Violence in Public Schools the Recent Violence

Violence in Public Schools

The recent violence on school grounds (including elementary, middle school and high school violence) has created a climate of fear in American public schools, and the literature presented in this review relates to that fear and to the difficulty schools face in determining what students might be capable of mass killings on campus. Television coverage of school shootings leave the impression that there is more violence on school campuses than there really is, but the threat is real, students are being killed, and the background into how and why these murders take place is a main point of this paper. Moreover, the acts of violence at schools create perceptions that may or may not be valid, and that issue is part of this literature review as well.

Perceptions of School Violence

Why do Americans have the perception that schools are places where violence takes place on a regular basis -- when that is not truly the case? A scholarly article in the peer-reviewed journal The Clearing House points to the fact that when there are highly publicized acts of brutal violence at schools, because of the bold, up-close-and-personal video reports on television sets across the nations, the rare acts of violence stick in the minds of Americans. The article explains that there are upwards of 55 million students attending public schools in the United States today, including from kindergarten through 12th grade (Algozzine, et al., 2011), and obviously not all schools are places where killings take place. And moreover, "…reports of school crime and violence" from administrators, students, and teachers "…differ in severity and in nature from what is perceived" by the greater society (Algozzine, 91). The salient point this paper presents is that Americans perceive that schools (per se) are not safe, Algozzine explains (91).

The authors research existing studies of administrators, teachers, and students, to tap into their perceptions of exactly how much violence they witness or personally experience in public schools. A credible survey by several authors (Sprague, Smith, and Steiber, 2002) points out that principals in public schools "…perceived schools to be safe" (Algozzine, 92). Administrators reported that up to 80% of their problems (discipline referrals) result from "…ineffective classroom management on the part of teachers" (Algozzine, 92).

As for teachers, a recent study (Smith and Smith, 2006) reflects that their "…perceptions of violence…influenced their decision to leave" and go to schools that are less chaotic; the abuses teachers reported include drugs and weapons in schools and teachers also leave because of their perception that community violence had "…seeped into the school" and hence, it was time to leave (Algozzine, 92). Meanwhile, studies involving middle school students show they are not as concerned about gun violence as they are about bullying and being "…victimized at school" (Algozzine, 93). Research conducted by Hughes, Middleton, and Marshall (2009) reflects that about 15% of students surveyed "…reported being bullied often or daily" and that girls were more frightened of bullying than boys and younger students were more concerned about bullying than older students (Algozzine, 93).

Parents' concerns and perceptions were along the same lines as the teachers' perceptions; parents that stay in touch with teachers and listen to teachers' issues, know that the main interfering actions that disrupt schools aren't killings and shootings. Rather, according to Ashford (2001) parents understand that 80% of all problems teachers deal with are "nonviolent infractions" of rules (profanity, disruptive behavior, tardiness, etc.); the other 20% generally involves bullying (Algozzine, 93).

School Violence from Students' Perceptions

Author John Chapin has conducted research on youthful perceptions of school violence in the peer-reviewed journal Adolescence, and he reports that adolescents have misperceptions about the actual risks associated with being in school. Because children are "…bombarded daily by a broad array of violent messages in the media" (including shootings at schools and crime dramas on television), they are in fact receiving "mixed messages" and hence are left to decide "…what is accurate, what is real, and what it all means" (Chapin, 2008, 461).

Chapin discovered (through "multiple studies") that many students have an "optimistic bias" -- they believe they are "less vulnerable" than others are to "health risks" -- and they operate intellectually from a "third-person perception" (meaning they are less susceptible to violent media portrayals than the average person) (462). Chapin conducted a study involving 350 students in urban Pennsylvania (60% female and 80% Caucasian); these students participated in one-day "violence awareness" sessions and were asked to complete a survey following the sessions. One, they were asked to relate the degree to which they are influenced by violence in the media (third person perceptions); and two, "optimistic bias" was measured by asking, "Compared to other schools in the U.S. The chances of violence happening in my school are (-3 meant much less and +3 meant much greater) (Chapin, 465).

From the data collected, Chapin posits that students who believed they were "…less influenced than were others by media violence" also believed that "violence was not likely to happen in their school" (Chapin, 466). And students that had prior knowledge of school violence were associated in the survey results with "decreased levels of third-person perception, but not for optimistic bias" (Chapin, 467).

