegian research, including that of Daniel Olweus, as well as to a range of other international studies and pilot programs.
The article can be found at http://www.britannica.com/bcom/magazine/article/0,5744,228177,00.html
A British article about bullying, including suggestions for training peers as support people, can be found at http://www.dfee.gov.uk/teacher/teachmag/data/issues/images/alonhd05.gif
It is titled When they feel utterly alone and was written by Martin Moriarty.
Arguments suggesting that schools should be blamed for taking inadequate action against bullying
The first argument offered to support the claim that schools are ineffective in combating bullying relates to the apparent extent of the problem.
According to this line of argument, a high percentage of students are bullied while at school.
Research conducted by RMIT post-graduate psychology student, Deanna Brouwer, and published in January 2000, has indicated that up to 88 per cent of students reported being the victim of some bullying at school. 45 per cent reported being the victims of serious bullying, defined as bullying which occurs at least once weekly. 49 per cent of girls were seriously bullied, compared with 40 per cent of boys.
54 per cent of students did not report bullying to teachers, 45 per cent claiming they did not believe teachers could do anything about it.
Similarly, the Kids Help Line recorded an 80 per cent increase in bullying complaints in the past two years.
The advice line received 680 calls about bullying in 1999, 40 per cent claiming their were receiving frequent or continual harassment at school.
The second argument offered is more anecdotal. The media has reported frequent individual instances of students who were severely bullied at schools where no effective action was apparently taken.
A former Footscray City Secondary College student has claimed she was forced out of school by systematic harassment. She now studies via correspondence.
The 15-year-old now takes anti-depressants to control an obsessive-compulsive disorder. Her parents are suing the Department of Education for what they claim was the failure of their daughter's school to provide her with due care.
The mother of a 15-year-old boy, who also attended Mt Erin College, has claimed that her son had his glasses stolen, was knocked unconscious, pushed down stairs and spat on.
She claims that her son, who has learning problems, had to spend three months at a Frankston teaching unit learning to cope with bullying.
In January 2000 it was also reported that up to 12 parents of students at Camberwell Grammar School were considering taking legal action against the school because of its supposed failure to protect their children from bullies.
The extent of bullying has been referred to in an Age editorial published on January 20, 2000.
'Bullying appears to cross boundaries of class and gender. It occurs in wealthy private schools and in state schools in impoverished areas. Girls appear to be no less likely to bully than boys - though boys are more likely to attack physically and girls more likely to use tactics such as exclusion or belittling.'
The third argument offered against the policies of some schools maintains that in some schools the problem is not merely poorly addressed, rather, it has been claimed, the competitive culture within the school actually promotes bullying.
It has been claimed that the climate of competition fostered in some private schools tends to promote bullying.
This position has been put by Mr Michael Flynn, a spokesperson for Australia's Independent Education Union.
Mr Flynn has stated, '[The schools] operate primarily on a culture of competition; of "I am better than you are, I am bigger than you are".
How can they then be surprised when students play that out in their own social behaviour?'
Fourthly, it has been claimed that within some private schools there is such a fear of adverse publicity affecting enrollments, that some schools deny that instances of bullying have occurred.
Eugene Arocca, a partner with the law firm Maurice, Balckburn, Cashman, has claimed, 'There's no way [the schools] would want to have it known that as a business there are people in their system that are being allegedly mistreated by other people in the system.'
Ms Arocca has suggested that fee-paying parents would be disinclined to continue to send their children to schools where they were at that sort of risk.
'If there's seen to be a discipline problem people will not be prepared to pay that sort of money,' Ms Arocca has said.
Fifthly, some schools have further been criticised for failing to act on the anti-bullying guidelines which apply to all Victorian government schools.
The Victorian Minister for Education, Ms Mary Delahunty, has been reported as having warned state schools that Victorian Education Department strategies for dealing with bullying were mandatory.
Ms Delahunty is also reported as having reminded state schools that the new state government last year allocated $12.2 million to be used to employ extra student welfare coordinators.
Mr Delahunty appears concerned that the schools implement compulsory state-wide ant-bullying policies and that they use effectively the resources they have been given for student welfare.
