My question is, has bullying become worse since schools introduced anti bullying policies?

or are we more aware of it?

Rather hypocritically the mother of the boy that did the bullying, wants the victim to apologise to her son. Unbelievable

For some reason I've not been able to get to the article.

I had hoped that school responses to bullying had changed over time, that teachers were more willing to confront it. Clearly if the claims made about the leadup to that schoolyard body slam are true the teachers involved over the years have failed in this case.

I know when I was a child that a smaller child assaulting a larger one was not treated as bullying by some. I was tall for my age and seemed to attract a stream of thugs quite a bit shorter then me with a point to prove. On a few occasions following a prolonged series of assaults I found it necessary to remove the profit from the exchange for my assalant. Not an ideal solution but the only one that seemed to be available at the time.

R0bert

thuggish behavior at schools must be dealt with before it becomes ingrained and normal behavior. Bullying is a lack of respect for another person's rights, and if that's not understood properly from an early age, then schooling may as well be given an F for all the good it's done us all.

'My question is, has bullying become worse since schools introduced anti bullying policies?'

Of Course! The first step in any anti-bullying initiative is to convince people they are being bullied.

As it ever was, bullying is part of life. You can not do anything about it as you cant protect kids 24/7. To a large degree, this is something for kids to work out in private, as a group. All part of growing up, and the separation of children from parental authority, learning their own code of ethics, and experiencing and playing with power. It's a good thing.

More emphasis should be put on the parents of bullied children, as they're the ones who have let their children down, by not equipping them with the social skills and resources to mix within the school community.

Bring on the cries of blame the victim!

I fear for any kid whose parents encourage them to be seen as a victim, setting up a life long pattern of victim-hood.

r0bert, that IS the ideal solution. It taught you independence, it taught you assertiveness, it taught you that sometimes you just have to physically defend yourself, it taught you not to let people take the piss. Would you have learned all that if your partent had had a round table discussion with the kid and both your parents, and talked and talked and you were further ostracised as a dobber in the school community?

At a recent management meeting at our local high school, I overheard one of the department heads state, "I don't give any detention, it's too confronting, sitting in the room with those you have detained".

I wonder how confronting she finds dealing with bullying in the school yard, & weather she runs the other way to avoid being confronted.

I have seen some heads over the years, who would rather ignore bullying, pretending it doesn't happen in "their" school, than try to deal with it. Too many of these clowns seem to believe it will go away, if it's ignored.

The author does not say much about rates of bullying but as far as inter-personal violence is concerned there is little question that, in broad terms, it has been declining both very long term and in the past few decades.

Sociologists construct indicies of number of killings per hundred thousand of population - Why killings? They are easier to define and harder to hide - and those have been declining sincer the middle ages. But even back a few decades, any reader of autobiographies will realise that people use to hit one another rather more freely than they do now.

As for sport the situation is complicated by the professionalisation of the various codes, and the growing number of sponsorships. Players who hit one another on field now stand to loose a lot of money, bad behaviour off the field annoys the sponsors.

Yet another complication is that technology has changed so people have different ways of showing their nasty streak, but definitions have broadened. Text messages, for example, can form the basis of an apprehended violence order.

Now schools could clearly do more to reduce incidences of bullying, but the situation is vastly more complicated than the author would have us believe.

Houellebecq - I will not claim say 'blame the victim'. Instead I will simply inform you of my own situation.

Firstly I did nothing to attract the attention of the bullies, yet I was constantly - and I am not exaggerating here - constantly assaulted in the school yard. If the same incidents had occurred today the assailant would be arrested and charged. How do you justify the fact that these same children who are experimenting with 'power' are not being shown the real world consequences of their actions?

Secondly, not only was I physically assaulted but also verbally taunted - a lame attempt to goad me into a fight - yet in the real world if someone continues to push until you snap you can claim provocation. How do you explain away the fact that in schools both the taunter and taunted are punished?

Finally, I was subjected to extortion attempts, sexual assault from other older students (yes, it does happen), attempted physiological manipulation, property destruction and many other things. Yet the students involved, and their parents, refused any responsibility in these matters. Yet if these things happened later in life those involved would be convicted of multiple offences in short order. So can you please explain how these individuals can learn a code of ethics if no one teaches what is required by society?

I find that you know nothing of the reality. Please crawl back into your hole and stay there!

The author recommends sending bullies to to a tough boot camp. That might result in them simply learning new techniques of bullying. I have never been in a civilian boot camp, but I have been in a military one. Nobody bullied me, but I saw many others bullied there. Sometimes those set in authority were bullies. It is legitimate to send people to boot camps to toughen them up for combat. It does that.

However, I don't think sending people to boot camp makes them more considerate of others and probably makes them more likely to bully.

Oh Auther! Time to get over it already.

'Firstly I did nothing to attract the attention of the bullies'
Yes you did. You allowed them to treat you in a certain way.

'If the same incidents had occurred today the assailant would be arrested and charged.'
No doubt. Proof that bullying is being handled well enough, and that the current flavour of the month status it has in the outrage industry is all media driven. It's no big problem.

'How do you justify the fact that these same children who are experimenting with 'power' are not being shown the real world consequences? '

I don't have to justify it. I'm not against general school discipline. Just as I'm against terrorism laws but for general policing of the existing laws. No 'special programs' or initiatives are needed. General discipline is all that's required. Bullying isn't something special. Besides, the police aren't everywhere.

'How do you explain away the fact that in schools both the taunter and taunted are punished? '
The law never encourages vigilantism. Parents punish both children in a fight as it is mostly impossible to ascertain who is in the wrong, and it encourages the children to sort out their squabbles independently.

'I was subjected to extortion attempts, sexual assault from other older students (yes, it does happen), attempted physiological manipulation, property destruction and many other things.'

You sound like one of life's natural victims. Build a bridge, it was years ago. You're older and wiser now.

Every kid has been bullied at some stage, most get over it and learn to use humour, violence, avoidance, and acquire strategic relationships that will protect them (I used a combination of these). I don't think we should encourage a society where everyone is encouraged to dob each other in and disempower themselves to a third party that cant possibly protect them.

