I got this helpful and informative list from BullyingUK:
Signs to watch out for… You may be unsure if your child is being bullied. If you suspect that he or she is then look out for signs of bullying.
They may include the following:
bruises
broken or missing possessions
your child is withdrawn
changes in eating habits
sleeping badly
complaints of headaches or stomach aches
bedwetting
worrying about going to school.
But there could be other reasons for these symptoms, so try to avoid jumping to conclusions. Ask yourself the following questions:
Is there anything else bothering your child?
Have there been changes in your family like a new baby, or divorce or separation?
These are signs that both teachers and parents must learn to detect and follow-up on. A child can turn from open and honest about things that are bothering them, to closed and insular very quickly. The best course of action is to take an interest, be supportive and when the symptoms are there, be proactive.
Even though I am not in favour of children bringing mobile phones inside the classroom, I am not in the least bit sympathetic when teachers get caught out as a result of being covertly filmed by students.
With a phone camera, a special-needs student in New Jersey managed to turn the tables on a teacher who had been bullying him.
US-based ABCNews.com quoted the school district superintendent as saying teacher Steven Roth now faces disciplinary action for his actions.
The ABCNews.com report said Roth was heard on the recording calling the 15-year-old student a “tard” and saying, “I will kick your a** from here to kingdom come.”
The ABCNews.com report said that when the boy, who has ADHD and emotional issues, first told his parents about Roth’s bullying, they were skeptical.
But eventually, his father gave him permission to take his cell phone to school and record the bullying – and the boy did that last Oct. 24.
On the video, which lasted nearly 10 minutes, the boy had asked the teacher several times to stop calling him “special,” provoking an outburst from Roth.
The ABCNews.com story said the video also showed Roth to appear to use physical intimidation, walking up to the boy and standing directly in front of him.
The boy’s mother said she was appalled after watching the video. “I’m just appalled. I’m sickened and appalled,” she said.
Roth has been at the school for eight years, according to the boy’s mother.
“Teachers are supposed to build students up and build their self esteem, not rip it down. You don’t scream at them … degrade and threaten,” she added.
Mr. Roth may feel set-up or unlucky that he was undone by a child contravening school rules. I think, by the sound of it, he’s lucky it took so long for him to be exposed in the first place.
A recent study into bullying may have fond that online bullying isn’t as prevalent as regular bullying, but it is still early days.
A new study entitled Teens, Kindness and Cruelty on Social Networks confirms much of what we already know about cyberbullying. Most kids aren’t bullied and most kids don’t bully either online or off.
In fact, the study–conducted by the Pew Internet & American Life Project for the Family Online Safety Institute and Cable in the Classroom–concluded that “[m]ost American teens who use social media say that in their experience, people their age are mostly kind to one another on social network sites.” Nearly seven in ten (69 percent) of teens said that peers are mostly kind while 20 percent said peers are mostly unkind with 11 percent saying, “it depends.”
Fifteen percent of teens say they have been the “target of online meanness.” When you include in-person encounters, 19 percent say they’ve been “bullied” in the past year.
These numbers track very closely with previous scientific surveys on bullying and cyberbullying. The largest source of bullying (12 percent) was in person, followed by text messaging (9 percent). Eight percent said they had been bullied via email, a social networking site or instant messaging and 7 percent were bullied via voice calls on the phone. Girls are more likely to have experienced what we typically call “cyberbullying,” while boys and girls are roughly equal when it comes to in person bullying.
Online bullying may be less prevalent but it is arguably more damaging. It is generally accepted that since online bullying invades the victim’s home (traditionally a place of comfort and safety), it has a much more powerful effect. Another reason that online bullying is potentially more oppressive is that there can be many more bystanders and participants online. Facebook bullying can be shared between hundreds rather than just handful of kids in the schoolyard.
And let’s not kid ourselves. Bullies don’t discriminate between mediums. A bully doesn’t throw their weight around in person and then become an angel online. Bullying is bullying, no matter what the medium. The experts are telling us online bullying is not the major form of bullying that some believe it to be.
You know you’ve messed up completely when the father of the child you’ve named your legislation after publicly denounces it.
The legislation, called “Matt’s Safe School Law,” was named after Matt Epling, an honor-roll student who killed himself at the age of 14 in 2002 after being assaulted by anti-gay bullies at his school.