It has been suggested that some schools adopt a fatalistic attitude to the problem of bullying, seeing it as something which will always occur and something which is largely outside their control.
The father of a Camberwell Grammar student who claims his son has been bullied for some years, has said, 'The school will expel someone who is caught with a can of beer but with this kind of issue they don't really want to know about it.'
The boy concerned has claimed, 'They (the teachers) just said: "Oh, forget it, don't worry about it, you'll live' ... those were the main responses I got.'
Arguments suggesting that schools should not be blamed for taking inadequate action against bullying
Those who defend the action being taken be schools tend to argue that the problem of bullying is not one that can be seen as the sole responsibility of schools.
According to this line of argument, it is unreasonable to hold schools responsible for bullying among children and adolescents when the problem often originates elsewhere and should be addressed by others.
The Victorian education minister, Ms Mary Delahunty, has stated, 'Let's not blame the schools entirely ... [Bullying] says something about the culture we live in, the culture supported by the kind of violent movies and violent TV we see ...'
The claim that bullying stems from widely endorsed values within the general community has been supported by research from the United States which suggests that bullying and aggressive behaviour can actually make male students more popular.
United States psychologists have suggested that aggressive boys may become bullies because their anti-social behaviour actually wins them friends.
The report states, 'These boys may internalise the idea that aggression, popularity and control naturally go together.'
This perspective has been summed up in an analysis written by Carolyn Jones and Rachel Gibson and published in The Age on January 22.
The analysis suggests that bullying at school is 'a reflection of a broader culture that tolerates and even encourages bullying on the sports field, in politics, or the shop floor and in the boardroom. This culture reinforces the belief held by some that a little bullying can be character building.'
From this point of view, bullying is a major societal problem and probably one that needs to be tackled on a number of fronts, rather than simply through the agency of schools.
A similar point has been made by Michael Pontifex in a letter published in The Age on January 19, 2000.
The letter asks, 'Why in our society when something goes wrong do we look to blame someone else? "The government/school/police or 'they' ought to do something about it."'
Mr Pontifex argues that bullies should be 'pulled into line by their peers, their parents, their school, or state authorities, preferably in that order.'
Referring in particular to the role that should be played by parents in regulating the behaviour of their children, Mr Pontifex suggests, 'It may be useful if sometimes we look to our own performance [as parents] before expecting someone else to fix our problems.'
This point was also made by Ms Helen Krashow, in a letter published in The Age on January 2000. Ms Karshow states, 'The blame for bullying should not be placed entirely on the school. Schools are supposed to teach the "4 Rs" - reading, writing, arithmetic and respect. Home is where manners, appropriate language, love and security are developed and fostered.'
It has also been argued that schools are not sufficiently well resourced to eradicate the range of social problems with which their students present.
This point has also been made by Helen Krashow, who has stated, 'Over the past few years, teacher resources have been stretched to the limit. We need more teachers to supervise all play areas during breaks. One teacher simply cannot be everywhere at the one time.'
A similar point has been made by the present Minister for Education, Ms Delahunty.
Ms Delahunty has stated, 'To its great shame, the Kennett Government took resources out of schools and student welfare suffered.'
Peter Hodge, a teacher at Kilmore International School, has argued, 'The best defence against bullying in schools is for teachers to know their students well. Small class sizes allow teachers to better know the characters of their students and develop stronger student-staff relationships ... But this only happens in a stable school environment, where teachers are familiar faces from year to year and, preferably where the student population is not too large.'
The argument put by Mr Hodge suggests that the effective management of bullying in schools is not simply a matter of implementing anti-bullying policies. Mr Hodge argues that it is a total resourcing issue, closely related to student-staff ratios and teachers' job satisfaction.
Further, the Australian Council of State School organisations has claimed that the Federal Government needs to supply additional resources to enable schools to employ the counsellors they need to address the problem of bullying.
Dr Ian Morgan, the president of the Australian Council of State School Organisations, has stated, 'We have repeatedly called on the Commonwealth to fund additional school counsellors under its National Drug Initiative to enhance early detection of students at risk, and to support other measures to create safer and more supportive learning environments.'