Teaches cant be everywhere, and bullying is something you will never stamp out. General discipline against violence is necessary but at some point kids need to learn to find their own coping mechanisms and learn the necessary social skills.

On one hand we see increased 'pussification' of youngsters with parents, schools, civil authorities and legislators obsessed with 'safety' - a phenomenom that's largely replaced Common Sense. Not saying this is a bad thing - just it's been overdone.

On the other hand we have a culture of violence expressed predominately through visual media. Recall 'experimenting' as a child aged about 8, using Grandfathers huge umbrella to 'parachute' off the shed roof. A cousin and friend were co-conspirators. Can't remember the exact movie or cartoon that inspired this idiocy but that's where the idea came from. My cousin, having 'borrowed' the umbrella, insisted he be first which saved me the visit to hospital with a fractured ankle ... (Got my bum tanned instead.) The point being kids do not always have the skills to separate fact & fantasy. Video games with extremely realistic depictions of violence and the dedication to playing them concerns. Apart from 'glorifying' violence these games trivialise the effects. Could this partly explain the seemingly increased incidence of high level violence amongst kids? They have unrealistic ideas about the consequences of violent acts?

I agree that it's good for kids to sort out their own squabbles - within boundaries. Kids need sorting out when they go over the top and those who have 'victim' written across their foreheads need protecting. 'Victims' sometimes encourage negative attention but more often are shy, awkward or slow and easy pickings for bullies. BTW I was small and sometimes seen as an easy target but when picked turned mad-dog which tended to discourage further torment.

However - get caught fighting, get 6 of the best and then probably worse from your folks if they thought you were at fault. Unfortunately that don't happen any more because Social Engineers don't believe parents, schools or law enforcement should wield authority over children - precious little innocents they are with all rights and little responsibility ...

Unless there is a pendulum swing back to more balanced approachs to discipline in the home and schools and social values, don't expect improvement.

I would agree with Curmudgeon

It is unlikely the bullying has increased over the years, if the murder rate is an indicator of less serious crimes.

The murder rate has actually decreased.

But the so-called disruptive students and bullies are very easy to sort out.

Simply ask them a question.

EG “What do you hope to gain by calling Tommy a gay”

Or “What do you hope to gain by calling Mary a fat pig”

Bullies usually don’t like answering questions, and quickly lose their incentive to bully others if they know that they will be asked questions later on.

How teachers have not leant this simple and highly effective strategy is difficult to understand.

But then, the most constant and damaging bullying I have seen in schools actually came from the teachers.

And I know that many of them do not like being asked too many questions, or having to show any accountability.

I am a teacher, as many of you will know. I'm lucky enough to teach in a school in which bullying is only a very minor problem. Perhaps lucky isn't the right word - we work very hard to keep a handle on bullying.

One of the problems is, I think, the special status given to bullying. As Houellebecq says (correct me if I'm wrong here), rather than policing 'bullying', schools need to police the individual acts that, once they become systematic, earn the label of 'bullying'. That's what my school does well. A punch is a punch, whether it is a one-off or part of a pattern of behaviour. A punch earns the kid a week off classes, sitting outside the deputy's office and doing work in isolation. It's not a holiday, but isolation with regular harsh lectures. It's not pleasant. An insult is an insult, a shove is a shove and a rumour is a rumour. They are dealt with harshly from the outset, rather than waiting for a pattern to emerge. While we have an anti-bullying policy, it is rarely implemented because we don't allow things to escalate to the point where they are called 'bullying'.

If I was an administrator, I would like to take things further. A punch is a punch, and a punch is a criminal offence. If punching somebody led to a trip to the police station, I think fewer students would be brave enough to do it. Perhaps it's time we enforced that at school, rather than allowing criminal activities to be dealt with locally. It would send a strong message. The same applies on the football field, the netball court, the cricket pitch ... if the behaviour would lead to an arrest in the street, why is it dealt with informally when 'role models' carry it out in front of live audiences of 40,000 and TV audiences of an even greater size?

Otokonoko,
I would think what your school is doing is ultimately harmful.

If a student is made to sit outside of an office for a week, that can be very embarrassing to the student, and that student may kick back at authority and at society at sometime in the future.

Because the student is being taken out of class, they are also not learning much.

Best to actually talk to the student instead, and that advice is from many years supervision of mostly men doing shift work under very trying conditions (eg 40 oC heat and 90 dB noise levels)

Keep asking the student questions untill they can't answer something.

If a student is picking on Tommy, keep asking them questions until they can’t answer anything any more.

“Is there anything about Tommy you like? He got 70% in his maths exam, and that was good, so do you like that?”

“Do you think Tommy could help you in your maths homework.”

“Do you think Tommy would be better at football if you didn’t pick on him.”

“Do you think Tommy would be better at football if you showed him what to do.”

“Do you think Tommy is a good swimmer. He was able to swim a whole lap last swimming lesson”

Etc, etc, etc

Eventually the bully won’t be able to answer a question, and then they are sent away to think about their answer to that question, and then they have to come back and give their answer to the teacher.

Simple, very effective and no detention or lost time from class.

Guaranteed to work, and a win-win situation all round.

vanna, I really doubt that would work. To be honest, I think the child being questioned would give whatever answers the parental figure would want to hear, then seek out 'Tommy' and make his life hell.

As 'repercussions' go, being asked a few questions doesn't really cut the mustard I'm afraid.

To a large extent I agree with Houellebecq. I think that the social skills children learn in school through dealing with their classmates are far more important that what is actually taught in the classes. Dealing with bullies is a big part of that. The kid who never learns to deal with bullies will one day become the adult who lacks confidence.
Some might say that the child lacks confidence because they were bullied, but where does this innate 'confidence' come from, if not from developing their social skills with their peers?

That being said, of course we don't make it the rules of the jungle. Discipline is necessary sometimes, and I'd rather it be swift and effective rather than limp-wristed when it comes to dealing with violence.

Suggestions such as vanna's might work for very young children, or when the matter hasn't escalated as far as violence, but once things have gotten that ugly, more drastic measures need to be taken.

vanna,

Harmful it may be, but it works. For quite some time, my school has had one of the most harmonious, tolerant and accepting student bodies around. Do you really think that a punch should be addressed solely with questions? Will that condition students to expect similar consequences in the outside world? And if the questions are asked without loss of class time or time spent in detention, when are they asked?

