1
Violence in School
RUNNING HEAD: PERCEPTIONS REGARDING VIOLENCE IN SCHOOL
Paper presented at the European Conference on Educational Research, University of Crete, 22-25 September 2004
Student, Teacher, and Parent Perceptions Regarding Violence In School: A Qualitative Investigation
Zeynep Sumer
and
Evrim Cetinkaya
Middle East Technical University
Abstract
The purpose of this study was twofold: a) to investigate the students’, teachers’, and parents’ perceptions regarding school violence in a low income urban school in Ankara, Turkey, b) and to identify the needs and concerns important to participants so that appropriate school-based violence prevention program can be developed. The participants were 15 students, 7 teachers, and 8 parents from a low income urban junior high school in Ankara. A case study approach utilizing focus groups was implemented to explore participants’ conceptualization of school violence, and perceptions of risk factors for school violence. In general, the results of this study support the view that youths’ violence is of concern to students, teachers, and parents in a low-income urban area in Turkey. Moreover, participants mentioned several kinds of aggressive and violent behaviors that occur often in their schools including fighting, beating, bullying, verbally and physically threatening others, and vandalism. Gang involvement, poor parental supervision, school staff victimization of students, and location of school were perceived as contributing factors to school violence.
Student, Teacher, and Parent Perceptions Regarding Violence In School: A Qualitative Investigation
Schools, where children learn life, should be a safe place. Since feeling safe is essential to children’s healthy learning and development, identifying violent incidents and reducing them should be of primary concern to educators, parents, and also to researchers.
School violence, a form of violence, includes a full range of aggressive and antisocial behaviors (Kellam, Prinz, & Shele, 2000; as cited in Pleasents, 2002, p.10) such as verbal and emotional abuse, direct and indirect threats, theft and destruction of property, sexual harassment, mild and severe physical assault, the threat with and the use of all weapons that threaten and harm children or youth emotionally and physically (Benbenishty, Astor, Zeira, & Vinokur, 2002, p. 72).
A growing body of research focusing on the prevalence of violence among school-age youth has indicated that school violence has been steadily increasing across the world (e.g., Boulter, 2004; O’Donoghue, 1995; Srebalus & Schwartz, 1996). Hence, increased funding of research to identify the causes of youth violence to support development, implementation, and evaluation of prevention and intervention programs has become observed in many countries (Boulter, 2004).
Although youth violence in schools is a worldwide concern, and is becoming an increasingly important social policy issue (Boulter, 2004), as a research topic, school violence has neither neglected nor gained the necessary attention in Turkey (Sumer Hatipoglu & Aydin, 1999). Few empirical studies and anecdotal media reports suggest that school violence has also been increasing in Turkey, especially in metropolitan areas. For instance data obtained from 27 cities’ security units have shown that youths’ and children’s (between the age of 7-18) arrest rates were high in metropolitan areas. Stealing, wounding, threatening, using force, and homicide were the most frequently committed crimes among school age population (T.R. Security Dept., 1998). According to 2001 Judicial Statistics by residence, 91.5% of the juveniles received into security units were from urban areas (Judicial Statistics, 2001). Furthermore, overall arrest rates for violent crimes by children and youths between the ages of 11 and 15 rose sharply from 1994 to 2003. Despite this evidence indicates the seriousness of violent crimes among school age population in Turkey, no study exists that directly provides data regarding the proportion of incidence happened in schools.
The strongest risk factor for school violence has been difficult to identify. Empirical studies in this vein have demonstrated a wide range of risk factors that contribute to violence in schools. Social withdrawal, peer rejection, poor academic performance (as cited in Rollin, Kaiser-Ulrey, Potts, & Creason, 2003), being a victim of violence by school staff (Benbenishty, Astor, Zeira, & Vinokur, 2002), poor parent-teacher communication (Kandakai, Price, Telljohann, & Wilson, 1999), SES, psychological factors such as impulsivity, empathy, locus of control (Dykeman, Daehlin, Doyle, & Flamer, 1996), have been cited as risk factors in the literature. The review of paucity of Turkish studies also suggests that parenting style (Hatunoglu, 1994), domestic violence, poverty, parents violence, popularity and power gained as a result of violence acts (Yerin-Guneri & Cakir, 2003) were the factors that contribute to school violence in elementary and high schools in Turkey.