Finally, it has further been argued that government schools cannot be expected to take effective action because the Victorian Government's anti-bullying guidelines, which they have to follow, are too tame.
This point has been made by Elsie Johnson, a former teacher, in a letter published in The Age on January 20, 2000. Ms Johnson states, 'A community that sends its teachers into battle against bullying, armed with ministerial directives and counselling notes, but no live ammunition, should not be surprised that many decide discretion is the better part of valor and abandon the field to the bullies.'
Further implications
It appears certain that a more concerted effort to combat bullying is about to be made in State, Catholic and private schools throughout Victoria.
It was announced on January 20, 2000, that all Victorian schools - government, catholic and independent - were to cooperate in the development of anti-bullying policies and strategies.
Officials from all three sectors have apparently agreed to work together to overcome school bullying after recent claims that they have not been doing sufficient to address the problem.
Schools will be encouraged to share examples of best practice and offer each other advice on the development of anti-bullying strategies.
The Government has also announced that it will provide an extra $150,000 to assist schools in developing anti-bullying policies. This is in addition to the $12.2 million allocated for the provision of welfare coordinators.
The anti-bullying strategies and their implementation are to be included in all state schools' annual reports.
The Minster for Education, Ms Delahunty, has said, 'This will allow us to conduct almost an audit of schools to tell us how they are using the funding.'
It has also been announced that there will be a an anonymous survey conducted among some 800,000 Victorian school children in an attempt to accurately track the problem of bullying.
It remains to be seen how effective these new efforts will be.
Sources
The Age
15/01/00 page 1 news item by Carolyn Jones and Stephen Cauchi, 'State set to act on school bullying'
15/01/00 page 5 news item by Carolyn Jones and Stephen Cauchi, 'Bullied boy may change schools'
16/01/00 page 2 news item by Farah Faraque, 'Tough for girls in co-ed schools'
19/01/00 page 3 news item by Stephen Cauchi, 'Minister warns on school bullies'
19/01/00 page 14 letter from Michael Pontifex, 'Why didn't the parents know?'
19/01/00 page 14 letter from Christopher Smith, 'Kids won't tell, teachers don't care'
20/01/00 page 5 news item, 'Counsellors needed to ease pain of bullying'
20/01/00 page 10 editorial, 'Time for action on school bullies'
20/01/00 page 10 letter from Helen Krashow, 'How do we protect our children from bullies?'
20/01/00 page 10 letter from Lesie Johnson, 'Give teachers the "ammunition" to act'
20/01/00 page 10 letter from Kate Price, 'The harsh facts on bullies'
21/01/00 page 3 news item by Carolyn Jones, 'Schools unite to battle bullying'
22/01/00 page 3 (News Extra) analysis by Carolyn Jones and Rachel Gibson, 'He can make your life hell'
23/01/00 page 3 interview by Matt Condon, 'A loving mother's bid to right a wrong'
23/01/00 page 3 comment by Leslie Cannold, 'I confess: I was cruel in school'
27/01/00 page 5 news item by Stephen Cauchi, 'Bullying hits most students, but few bother to speak out'
27/01/00 page 15 comment by Peter Hodge, 'Bullying: the view from the classroom'
The Australian
15/01/00 page 10 news item by Guy Healy, 'Warning on school bullies'
17/01/00 page 9 analysis by Amanda Hodge, 'Elite schools of hard knocks'
27/01/00 page 5 news item by Amanda Hodge, 'Most of us are bullied: pupils'
The Herald Sun
14/01/00 page 11 news item by Michelle Edmunds, 'School faces bullies lawsuit'
15/01/00 page 14 news item by Sasha Baskett, 'Boy bullied "for years"'
19/01/00 page 11 news item by Michelle Edmunds, 'Bullies push girl to brink'
20/01/00 page 12 news item by Sasha Baskett, 'Aggro but popular'
20/01/00 page 12 news item by Michelle Edmunds, 'Bullies claims soaring'
21/01/00 page 2 news item by Michelle Edmunds, 'Bullies face school dob-in'
21/01/00 page 21 analysis by Michelle Edmunds, 'Stamp out bullying'
27/01/00 page 7 news item by Michelle Edmunds, 'School bullies alarm'