Obviously, other actions are dealt with less severely - but there is absolutely no tolerance for violence. As a result, acts of violence almost never take place.

My point is that bullying is a pattern of behaviour. It can only become a pattern if it goes unchecked. If individual incidents are addressed, bullying almost never happens.

Oh Auther! Time to get over it already.

'Firstly I did nothing to attract the attention of the bullies'
Yes you did. You allowed them to treat you in a certain way. (Houllebecq)

...must have a little difficulty thinking with the social other side of his/her brain, yet fascinating that he/she can on occasions be highly intelligent regarding economical or non-social issues.

Sadly, Houllebecq it appears you have not yet 'learned' from people who have been victims at one stage or another during their lives, still holding the same old tunnelled vision view that a victim is inviting or tolerating bullying, and that therefore it is the victims fault. How old are you Houllebecq if you do not mind me asking?

Generally speaking Houllebecq, it is usually a well known bully as a child or adult, who holds this generalised opinion, a person who was once bullied themselves during childhood or as an adult. Learned environmental behaviour by a bully, their excuse, for their dreadful verbal and physical assaults on children and people, is to blame their victims or victims in general.

I would say to you Houllebecq, with respect, it is best that you address the bullying that was inflicted upon you at some stage in your life, instead of attacking a person (Arthur)who was an innocent victim as a child, and chose beautifully to break the cycle and not take the road some other victims have taken as adults later, by "bullying" other adults.

Take away or distract a bully's audience [usually the bully's mates] using humour without degrading, and one will discover that child and occasionally adult victims, are half way there with a bully. The lack of attention shifting from a bully back to the victim, with others present, decreases the confidence in a bully.

Another strategy useful for children suffering from schoolyard bullying, is to enrol these kids into drama and martial arts for extra confidence, in addition to inviting a friend or two home for a sleepover or activities regularly during school terms when the bullying occurs.

I recall my daughter being stabbed in the eye with an object by a Year 5 girl once. The girl was insecure about my athletic daughter's ability to win races during school events. The following week I took the day off work to attend the schools trials and watch my daughter compete against her bully [previous incidents that year]. The girl's parents stood by the racing line, "C'mon Trish, C'mon Trish you can beat them all". I laughed at their non-stop banter. My daughter beat them all with a stitch, not a word said by myself. I was just glad she had participated for her health and a community event.

All four girls were selected to compete interstate in a relay team, making me laugh more. I informed her mother and father, that if their daughter ever assaulted my child again, I would lay charges and sue for the injuries. Both walked off scolding their daughter for not 'coming first' in the race.

All schools should be ensuring there is a continued 'Buddy' or "Pal" system for each year throughout primary and high school. Tutor or school 'Home' groups should be conducted once or twice per week to specifically discuss bullying issues without a victim's bully being present in those school time 'home' groups.

For children, making eye contact with a bully, standing firm, and knowing, that at the end of the day, the bully will either not attend a school reunion years later, or be shunned by his/her old school 'mates'

Sorry vanna, I clicked 'post' before I was finished. I meant to say that there is certainly merit to your suggestion. I agree with, and regularly employ, a method similar to your line of questioning. 'I don't know' is not an acceptable answer, either. Students are expected to answer questions and answer them in full.

There is a line to tread between restorative and retributive justice in schools. The reality is that we are preparing kids for a society in which retribution is the most common method of dealing with misbehaviour, even when we pretend that our criminal justice system is about reforming people. I'm a firm believer that, while we in schools must do what we can to help students make better decisions for themselves, we should not neglect the punishment when a kid appears to be penitent. With the systems we have in place, students tend to accept the consequences of their actions and rarely offend again.

I've seen less successful procedures in other schools: you can pick the schools with ineffective systems by the number of repeat offenders they have, and the number of times those students repeat their actions. I once taught a boy who had four twenty-day suspensions in one year. Obviously the consequence wasn't working, but the school kept on going down that same old track. Perhaps some attempt at restorative justice, including your questioning method, would have been a good idea.

Otokonoko,
I have actually said to teachers that they can learn something from industry, and the usual response is that the teachers shake their heads.

Many industries are quite different to the education system, where accountability is almost non-existent.

In some areas of the country, tradesmen can be in very short supply, and tradesman can become very arrogant and difficult to deal with.

The supervisor can’t sack the tradesman, because there is no one else to replace him, and the company will also get behind in its work schedule, and then the supervisor is in the stew.

So the supervisor has to think of ways of dealing with the arrogant individual, and also meet the company’s work schedule.

Asking the tradesman a series of questions is the simplest and easiest way of dealing with many people, and even some of the most arrogant individuals will become like butter in your hand.

Compare this with the education system where a teacher can fail or expel a student, or send a student out of a class, and no questions are asked of the teacher.

You may think your school’s strategy works, but the student that has been sent from the class is not learning much.

The school has then failed to teach a student, and that is similar to a company falling behind in its work schedule.

Teachers have a very easy life in being able to fail or expell a student, but the student eventually becomes a problem for someone else.

Teachers do not have "a very easy life in being able to fail or expell [sic] a student". A girl in my Year 12 English class failed last year. The paper trail, moderation and follow-up finished this week. As for expelling, well, in a select few fully independent schools it's easy. In the vast majority of schools - state and Catholic - it's not easy at all. Even when a principal recommends a student for exclusion and backs his/her recommendation up with four or five years of documentary evidence, the exclusion is frequently rejected. Add to that the doctrine of forgiveness that underpins diocesan Catholic schools and, if a students shows some indication of contrition, we just keep taking them back. Really, I have no problem with that. They have to be schooled somewhere.

As for the students sent out of class (on internal suspension) not learning much, well, I'll admit that their lack of face-to-face contact has limitations. Knowing as much as you do about schools, though, I'm sure you'd be well aware that teachers are required to provide a full program of work for the duration that the student is out of class. It's a draining process, as we have to ensure that the work covers the content that would usually be covered in class over that time. It's one set of work for the students in class and another, usually more detailed (to make up for the absence of the teacher), set of work for the student who has been excluded.