As indicated above, the risk factors for school violence are not one-dimensional and static. Individual, family, school, peer group, and community seem to be the general categories for the factors (“Youth Violence: A Report” 2004). Furthermore, preventive interventions aimed at reducing school violence seem to be more effective by simultaneously addressing these dimensions (Tolan & Guerra, 1994, as cited in Hunt et al., 2002).
The review of literature reveals that in order to develop effective and comprehensive intervention programs, understanding the perceptions of violence held by members of relevant environments seems essential. Thus, a vital component of violence prevention efforts in schools is to conduct a needs assessment to obtain the perceptions about violence from students, parents, and teachers. Therefore, the purpose of this study was two fold: a) to investigate the students’, teachers’, and parents’ perceptions about the school violence in a low income urban school in Ankara, Turkey, b) and to identify the needs and concerns important to participants so that appropriate school-based violence prevention program can be developed.
Method
Participants
The participants in this study were 15 students (8 female, 7 male), 7 teachers (5 female, 2 male), and 8 mothers from a low income urban junior high school in Ankara, Turkey. Reported high rates of violence, and gang activities in the school and in the community were used as criteria for the selection of the school.
In the sample selection, academic classifications and gender representations were concerned. Three students were from 6th grade, 7 students were from 7th, and 5 students were from 8th grade. Teachers’ year of experience ranged from 16 months to 23 years. In the parent sample, 3 mothers reported that they completed elementary school, 3 had junior high school, and 2 had high school level of education.
Data Collection Instrument
Data were collected by conducting three separate focus group interviews. Interview questions were developed by the researchers through literature review, and examination of previously developed questionnaires. Experts’ opinions were obtained for the interview schedules. Interview schedules included the following questions:
• How do you define school violence?
• What factors contribute to school violence?
• Have you experienced violence in school? If so, how did school administrators, teachers, and parents respond to youths involved in violence?
• What preventive measures have been taken to help victims or to deal with perpetrators in your school?
• What do you think administrators, teachers, school counselors, and parents should do to deal with or prevent school violence?
Procedure:
A case study approach utilizing focus groups was implemented to explore participants’ conceptualization of school violence and perceptions of risk factors for school violence. Each group participated in a guided interview that lasted approximately 2 hours. In order to understand the school violence and factors influencing school violence, 5 open-ended questions were included in the interview schedule. Each focus group was led by the researchers. The focus groups were audiotaped for transcription purposes. The tapes were transcribed and analyzed to identify and categorize the emergent themes in participants’ responses.
Results
Definition of school violence
Students, teachers, and parents revealed that violence had several directions in their school. Violence employed by school staff to student, student to student, student to school staff in particular, student to teacher or to teacher’s child, and parents to students were frequently observed. All participants conceptualized violence in three forms as verbal, physical, and emotional. Verbal violence was defined by the participants as cruel teasing, harsh language, and verbal intimidation. Fighting, beating, spanking, bullying, especially larger students’ pushing/hitting smaller or weaker student, vandalism, and gang activity in school environment were comprised of physical violence. The last one, emotional violence was defined by the participants as threatening students to motivate in school task, or comparing with other students and/or siblings, or unequal treatment of girls (gender discrimination) that were mostly employed by parents.
Factors contribute to school violence
All three group of participants disclosed several factors that can be grouped under four main titles; individual factors, family factors, school factors, and community-environmental factors.
Individual factors: Gender differences were mentioned by all the participants. In particular, boys continued to be observed as employing more physical violence whereas girls employing more verbal violence. Achievement, lack of motivation to be successful, and lack of interest regarding extra-curricular activities were another theme that can be included under the individual factors. Not possessing effective problem-solving skills and lack of communication skills were mentioned as contributors to school violence. Besides, low self-esteem and lack of confidence, feeling worthless seemed to promote involving violent acts in schools. Moreover, participants indicated that introverted and silent students who can not defend themselves became the victims of school violence.