School Violence from Teachers' Perceptions

Why do some teachers leave schools that are located in urban settings? Because they believed there is an important "research gap" in data about why urban teachers leave their positions in inner city schools, Deborah Smith and Brian Smith researched that issue by interviewing twelve former urban educators (Smith, et al., 2006, 34). As background the authors point out that "…because of inferior working conditions" in low income neighborhoods the average public school teacher leaves after three to five years (Smith, 35). In fact, during any five-year period in an inner city school "…approximately one-half of the urban teaching force leaves the profession" (Smith, 34). It comes as no surprise that among the reasons inner city teachers abandon their schools (or their profession entirely) violence is at the top of the list.

But that having been said, the sum and substance vis-a-vis perceptions of violence is that some new urban teachers "…misinterpret students' actions as deviant" and as a result those teachers "treat [minority students] punitively" and tend to lower "expectations" as to how capable minority students are (Smith, 35). As to why the dozen teachers interviewed had left the inner city schools, "…ten of the twelve respondents" reported it was the "stress" that builds up at the very thought of potential violence, and is later manifest in actual fights witnessed by teachers on the school grounds that escalate into racial conflicts in their classrooms (Smith, 38). Whether factual or not, the majority of the 12 teachers surveyed viewed "…the students' social worlds as being violent and drug-ridden" (Smith, 40).

School Violence in Context - Victimization

In their book School Violence in Context, authors Rami Benbenishty and Ron Avi Astor explain that school violence relates in a very real way to "victimization" -- and not just to shootings and/or physical combat between students. Victimization takes many forms, and researchers are aware of these forms: "verbal harm; physical harm; sexual harassment; threats (think bullying); and weapon-related threatening and violent behaviors" (Benbenishty, et al., 2005, 9).

A positive school climate has a better chance to reduce victimization than a negative school climate, Benbenishty explains (11). In fact the more negative a school is -- and negativity in schools is described as those schools that are "less focused academically" -- the more the problem of bullying is usually present. Schools with large class sizes are also known to be conducive to students being victimized, Benbenishty continues (12). The authors run through a list of students that are particularly vulnerable to bullying, and those are: a) younger students; b) smaller students (that are shorter and perceived as weaker); c) students perceived as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transsexual (LGBT); d) a student that lacks "emotional support" from parents may become a bully; and e) and parents living in "socially toxic neighborhoods" who teach their kids to be aggressive and defiant -- those children are more likely to be bullies (Benbenishty, 16). School Violence -- Bullying

Is bullying an activity that is always learned in school? In some cases that might be true but in general, students learn bullying at home, according to Bully Busters, a teacher's manual published in 2003. Students may well learn to push and shove at home, and by the time they enter school they bring "…their aggressive means of interacting with them" (Horne, et al., 2003, 68).

Horne points out that most children report having experienced bullying "…at some point during their school years," in fact about 70% of students say they have been bullied (Horne, 68). A survey of 1,200 students from 85 schools reflected that 98% had witnessed bullying in their schools; of those 1,200 students, 40% indicated they had been bullied (Horne, 68). The authors assert that "…as many as 160 thousand children" stay home from school on any particular day "…because of fear" (Horne, 68).

A child's normal development can be hindered when the child is bullied -- and that hindrance can carry into adulthood, Horne explains; in fact early childhood bullying can become a "risk factor for adolescents' suicidal behavior" (68). And teachers in elementary school can usually identify a student who will later "…exhibit delinquency and criminal behavior" that is true because elementary school bullies often grow into offenders during their adolescent and young adult years (Horne, 68).

School Violence -- Forms of Bullying

Dorothy Espelage and Susan Swearer edited a book titled Bullying in North American Schools (Second Edition); they define bullying as a "complex phenomenon," deserving of being linked with school violence (Espelage, et al., 2004, 3). Research on bullying indicates that it is a "discriminatory behavior" which includes "physical and verbal behavior within an affective framework (i.e., the intent to harm) (Olweus, 1993; Swearer, Espelage, Vailliancourt, & Hymel, 2010).

Within the concept of bullying there are a set of "…antecedents, behaviors, and consequences," Espelage explains (3). Why do young people bully? The reasons are "complex, multiply-determined, and differently reinforced," Espelage writes. Moreover bullying is a serious problem, and not just because it creates fear and it causes a bullied person to be intimidated. Rather, bullying is a very serious health issue because neuroscientists have reported that being bullied "…causes significant social pain, which, over time, alters brain functioning" (5).

School Violence -- Bullying by Girls

Much of the literature on bullying involves the bad behavior of boys, but while girls are "less likely than boys to endorse bullying, and especially physical aggression," girls do in fact participate in bullying (Pellegrini, et al., 2004, 94). Girls are known to engage in what is called "relational or indirect aggression," which involves attacking opponents' "social relationships," Pellegrini explains (94).