Maybe in the schools with which you have been involved this policy is ignored or only partially followed, but in the schools I have worked in it is followed to the letter. It is interesting to note, though, that when students are suspended externally, the work is seldom collected from school and, when it is emailed home, it is only rarely completed. For this reason, I'm a big fan of internal suspension. The deputies ensure that the work is done and, on many occasions, call department heads down to give students a hand when they're stuck.

Otokonoko,
As a freebie, I’ll also give you another set of clues.

Get the student bully alone and tell them a joke, and then wait for them to tell you a joke. After that is out of the way, then you can start to ask the student a series of questions.

Also best to offer to do something for the bully, and then expect the bully to do something for you (without stating it).

If you think teachers have a tough life, then try this.

I was once with a company that divided up their factory into a number of sections, and each section was called the blue section, or the red section or the green section etc.

The supervisors were expected to supervise in one section, and then swap with the supervisor in another section.

At first the supervisor went into an area they didn’t know much about, and the station operators knew more than the supervisor, and would get up to all sorts of tricks with the supervisor.

A supervisor could be driven to distraction unless they could deal with that, and the supervisors couldn’t sack anyone.

Sink or swim for the supervisors, and the best strategy was to play dumb and be asking the station operators a series of questions, and also be doing things for the station operators until finally the station operators in that section of the factory began to do things for the supervisor.

"Six teenagers face serious assault charges after an attack on an intellectually disabled youth.

The 17-year-old victim had just got off a bus at Westall Railway station in Clayton on March 8 when he was allegedly assaulted by the group.

The teenagers, males aged between 13 to 16, were arrested on Friday afternoon.

They face charges including intentionally causing serious injury and recklessly causing serious injury.
All have been bailed to appear at a children's court."

...................................................................

Now here's a mob of little charmers!

I wonder how the victim 'invited' the bullying (Houellebecq) and just what questions would you ask these little thugs (Vanna)?

It seems to me Otokonoko is the one voice of wisdom in this thread. Bad behaviour needs correction. There is little chance of reform if the offender has no reason to want to do so. Unpleasant consequences - real ones - provide incentive, especially if applied early in the offending behaviour, the punishment firm, fair in line with the crime and applied consistently. This, combined with 'education' and example (mentors/role models) to teach and encourage responsible behaviour, works best.

The proof is in the outcomes - Otokonoko claims low levels of bullying behaviour at his/her school and I can believe that is more probable than not given the no nonsense approach taken.

Such a pity this tactic is not employed in every home and every school throughout the nation.

I worked as a CRT and on several short term contracts in schools in Melbourne, rural Victoria and London for many years and have now fled to Asia to teach English. I've been here almost four years and my life is markedly less stressful than before. Shock horror that many of my students actually thank me at the end of each lesson, wave to me in the street and (despite limited English) will try to have a civil conversation with me!

Frankly, not even wild horses could drag me back to working as a teacher in most government schools in Victoria and I certainly wouldn't send my children to them. Since becoming a teacher, my views on discipline, especially corporal punishment, and every child's right to receive an education (i.e. every student's right to disrupt the work of teachers and the learning of other students), have become far more "right wing".

The system simply isn't working. Bullying is rife not only from student to student, but student to teacher and even teacher to teacher. Those teachers who do demand some standards are often left adrift at sea with absolutely zero support (if not outright disdain and mocking) from their colleagues, superiors, parents and the wider community.

Everyone likes to complain about the lack of discipline in schools, yet it's always some other person's kid, not their little darlings. On the rare occasions when their little darlings do get pulled aside and told to pull their heads in, plenty of parents are up at the school complaining.

No more. No thanks.

If teachers (in general) were to have an attitude which includes working towards a better society that they could make a difference. Sadly, the greater majority of teachers are heavily focused on getting more & more benefits. If only some of these benefit seeking efforts were diverted towards discipline then they would get more discipline. It really is a matter of receiving what's sown. I haven't heard of teachers striking to get more discipline into schools but I have heard of many teachers' strikes for more pay.

divine_msn,
So what happens to the alleged perpetrators if they are found guilty and sent to prison?

Will they break the law again?

Possibly, if they like the notoriety and the attention they receive in prison. They might actually like punishment, because when they are being punished, they are getting attention.

It is best to put the lid on it at a younger age, but I doubt that punishment works very well. Other strategies can be used.

I have had to supervise many different people including a few ex-crims. One was a car thief as a teenager who eventually went to jail, and when they came out they joined a bickie gang and became their “cook” (or drug maker). He went back to jail again for a number of offences, and eventually I had to supervise him doing a job in a sugar mill.

I never had any problems with him, and for that matter I rarely had problems from anyone, and never enquired about someone’s upbringing or past life.

Their upbringing or past life didn’t matter that much, unless they were psychotic.

Any sort of trouble or cheek from someone, and immediately ask them questions. They learn that this will be the routine, and eventually they stop giving trouble.

Shorbe
It is interesting that males built the schools (and are still building schools).

How do you think males were supervised while building the schools?

And how do you think males were taught to be builders?

With corporal punishment?

I think this whole “school bully” and “disruptive students” thing is just being used as an excuse for poor teaching methods and lack of motivation by the teachers in the schools.

Why is everyone of the opinion that "institutionalisation" - in school or elsewhere - would bring out the best qualities in a human being?

(I know I'm wasting my time with that statement - but I thought I'd throw it in anyway.)

institutionalisation,
Poirot,
Institutionalisation ? Isn't that exactly what we've had thus far ? Teachers not thinking or acting on their own initiative ? Only doing what they're told to do ? That is institutionalisation.
That's why kids run riot because no-one's prepared to go against the system i.e. institutionalisation. If teachers were to make a move & lobby the authorities then they would have an impact on bullying. By doing nothing but blaming everyone else the kids get more out of hand. Why not strike for the right to slap a mongrel kid ? I bet 99% of parents would sanction it. Why not have cameras for those parents who think their little darling is innocent. Teachers must make the first move, after all they're the ones spending most time with kids & having most influence.

I agree with Shorbe. This issue begins with the ersoion of the power of the teacher to deal effectively with poblems. They are hamstrung by the stupid rules under which they are forced to work.