The draft law, which passed the state Senate with 26 Republican votes against 11 Democratic votes and now advances to the lower house, includes language inserted before the vote that says the bill “does not prohibit a statement of a sincerely held belief or moral conviction” of a student or school worker.
Activists say that the provision gives bullies license to prey on other students — especially those who are gay, lesbian or transgender — and, at least as important, gives bystanders who should be trying to stop bullying an excuse not to intervene.
The real story here is not the amendment which undermines the whole essence of the legislation, but it is the value of the legislation to begin with. The essence of this legislation is to “push each school district in the state to write their own anti-bullying policy.” Australian schools have been mandated for some time to have their own anti-bullying policies. These policies are wonderful at preventing schools from being targets of litigation. They can simply point to their vague and fickle policy and ward off most lawsuits. But when it comes to its ability to prevent bullying behaviours it has been completely useless.
Bullying legislation has never and will never have a marked impact on bullies and bullying behaviour.
In the name of Matt Epling and all others who have been subjected to malicious bouts of bullying, stop pretending to do something and actually devise something that actually works!
Unfortunately, teachers and Facebook aren’t always a match made in heaven. Whilst the vast majority of teachers on Facebook are responsible and mature enough to stay out of trouble, there’s always a news story popping up about tasteless comments a teacher made against students or minority groups. This month it is Viki Knox, a Special Education teacher who was rightly condemned for her anti-gay comments on Facebook.
The media storm resulting from the Knox case and others like it serve as a timely reminder to teachers on Facebook that they must be extremely careful not to offend (something which shouldn’t be hard to do).
More than one in seven teachers has been the victim of cyberbullying by pupils or parents, and almost half know a colleague who has been targeted, according to a survey published today.
Students have set up “hate” groups on social networking sites calling for specific teachers to be sacked and have even created fake profiles in their names containing defamatory information.
Schools must make clear to pupils that such behaviour will lead to punishment, the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) said.
Schools seem to be increasingly soft on parents that bully teachers. Turning a blind-eye to Facebook campaigns and insulting comments against teachers is not acceptable. Teachers so often feel isolated and powerless against taunts from parents.
Who do they turn to for support?
When schools claim to have a “zero tolerance for bullying”, they ought to include bullying of teachers by parents. Any parent caught bullying a teacher online should be subjected to the same penalty as a teacher. They should be told to take their child and find another school.
If you think that’s harsh, try being a bullied teacher. I’m glad I’ve never been bullied, because I guarantee you, it’s not easy!
Today, my blog Topical Teaching, celebrates its very first birthday.
In the past 12 months I have witnessed probably the most difficult period for teachers in recent memory. From layoffs, to debates over tenure vs skilled teachers, it has been a period of great uncertainty. Teachers are facing great negativity by those that are looking for an easy target to blame.
Whilst there are a premium of poor teachers out there, there are also brilliant teachers in great supply. Teachers are not to blame for the state of our education system. There are other stakeholders that must lift their game as well.
In the past year the Facebook phenomenon has uncovered a potential danger for teachers. It is clear that teachers on Facebook must be extra careful to avoid controversy, as some have made very poor judgement calls that have cost them dearly in the end.
Teachers are also faced with an ever-growing bullying problem. From the classroom to cyberbullying, teachers have the important task of limiting incidences of bullying as best they can.
The rigours of standardised testing has also been a hot topic throughout the year. From cheating scandals to stressed out teachers the blasted tests are here to stay and the question is, are our students better for it?
Thank you to those of you who clicked on and contributed to my blog. I have really enjoyed sharing ideas and interacting with you. A special thank you to regular contributors, Margaret, Carl and Anthony for their loyalty and insight.
I hope, as I continue writing this blog, teachers get the break they so richly deserve. Teaching is a profession that attracts people who want to make a difference. We aren’t in it for the money or prestige, just the opportunity to help the students of today become the role models of tomorrow.
It is my belief that cyber-bullying is often based on “dominance” and “popularity” rather than “hate”. I don’t think most cyberbullies hate their victims. Instead, I think they see them as stepping-stones to wider acceptance from their peer group. Often the victims are minorities or outcasts. The pressure to be in the “in group” has always been high. For an “in group” to exist there needs to be a clearly defined “out group”. It is often seen as a sort of right of passage for someone seeking popularity to kick the easy target.
A new study commissioned by CNN’s “Anderson Cooper 360°” found that the stereotype of the schoolyard bully preying on the weak doesn’t reflect reality in schools.