Family factors: Most of the participants indicated the influence of child rearing practices on violent acts. Specifically, the extreme parenting styles such as uninvolved- neglecting or poor parental supervision, and overly involved parents seemed to foster the perpetrators. Participants reported that limited support and supervision along with lack of communication among family members seemed to be link to involving violent acts in school. Some participants also discussed the role of domestic violence (parental verbal, emotional, and physical abuse), and alchohol or substance abuse among family members (especially fathers).
School factors: School staff victimization, particularly teacher employed violence was emerged as a concern for all participant groups. Probes indicated that emotional, verbal, and even physical violence of teachers directed to students were observed by most of the student participants. Teacher participants tended to justify using corporal punishment. For example, they stated that as the recent school discipline regulation was not enough to prevent students’ misconduct, corporal punishment was the only tool to deal effectively with the “trouble-makers” in the class. Another factor that participants identified was ineffective classroom management skills of teachers. Most of the teacher and student participants emphasized that crowded classes semmed to hinder having effective communication with students. Additionally, participants indicated that administrators also employed corporal punishment such as, beating and insulting. In some cases, participants observed that school principals and administrators tended to tolerate violence employed by teachers.
The last factor that participants identified was community- environmental factors. Peer influence was reported by all the participants. According to participants, involving in a gang activity could be the result of peer pressure or a sort of coping style to deal with peer pressure. Location of the school or violence around school, and physical conditions of the schools might also associated with the violence. Specifically, participants emphasized that after the implementation of eight-years compulsory education in Turkey, elementary and junior high school students have started to share the same school yard and playground. Hence, this situation might increase the victimization of young students by the older ones. Another theme that reported by the participants was the culture that encourages the use of violence. Participants, especially, teachers and mothers stated that use of harsh language was part of regular daily life of boys and girls in that province. Finally, participants was also emphasized that being too much exposed to TV/media violence might desensitized the students toward violence.
Exposure of violence in school: School administrators, teachers, and parents responses to youths involved in violence
The following issues emerged when the participants were asked about their experiences related to school violence. Almost all students reported that they had experience at least one form of violence (physical, verbal, emotional) in school. Mostly verbal violence employed by other students and teachers was reported. Four students (out of 15) revealed that they had been beaten by gang members, and 2 students had been beaten by their teachers.
Teachers are often the staff that seem to be directly involved in violent actions. Student participants reported that when they faced with violent behaviors, their teachers warned, threatened, and emloyed corporal punishment to deal with perpetrators. In addition, teachers prefered to send perpetrators to school principal’s office. Similarly, administrators used physical punishment and/or sent perpetrators to other schools. Victims prefered to be either silent or get help from others, especially from teachers, elder brothers, counselors, administrators, and police officers. When victims could not cope with the situation they requested transfer to another school. In our sample 2 students have experienced this.
Parents were more tolerant to teachers’ verbal violence. When teachers employed physical violence to students, parents refrained from getting help from school staff. When children exposed to violence employed by other students, parents prefered to get help from school counselors, teachers, and/or administrators. For instance, they may request a meeting with perpetrator’s parents in the school.
Preventive measures taken to help victims or to deal with perpetrators
When participants were asked about the preventive measures that have been taken to help victims or to deal with perpetrators in their school, they revealed that there was no school based violence prevention program. Only school counseling service has provided counseling to at-risk students. In that school, counselors and teachers were act as mediators and tried to facilitate communication between student-teacher, student-student, and administrator-student groups when faced with violent events.
Suggestions to prevent school violence
When participants were asked about the suggestions in order to prevent school violence, almost all participants suggested that developing and implementing a school-based and culturally appropriate violence prevention program by considering the needs and priorities of the school. They also added that school-parent collaboration should be provided in dealing with school violence, such as establishing a School Parent Association. In addition, parents, especially fathers should be trained to equipped with effective communication skills. Paralell with this view, another suggestion was providing pre-service and in-service teacher training regarding effective classroom-management skills. Thus, educators may learn to build more individual and caring relationships with their students. Furthermore, group guidance and counseling activities should be revised to deal with perpetrators and victims effectively. Finally, extra-curricular activities in the school should be provided to students.