Every child deserves an education has turned into, 'any child who happily disrupts the whole class and prevents everyone else from learning - must be allowed to remain in their class" Same with those who assault other students and teachers.

http://www.urlesque.com/2011/03/16/zangief-kid-casey-heynes-bully-anonymous/

This poor fat kid being picked on by kids 3 years younger was lucky to be bigger and stronger and to finally overcome his fear. But He shouldn't have to be lucky. We need to be teaching our kids that we don't pick on people for being different, and that acts of bastardry like this are taken very seriously.

I don't believe in Vanna's tactics. Bullies generally operate within highly self-reinforcing social groups. The chance of a teacher being more influential than their peers is extremely unlikely

Houellebecq is just a simpleton. I deat with bullies with violence as well when I was at school. But the fact is that it is not always practical. I was never as isolated as some kids are. I had friends which makes dealing with these issues a lot easier. But I know many kids who were ostracised for no fault of their own (merely their inability to correctly mimic the dominant group behaviour)\ Often the kids doing the bullying are older and bigger/stronger. The idea that the victims of these attacks are inviting their attacks is OUTRAGEOUS. If not COWARDLY.

Yes children need to be taught anti bullying tactics, and the parents of bullied kids need to take some responsibility to find out if its occuring and to try and stop it. But the fact remains, that we need to hold people responsible for their behaviour. We need to send a message that bashing someone who won't fight back is a cowardly act that is deserving of serious punishment. Punishment that fits the crime.

PaulL
If you read the interviews of the boy being bullied in the video, he claims that he was bullied every day he was at that school, and I find it impossible to believe that the teachers didn’t notice this.

Looking at the video, it appears that the perpetrator also carried out the bullying with complete impunity.

The parents of the boy being bullied had handed their child over to the school, and the teachers had turned a blind eye to the bullying going on.

As I have mentioned previously, bullying can be stopped very effectively at a very early stage with just a few questions being asked of a perpetrator. No corporal punishment or detention is necessary.

But the teachers and the principal where most likely aware of the bullying, and had not acted, or whatever they did was ineffective.

Bullying is a safety risk, and under risk management legislation, I certainly believe the principal should be immediately stood down, for allowing a safety risk to occur for so long.

Then each teacher should be investigated by the police or other government authorities to see whether they should be stood down also, and whether the school should be closed.

Vanna,

Thats arrant nonsense. Your trumpeting of health and safety seems unbelieveable. The incident took a total of about 30 seconds. There is simply no way to monitor all of the students all of the time. Its not a prison and teachers aren't warders. There are fights at schools every day. When I was at school there was at least one every week, often more. If you sacked every principal whose pupils were involved in fighting you'd have no principals left.

We don't know if the kid reported any of his bullying. If he did and it was ignored then thats a problem. But reporting it it is almost never effective because the school is always hamstrung by rules imposed by the education department doo gooders. And it almost always leads to more bullying for dobbing

Their tack (ED), and yours, has been to de-emphasize the importance of the student and their parents in dealing with poor behaviour and overemphasising the role of the school and its teachers.

You may be right that talking to primary school bullies is effective if you catch it early enough. By high school I don't think so. The mix of testorone, peer pressure and the desire to rebel, trumps rationality and fairness every time. Some kids need to be expelled. Teachers have enough to do, teaching their students. They don't have time to be continually correcting the outrageous behaviour of students who have been taught that if they play it right they will never have to face serious consequences.

The way you would have it, all of a teacher's time would be consumed by those who are least willing to be taught. This is simply unacceptable and it is one of the reasons why we have far fewer teachers than we need.

It is a simple matter of fairness. The burden of bad behaviour needs to be placed first, upon the person misbehaving. If its a teenager we should still look to them first, their parents are next in line. Then we can worry about the teachers and whether they are complicit.

PaulL
If you look at the school’s website it says “The school aims to provide a safe, supportive and productive learning environment to promote individual achievement and self-responsibility. “

http://www.dunheved-h.schools.nsw.edu.au/sws/view/376164.node

Other students have claimed”
"The fights I have seen here, it's horrible. It really makes me feel unsafe," one said. A classmate added: "People pick on him every single day, they hit him around and stuff, and he just got sick of it and let out the anger."

The student being bullied also claims “``I've been duct taped to a pole before as well. “ and has also said “``I've never had so much support before,'' after people began supporting him after the video was released.

Now adding all this together, there would be gross negligence on the part of the school for the bullying to be occurring for so long.

It means that their supervision of the school grounds is inadequate, their early intervention programs are inadequate, their teacher to student communication systems are totally inadequate, their bully reporting systems are inadequate, and their teacher to parent communication systems are inadequate.

They state that they “aim” to provide a “safe” environment. That is borderline, because under risk management legislation that governs the school, they HAVE to provide a safe environment, full stop.

Someone can blame the parents as much as they like, but the parents are not there at the school.

If the teachers believe the school is not safe, the teachers should have called for the closure of the school, but they didn’t, when even the students know it is not safe.

In this situation, the teachers have prime responsibility.

If teachers are blaming the parents, they are just avoiding their own responsibility.

Interesting arguments, vanna.

You contend that physical violence should go unpunished, but should be addressed with questions.

You speak out against suspension and expulsion, arguing that both deny children the right to learn.

You then claim that the unpunished physical violence should result in the closure of a whole school, so that not only the violent but also the innocent students are denied the right to learn.

Perhaps it's time to clarify what you are REALLY trying to say, because your posts in this thread really don't add up.

Otokonoko
Bullying in the school is a safety issue, and the school has prime responsibility for the safety of the students once they walk through the school gate.

That is legal fact.

If the teachers have done everything they can to stop bullying, but it is occurring to such an extent that it is making children unsafe, then they should close the school.

However in this case I would think that the teachers have done nowhere near enough to reduce bullying in the school

If the students were regularly seeing fights and bullying, then teachers would have too, but the teachers were culpable because they didn’t act.

That is how a court would see it.

The teachers have a vast array of things they can do to reduce or stop bullying.

However, in my experience (and I have had some rather big and ugly fellows to supervise) it only takes a few words or a few questions to get them sorted out, and corporal punishment can create more problems in the longer term than it solves.