Instead, the research shows that many students are involved in “social combat” — a constant verbal, physical and cyber fight to the top of the school social hierarchy.
“Kids are caught up in patterns of cruelty and aggression that have to do with jockeying for status,” explains Robert Faris, a sociologist whom “Anderson Cooper 360°” partnered with for the pilot study. “It’s really not the kids that are psychologically troubled, who are on the margins or the fringes of the school’s social life. It’s the kids right in the middle, at the heart of things … often, typically highly, well-liked popular kids who are engaging in these behaviors.”
Faris, along with the co-author of the study, Diane Felmlee, also found that bullies, whom they call aggressors, and victims are not defined roles, but in many cases, they can be the same person. The higher students rise on the social ladder, the more they bully other students, and the more other students bully them.
“When kids increase in their status, on average, they tend to have a higher risk of victimization as well as a higher risk of becoming aggressive,” Faris says.
The study was conducted this spring at The Wheatley School, a nationally top-ranked high school on Long Island, New York. More than 700 students at the school were given a survey with 28 questions on aggressive behavior four separate times throughout the semester. They were also given a roster of the entire school in which every student had an identification number and kids were asked to write down specifically who did what.
This is part of the reason why I am so critical of the way bullies are handled at some schools. So often the emphasis is on the actions of the bully and not on the social environment that encourages bullying behaviour in the first place. That is why so much of my energy is devoted to changing the social fabric of my class.
After all, bullying isn’t a priority – it is THE PRIORITY. As a teacher, I am entrusted not with people’s money or belongings but with the most important and precious things they have – their children. It is my responsibility to ensure that they are safe and secure. Sure, I have to teach them and help them grow academically, but even more so, I have to do my best to make sure that the child they dropped off at my classroom is going to come back in as good if not better emotional shape than when they arrived.
When I speak to my class at the beginning of the year, I tell them there is a sure-fire way for them to have to repeat the year a second time. It’s not if they find the work difficult or are struggling to pass assessments – it’s if they are not treating their classmates with respect. Because if they are not ready to treat others with respect, they are not emotionally ready to go up a year level.
I’m not joking. I really do mean it.
There is a lot of talk about ‘child centered learning’ vs ‘teacher centered learning’. I prescribe to neither. Instead, I believe in what I call “class centred learning”. The main focus of my teaching is that everyone in the class must respect each other. It is the fundamental rule for assessing my own performance. They don’t have to be best of friends, but they absolutely must respect each other. And ultimately, it is my duty to empower the class and create an environment of closeness and mutual respect.
Does it mean that there is no bullying in my classroom? Absolutely not. I wish. I’m only an ordinary teacher. What it means is, I take more interest in the welfare of my class than any other consideration.
On the topic of bullying, I again strongly recommend (not for the last time) this most brilliant anti-bullying film developed by young students in their own free time. It is the best of its kind by a long, long way!
At present schools have been able to turn a blind-eye to cyberbullying. As the offence occurs out of school hours, schools have been only too happy to handball the problem to the parents of the bully. Whilst I believe that parents are ultimately responsible for the actions of their children, I ask that schools do more to help deal with this ongoing problem.
The reason why I feel schools should involve themselves more actively with this issue is that most cases result from pre-existing schoolyard bullying. Having started in the playground and classroom, the bullying then gets transferred online. Whilst the school isn’t liable for what goes on after school, the problem is often a result of what started during school hours.
To me, the best schools are the ones that work with the parents in a partnership for the wellbeing of their students. For a school to excel it needs to show that it cares about its students beyond its working hours. That is why a teacher or staff member that is aware of cyberbullying must be able to do more than discuss the issue with the class. They must be able to contact parents, impose sanctions and actively change the situation at hand.
We also have to understand what cyberbullying is and why kids do it.
Suicides from cyberbullying are extreme cases that draw attention. Media and government attention are creating a panic around the wrong issue. The issue isn’t so much that a child killed himself because he was cyberbullied. He did it because he was subjected to hate crime — harassment based on sexual preference, race and the like — couldn’t get it to stop, and felt hopeless, eventually leading to suicide. Thus, the attention needs to go to the source. How do you teach young people to be kind, open, or at the very least accepting of kids different from them?
If we are to ever put a stop to bullying — wherever and however it takes place — we must step back for a moment and think of what we have done for many years before “cyber” became an indelible part of our language.