Typically, a bullying girl in this context would say something mean, untrue or simply nasty about another person to a third party. The intent is to damage the reputation of a person's social standing. For example, something untrue and ugly is said about girl "B" to girl "C," and once "C" has heard it, that mean-spirited remark may well travel around the school and whether others believe it or not the vicious, scurrilous remark has its intended affect (to embarrass girl "B") (Pellegrini, 94). Hence, girl "B" has to be defensive in her denial of the aspersion that has been launched at her.

Pellegrini goes on to explain that female groups are not usually organized according to "…dominance strategies in the same sense as boys' groups (Maccoby, 1998) (94). Girls rely instead on "indirect aggression" (the opposite of boys, who usually confront their victim directly) which Pellegrini indicates follows along with Darwin's sexual selection theory. The author also suggests that unlike boys, girls are aggressive in indirect ways, which "…minimized direct confrontation and possible harm"; moreover, it is suggested that girls use relational aggression to build female coalitions and alliances "…against rival girls so as to attain social goals" (Pellegrini, 94).

School Violence -- Bullying in Preschool

Laura Hanish and colleagues explain that bullying begins in preschool, which is not a well-known fact in the literature. In fact "…peer-directed aggression has been observed in infants as young as 12 months of age" (Hanish, 2004, 133). And by the time children reach preschool age, peer-directed aggression is quite common," Hanish continues (133). It may come as a surprise to many observers but verbally aggressive behaviors "…peak in frequency during early childhood" and decline in subsequent years; hence bullying and pushy behaviors in general are noticed by young children (in terms of frequency) more often than at any other age.

Twenty percent of kindergartners have reported being "victimized frequently by peers, rates that are considerably higher than those that are typically reported for older youth," Hanish explains (133). Moreover there is a strong "propensity" to be aggressive and to be aggressed against for children at the preschool age (Hanish, 134). That said, the authors point to the fact that there are "significant individual differences" in the level of aggressive behaviors that very young children exhibit; when a preschooler is aggressive often, several times a day, he or she may be trying to express "…a constellation of externalizing problems" (134). Those problems could entail anger that is not well "regulated"; they could mean the child is simply being "oppositional" by demonstrating "disruptive behavior" (Hanish, 134).

School Violence -- Depressed Adolescents are Bullies & Bullied

The data presented by Susan Swearer in her essay shows that because young people suffering from depression tend to experience problems in their relationships with peers, they also tend to become disinterested in activities that other young people are engaged with. The depression also can be accompanied with "…distorted thinking and poor problem-solving skills" (Swearer, 2004, 46). Moreover, the depressed child (up to 7% of adolescents suffer from depression) may suffer from insomnia, fatigue, psychomotor agitation, and suicidal ideation (Swearer, 46).

Given those problems, the depressed adolescent is a candidate for being bullied. This brings in another aspect of violence in schools. According to Swearer's research (Kumpulainen and colleagues 2001) those depressed adolescents that are bullied aren't the only ones suffering from depression; 18% of bully-victims, 13% of bullies, and 10% of victims have been diagnosed with "a depressive disorder" (Swearer, 46). Taking those data a bit further, an analysis of school shootings in the past thirty years reflect the fact that "…79% of the attackers had a history of suicide attempts or suicidal thoughts" (Swearer, 46). And 61% of school shooters had a history of "serious depression" (Vossekuil, Fein, Reddy, Borum, & Modzeleski, 2002) (Swearer, 46).

Violence in Schools -- Weapons Have Been a Problem for Years

The National School Safety Center (NSSC) published a report in 1993 that documented the number of and kinds of weapons students were bringing to high school twenty years ago. The report, presented by Pepperdine University, offers an eerie foreshadowing to the September 11 terrorist attack on New York and Washington. The authors point out that guns and knives are not the only weapons students are bringing to schools. Security personnel in the New York City Public Schools report that in 1993, "…the weapon of choice is currently the box cutter, a small razor blade used by grocery handlers to cut open boxes" (NSCC). Plastic box cutters of course were used to subdue airline personnel in order for the hijackers to take over commercial airliners on 9/11.

The American educational scene twenty years ago was certainly not safe for the average student to attend classes. The NSSC reports that "…as many as 90,000 to 100,000 students carry a gun to school every day." Subsequent to the early 1990s, many high schools have installed metal detectors to prevent weapons from coming into schools, but as some of the recent shootings have shown, if a student has an assault rifle that bursts forth with numerous rounds in a few seconds, he or she can blast their way into a school and there is little to stop them.