PS.

If you think closure of the school is extreme, then think not.

Recently a coal mine in central QLD was shutdown because someone went onto the site without getting a site induction. As soon as the safety officer learnt that the person had not received a site induction, they called the coal mine to a stop (at great cost to the company) and everyone had to go to their evacuation areas, just because someone had not been given a site induction.

That is the extent that safety and risk management is being carried out in industry, but compare that to the extent that safety and risk management is being carried out in the schools.

weareunique,

'How old are you Houllebecq if you do not mind me asking?'

I don't see how that's relevant. You don't volunteer your age anyway.

'a victim is inviting or tolerating bullying, and that therefore it is the victims fault. '

Well, I didn't mention fault. My outlook is that you cannot control the actions of others, and it is more empowering to look towards oneself if one is to get along in society. Now, this Arthur guy has rattled off a heap of 'wrongs' done against him by many people. I find in life, if you have a problem with a great many people, just maybe, it's you who is the problem.

'Take away or distract a bully's audience [usually the bully's mates] using humour without degrading'
OH! BLAMING THE VICTIM ARE WE! I mentioned that already. Just when I did it...

'Another strategy useful for children suffering from schoolyard bullying, is to enrol these kids into drama'

HAHAHA. Just because someone is bullied doesn't mean they are gay or should be turned gay. Though, I think Arthur is a natural for 'drama'.

'The girl was insecure about my athletic daughter's ability to win races during school events'
Hahaha. Yep, and every child these days is 'gifted' and all the other parents are 'jealous'. You sound smug, 'not a word said by myself. I was just glad she had participated for her health and a community event. '. Ooh lardie dah! Such a wonderful parent, it's all due to your goodness that your child isn't one of 'those people'. No wonder your kid is bullied. The 'bully' probably resents your kid looking down on her and your kid probably deserves to be taken down a peg or two.

'For children, making eye contact with a bully, standing firm'

BLAMING THE VICTIM!

Houellie,

Rendering yourself inconspicuous to the bullying fraternity is sometimes beyond the capabilities of some children,

My son is mildly autistic. He's smart kid, he's handsome and friendly - yet he is naive and easily led. He doesn't have a problem with bullying because he is educated at home and in the wider community. However, I've often observed how it is that certain children react once they pick up on his gullibility.

It's fascinating to watch as they decide to stir him up simply because they can. In the most exquisitely sadistic fashion they delight in spinning him stories and "taking him for a ride". They are almost beside themselves with glee when they manage to frustrate and upset him - it is stunning to watch.

These children are definitely a minority in his life, but if he was in a daily situation with them (which he isn't), his life would be quite miserable. As it is he's a confident child who gets on fairly well with most of the children he mixes with.

There are many children like him in the school system and there always have been - it doesn't necessarily mean they've invited the unwanted attention or that they are capable without some intervention to keep it at bay.

Poirot,

I think your son is a special case. Really that falls more under the jurisdiction of special needs.

I think we've all seen people in the world who have been pampered and not allowed to navigate adversity and grow. There is today an attitude of wrapping cotton wool around kids. Sure, teenagers are cruel, but so is life. It's no preparation for life to have some higher authority stepping in all the time (outside the obvious enforcing of rules at school). Kids need to know there is a system and rules that will be applied universally. Outside that, where authority is absent (as it MUST and SHOULD be at times) I'm all for teaching kids the skills to navigate the bullies in life rather than 'protecting' them and setting them up for a life of victim-hood.

Kids need to negotiate these social environments and it is a vital part of their development. I also think it is naive in the extreme to think you can spot systematic bullying or be there when it happens. So then you're left with he said/she said, and you're actively undermining the kids chances for respect in the school yard. The message you're telling all the kids is 'that kid is weak' and needs special attention. You're telling 'that kid' that he is weak too, and that he will never be able to fight his own battles. You're messing with the natural ecosystem, and you're messing with something you cant control 100% of the time.

I understand your idea to keep your kid home, and that is your way of handling the situation. I understand you have other more ideological reasons which I'm quite sympathetic to. I always admire people who think/do outside the box and live life a little differently. Money where your bleeding heart lefty humanist mouth is and all that. It's only when your sort start preaching about what 'we' need I get the sh1ts with it.

BTW: I went to a really rough all boys school. It taught me many lessons in life. You cant discount the natural school environment where teachers are seen as 'screws' as in a prison environment. It's us against them, and when inmates are seen fraternising with the enemy it's a slap in the face to the comradeship of the student body.

Apart from learning to add up and read, school would be a general waste of time if not for the social skills learned. I think really we should shorten school by 2 years. There is way too much fluff.

I remember starting high school and thinking I really haven't learned much up to this point in primary school, being excited for a few months to a year at actually learning something more substantial, and then becoming bored for the next 2-3 years, and then spending my time messing with teachers and seeing how they tick, and what would challenge them most. Then when I was considered a lost cause, the corresponding lack of attention and care factor of the teachers enabled me to get on with learning in my own style. I successfully recalibrated the expectations of teachers and gained praise for doing anything at all, or at least a comfortable indifference and was no longer 'rewarded' with extra work.

The school system is insulting to young people. The idea that a bell is rung every 40 minutes, and students are expected to mindlessly and obediently move on to the next 'lesson' is ridiculous. There are 30 students and 1 teacher. The teacher should move. Homework is ridiculous as well, entrenching inefficiency, and the idea that the time allocated is insufficient for the content (fluff) or the teachers are somehow defective.

I think the sane and independent thinking kids are the disruptive ones. The kids who are obedient are the broken ones. Breaking them in being the purpose of school. The only compensating factor for me was the comradeship of the student body rebelling in imaginative ways against this oppressive system.

Teachers are not simpletons, they know their students but there is little support in the system to take stronger disciplinary action such as suspensions. It is treated as the worst case remedy only after counselling - often too late.

Counselling is important (with parental involvement) but frankly some kids will always be at a disadvantage and the process much more difficult especially if the parents are dropkicks. Some might never get on track even with all the right supports. Of course children have a better chance when that support is provided. Perpetual victims of bullying also need counselling, that is an aspect often overlooked.