I am reminded of this lesson my father taught my brothers and me as we were growing up. Like many kids do, we would say we “hated” something or someone. Perhaps it was a certain food or a person in our school. My father always reminded us not to hate by not allowing us to use the word “hate.” We could simply express our feelings by talking about what we didn’t like about a thing or agree with about a person.
As we adopted this house rule, we found ourselves talking about things and people we liked more than the things and people we didn’t like. Today I find myself sharing the same lesson with my own children. I am hearing them talk about things they like about a person or thing without mentioning hate. The lessons that strengthen tolerance begin in the home, “cyber”-connected or not.
It is my belief that cyber-bullying is often based on “dominance” and “popularity” rather than “hate”. I don’t think most cyberbullies hate their victims. Instead, I think they see them as stepping-stones to wider acceptance from their peer group. Often the victims are minorities or outcasts. The pressure to be in the “in group” has always been high. For an “in group” to exist there needs to be a clearly defined “out group”. It is often seen as a sort of right of passage for someone seeking popularity to kick the easy target.
If my theory is right, there is even more reason for schools to see cyberbullying as a problem that they have a significant share in.
Leading expert on bullying, Professor Debra Pepler of York University condemns Canada for failing to manage its rampant bullying problem. Professor Pepler’s criticisms are valid not just for Canada, but for all countries. You would think that since we have a greater understanding of the issue and Governments have pumped mega dollars in fighting the problem that we would have seen some results. Unfortunately, this is not the case:
Canada is not doing a good job of addressing bullying so it remains a major problem, says one of the country’s leading experts on the issue.
“Here we are, a country that has an international reputation of being so nice and dealing with issues of diversity, inclusion and equity, and yet at the level of children, we really aren’t doing a good job,” said Professor Debra Pepler of York University, who is also a scientist at the Hospital for Sick Children.
“We are not keeping them safe; we are not providing them with the necessary supports to learn how to live in healthy relationships,” added Pepler, a founder of PREVNet (Promoting Relationships and Eliminating Violence Network), a national network of researchers.
With the recent news of an 11-year-old Pickering boy who killed himself earlier this month — with bullying one of the many factors involved — many now wonder what more can be done.
The parents of Mitchell Wilson say their son, who suffered from muscular dystrophy, began a downward spiral of depression and anxiety following a November 2010 mugging and subsequent bullying by older students at Westcreek Public School.
It’s time schools spent less energy trying to protect themselves from lawsuits and invest more into improving its culture and ramping up the consequences for bullying infringements. Inept policies and programs may be enough to avoid legal suits but it has never come close to dealing with the problem.
Success in curbing bullying is every bit as important as academic achievement. Ultimately, both go hand in hand. You are unlikely to get a child to perform at their potential when they are being victimised and tormented.
Parents are right when they express a lack of confidence in the way bullying behaviour is being handled by schools. Schools just don’t seem to find dealing with the problem anywhere as near a priority as performing in standardised tests. Schools nowadays use simplistic and inept anti-bullying policies to point out to parents that they are proactive on the issue. In truth, all anti-bullying policies really does is protect a school from lawsuits. If policies worked the problem would’t be getting worse. But it is.
Detective Tim Toth, head of the youth services division of the City of Tonawanda Police Department is absolutely right:
“It’s great to tell the parents we have a bullying program in place, but until they take it serious and until the kids know there are consequences with what they do, the program is no good,” said Toth, who has also spent several years working at the high school as a resource officer.
I however disagree with Toth’s conclusions on cyberbullying:
“We don’t have the legal authority to intervene in a situation which exists between one child’s computer and another child’s computer when they are not being supervised when they are off school grounds,” noted Crawford. “But that doesn’t mean we don’t care…and it doesn’t mean we don’t make efforts to intervene when we can. But we need people, when we do attempt to intervene, to respond to us.”
That is a very poor response to an increasingly massive problem. Schools MUST intervene when it comes to cyberbullying. They MUST take more than a passing interest. Schools, police, parents and the wider school community must join forces to curb cyberbullying. It must be seen as a wider communal problem rather than something each and every stakeholder hides from.
Schools have got to ramp up their responses. Programs, procedures and policies is not enough. They will not work and never have. Appealing to kids to improve their communications wont work either.
Bullying hurts and sometimes kills. Surely schools have got that by now …
Topical Teaching 