Another author that reports the violence in schools in the early 1990s is Denise Bonilla; in her book, School Violence, she asserts that "Children have long killed children in the United States" (Bonilla, 2000, 71). The peak was reached as far as numbers of students killed in the 1992-93 school year, Bonilla reports; "nearly 50 people will killed in school-related violence" (71). The rash of shootings in 1992-93 prompted the U.S. Congress to pass a law banning weapons in schools, Bonilla explains. The author also points out how the killings in schools have changed; that is, many earlier killings in schools were gang-related, or involved "a fight over a girlfriend" (72).

But the shootings have changed in terms of targets; the victims, tragically, have become "…anyone who happened to be in the way" (Bonilla, 73). The shootings at a middle school in Moses Lake, Washington in February 1996, for example, involved a boy (Barry Loukaitis confessed to the shootings) who walked into an algebra class and shot a popular boy "who had teased him" (Bonilla, 72). But then Loukaitis began shooting at students at random and ended up shooting the teacher, Leona Caires, "…in the back. She died with an eraser still in her hand" (Bonilla, 72). Asked later why he continued shooting after he had killed his intended target, Loukaitis said, "I don't know, I guess reflex took over" (Bonilla, 72).

Violence in Schools -- Shooters

According to author Marcel Lebrun, looking at previous school shootings researchers can see some "common patterns" (Lebrun, 2009, 71). One common pattern is that youths that were bullied in their younger years, who were "isolated, harassed, threatened and made to feel secondary" make up the great majority of shooters in schools (Lebrun, 71). Those shooters that were bullied were "…unable to free themselves from victimization"; the only way they could respond is to "…fight back and show others that they were someone in life" (Lebrun, 71).

Shooters sometimes do what they do to become famous, Lebrun continues, and while they are more apt to become "infamous" they are seen through the media as being "monsters" that are "full of hate and anger" (71). It almost always goes back to the days when the shooter was bullied; first, he has thoughts and "fantasies" about somehow exacting revenge on those who tormented him (Lebrun, 72). Next, he moves into the actual planning process for his bloody revenge. There is usually a "trigger" (which may be the abuse he received from other adolescents) or something else sets him off, and his plan becomes real. It might be a failing grade, or someone bullies him, but something triggers his passion to kill students in some form.

Suicide is part of the plan because he knows "…he will bring shame to his family and that he will be forever hated" by townspeople, parents and students, Lebrun explains on page 73. After all, why not commit suicide because jail / prison is a miserable way to live and if he lives after the shooting of students, he will certainly be victimized while in prison, Lebrun continues. Hence, why get revenge for becoming a victim, why lash out at everyone through a violent spree, then be arrested and thrown in prison and become a victim all over again? He doesn't see the logic to that and so he marches ahead with his homicidal plan.

While most shooters take their own lives after their deadly deeds, very few leave an explanation as to why they did such a dastardly deed. But those shooters who did leave a note or a letter explaining their rage reflect some common themes, Lebrun explains. They were "unfairly treated by someone," or they have felt "hopeless or helpless" to change the way things have been going in their lives (Lebrun, 75). They have not been loved and not been accepted either. That lack of "connectivity" tends to be a motivating factor; if the shooter doesn't care about people and isn't connected to anyone, that makes it easier "…to kill them"; it is much easier to kill someone to whom you have no emotional connection," Lebrun asserts (76).

Killing people you have no link to is like "…disposing of unwanted garbage" in that person's mind; why care about someone when no one cares about you (Lebrun, 76).

School Violence -- Identifying School Shooters

School shooters are not easily identified; if they were of course there would be fewer ghastly scenes of students murdered in their own classrooms. The shooters who attack schools and students tend to "…remain off the radar screen" simply because their behaviors are not such that "…alert schools to their potential for violent behavior" (Newman, 2004, 104). The recent history of shootings in schools leads investigators and scholars to report that typically a school shooter does not cause enormous discipline problems, or, as Newman writes, "They are not jamming the gears" or making life miserable for teachers and administrators (104).

Teachers do not always report strange discipline problems to authorities and in fact teachers "…keep the information to themselves much of the time"; hence, the information tends to "…get lost," and the result is "…seriously troubled kids go unnoticed" (Newman, 104). In addition, in interviews with school counselors and therapists, those professionals note the reluctance of some teachers to allow a student to leave class and visit with a counselor. "The pressures teachers face to boost their students' scores" is part of the problem, Newman continues (106).