Kids are also not stupid and quickly learn how to play the system. While there is no emphasis in taking responsibility for actions bullying will continue.

There is some irony the schoolyard has become more tolerant of bullies despite the fluffery and puffery formal rhetoric about managing violence in the school.

My brother came home once from school complaining about a boy who was bullying him constantly. My parents said if he hits you again hit him back twice as hard. So he did but came home crying because the bully said he was going to call the police. We laugh about it now but fact is the boy never picked on him again.

I am not advocating this approach as the solution because there are many approaches depending on the situation. Many kids are not able to muster the courage to defend themselves especially if the attacker is twice as big.

Fact is I don't know the answer to this problem. Much of it lies not only in the institutionalisation of schooling but patterns learnt before schooling. Many parents are tired, both working often to support a high mortgage and many are compensating with pampering and spoiling their kids. That only leads to a sense of self-entitlement and at worse narcissism.

Houellie,

We are home a lot of the time, however, it's more about being able to go out into the community during the day and to mix with all age groups.

I agree that children need to negotiate social environments - not necessarily those found in an institutional environment - which I see as an artificial social model.

For instance, we have quite a large "homeschooling" group who meets regularly. During shared activities, the thing I've noticed is how all the kids don't segregate themselves into age appropriate groups. The older ones tend to be there for the younger ones.
Sure, they tend to gravitate to an age peer during quiet times or conversation, but there is no pack mentality or deliberate isolation practiced.

It seems to me that our schooling model exacerbates the problem of bullying by warping the natural social structure.

Houellie,

I can see that you realised quite young exactly what schooling is about - not just learning the three R's, but also the covert agenda of socialising children to conform to our time-clock society.

It's surprising how difficult it is for most people to stand back and look at the school system from a wider perspective.

Btw, my son is very marginally affected. He would only need the label if he attended school. As it stands, he's just a child growing up. So with him, I home educate because I want him to flourish and to develop confidence to pursue his learning independently - not to meekly conform to the prescribed model.

Pelican
I would oppose expulsion, or forms of corporal punishment.

One of the reasons is that it would more than likely lead to boys being expelled or receiving corporal punishment, while girls who are bullys are kept at the school and receive no corporal punishment.

There is enough evidence that girls carry out as much bullying as boys, and this bullying can be just as harmful.

EG
girls use indirect methods of aggression, such as spreading rumours and

excluding and ostracising others; and Crick, Bigbee and Howes (1996)

report that with relational aggression, girls' peer conflicts increase

in frequency and become more common as they move from middle childhood

to adolescence. Such socially manipulative strategies are also powerful

tools often used by girls to protect and maintain their peer

relationships and friendship dyads, which in turn reflect exclusivity,

intensity and disclosure. These behaviours appear to serve a dual

function: to protect existing friendships from the intrusion of others;

and to deliberately harm target girls through rejection and isolation. “

http://www.aare.edu.au/97pap/leckb284.htm

It is ironic that most of bullying can be solved through communication, and getting the student to think about their actions.

We are told to believe that women are the best communicators, and now about 4 out of 5 teachers in the primary school system are women.

However, when they have a problem involving communication, they want to solve it through expulsion and corporal punishment.

vanna I did not say expulsions or corporal punishment. I am not advocating the cane. Suspensions are not expulsions they are temporary removal to ensure the safety of other students and enforces the idea that certain behaviours are unacceptable. Just because I share this belief does not mean that all women share my views. Women are individuals - I know it is hard to fathom.

I don't care about the gender in terms of bullying the rules apply to all CHILDREN. We are human first before we are male or female IMO.

This issue is too important to reduce it to a boys vs girls scenario and I don't intend to insult the intelligence of the other posters in this debate.

Perhaps you should be advocating that approach pelican, if the school staff are failing in their duty. I found it worked very well.

Due to my father's work I went to 17 schools. As a perpetual new boy, & small when I was younger, I found myself being picked by the bully at every new school. The teachers never intervened, ever.

After one bad bashing, dad found out, & taught me to fight. As he had been his divisional champion during the war, I was well taught. After that, within a couple of days at a new school, I would sort out the bully who picked on me, & then have no further trouble, until the next school.

Later by high school, I had been taught to be a good enough footballer, & cricketer to make the school teams. Somehow then the bullying just stopped. Perhaps I had a confidence, lacking when I was younger, that deterred the bully, before it started.

What ever it was, I have not had to raise a hand to anyone since I was about 12 years old.

However I still remember what it was like. I particularly hated the third or fourth string bully, who had to give you a whack, when the top bully had finished

"The teachers never intervened, ever. "

I think this is still the case in many schools, and this is negligence by the teachers, and under risk management legislation, they can be convicted and tried in a court for this.

The system of blaming the parents is a part of an excuse system, so that teachers can do as little as possible, while getting as much as they can from the taxpayer.

Children get up to all sorts of mischief, and I have found that even 18 year olds (or older) need parental guidance to some extent, and leaving younger children unsupervised in playgrounds is negligence.

The scenario of retaliating only when provoked was a very simple model that my Dad gave to me when I was a child. The old school model was quite often to teach the kid to defend himself, so boxing lessons from Dad was my defence mechanism. It worked for me. Suddenly and perhaps sadly the bullies focussed their attention on the next poor soul. The problem isn't a new one, it's simply more visible and publicised than ever before IMO. Our overly PC culture almost prevents teachers from having the authority to pull bullies aside and give them a good talking to about their behaviour. Parents themselves abdicate responsibility by thinking that it's the teachers job to keep the kids under control when they're at school. Discipline is the unpopular word that is missing in both of these areas.
This behaviour will only stop when teachers and parents combine and send a clear, consistent message to ALL the bullies that this kind of behaviour is not going to be tollerated either at school or at home.

Radar "Parents themselves abdicate responsibility by thinking that it's the teachers job to keep the kids under control when they're at school."

From teachers I've had discussions with the problem is more that parents don't think that it's the teachers job to keep their kid under control. Many strongly resent and work against discipline of their child.

R0bert

Radar,
It is "the teachers job to keep the kids under control when they're at school".

The teachers need not worry about the parents.

The teachers need to worry about probable prosecution and litigation if the children are being placed at risk.

Some information on negligence in schools and teacher responsibility,

"There are two aspects to negligence in schools.
1 The negligence of teachers to students.
Teachers have a duty of care to students to
provide adequate supervision. This may occur in
the playground, on the sports field, in the
classroom or on an excursion. Under the doctrine
of vicarious liability the school authority may be
liable to pay the plaintiff for the negligence of
teachers. It does not however, negate the
personal liability of the teacher.

2 The negligence of school authorities.
Negligence of school authorities may arise where
the grounds or equipment are unsafe and a
student is injured. School authorities have a nondelegable
duty to students to ensure that
reasonable care is taken for the safety of children
at school.

Now for the important part

To be successful in an action of negligence the
plaintiff must prove all elements of negligence
according to the civil standard of proof, which is,
on the balance of probabilities. This means the
plaintiff must satisfy the court that his or her
version of the events is more probable than not.
The plaintiff must first prove that he or she was
owed a duty of care. It would be extremely
difficult for a defendant to successfully argue
that a student was not owed a duty of care.
Secondly, that a breach of duty care or the
required standard of care was not met and finally
that the injury was caused by the breach of duty.

THE VERY IMPORTANT PART WITHIN THE IMPORTANT PART WAS

"It would be extremely difficult for a defendant to successfully argue
that a student was not owed a duty of care."\

http://ajte.education.ecu.edu.au/ISSUES/PDF/251/Newnham.pdf

If any teacher or principal decides to blame parents, and not take responsibility for correct supervision of children at their school, they should get all that solicitors can throw at them.

Hasbeen
My kids thankfully were never bullied to any great degree. No more than what could be considered the norm experienced by most girls.

It would have been difficult for you being picked on all the time and the strategy your parents took might have been the best approach.

Sometimes bullies need a bit of retaliation. At one school I attended as a youngster a boy menaced a teacher with a compass (those pointy maths apparatus not the directional one) and was suspended for a time. That rarely happens now. I am not sure why we are all so tippy toe around bullying behaviours. To be frank there is a point where the bully has to tow the line or get out. That is a valuable life experience too.

I think we have become too soft on bullies overall and while I agree that the experiences we have at school help shape us and provide a good foundation for coping with adversity after school life, there also has to be an understanding that the more aggressive and threatening behaviours are not going to be tolerated. A no-tolerance policy does more in the long term for the bully just as much as providing a safe environment for children IMO.

It is the lack of boundaries that promote bullying. Some kids just don't see reason no matter how many questions you might ask them.

There are bullies in the adult workplace too but that does not mean it should be ignored just because it is character shaping.

You need someone to say some prayers for your heart Houllebecq.

Valid points, vanna. That's probably part of why I've never heard a teacher argue that they don't have a duty of care. I'm not really sure where you're coming from here. (I think) we agree on a few salient points:

1) teachers who ignore bullying are failing to provide adequate care.

2) teachers who take inadequate steps to prevent bullying are failing to provide adequate care.

3) schools that do not enforce their anti-bullying policies and do not take disciplinary action against teachers who do not provide adequate care are also failing to provide adequate care.

What we disagree on is the frequency with which this occurs. I take it from your frequent attacks on teachers at every opportunity that you have had some pretty negative experiences with teachers and/or the educational system as a whole. I suspect that this has coloured your views of teachers, teaching, the educational system and schools. I, too, have had experiences with some very bad teachers and some who are negligent. I have simply found those teachers to be in the minority. Get rid of them by all means.

Otokonoko,

If the frequency rate of bullying in the school is too high, then the teachers close the school.

It is no different to shutting down a factory if safety issues occur. As a supervisory in a factory, I shut down the factory on many occosians because it was not safe to continue, or took equipment offline if it was unsafe, and it was expected that I do this, and other supervisors did the same.

Teachers should not think that bullying only occurs in schools. It is possible to occur in any workplace, but normally the supervisor puts the lid on it at a vary early stage, and it is done quickly and subtlely.

If someone is carrying out bullying, no hand can be laid on that person, and no inappropiate words can be used, or the unions might go on strike.

So the supervisor has to have strategies to handle the bullying, without dismissing the worker or using any type of corporal or overt punishment.

weareunique,

Oh.

God botherer.

That explains it.

Don't be upset, I'm sure all the other kids are just jealous of your saintly kids and pious life. They'll all burn in hell! Every one of them!

What you're saying makes sense, vanna, though I do have a few more questions.

1) You mention taking equipment offline if it is unsafe. Surely the equivalent to this - in a school sense - is suspension? We take the dangerous component (in this case, a dangerous student) away until such a time as it is no longer dangerous?

2) I've been thinking about the comparison to industry, and I can't help thinking that a retail rather than industrial model would suit a school better. I know the same laws apply in all contexts, but the way they are put into action differ across settings. I have served on safety committees in both retail and school settings. In both retail and education, the physical environment and equipment present one set of risks, while the clientele presents another. As you know, the action taken in response to a risk depends on the likelihood of an incident occurring and the magnitude of that potential incident. When a customer punches another customer, s/he is removed from the store and/or referred to the police. The store isn't shut down unless the risk is beyond control. Surely a similarly appropriate action in a school would be to remove the aggressor until it is clear that the risk no longer exists - i.e. suspension?

3) I do like your point about talking to wrongdoers and asking questions, but I think it's only part of a solution. That's the restorative side, but there must also be a punishment. I doubt a parent whose son or daughter was brutally bashed would be satisfied that duty of care had been carried out if they found out that the offender had a string of similar offences in his past, and had faced no consequences other than questioning. Do you agree? If not, can you help me to understand why not? If so, what other punishments - given that you've ruled out detention, suspension and expulsion - would you suggest?

Vanna,

Firstly, the idea that you have the solution to bullying (the talking cure) is extremely naive. I'm not sure where you derive your certainty but it is surely misplaced. What works for one child won't necessarily work for any other. Moreover, what works for a child at one age, doesn't necessarily work for the same child when they are older/younger. There is no magic bullet to solve bullying and it is faintly ridiculous to try and claim one. Bullying is a human failing that occurs at all levels of society, in all ages, and is NOT a recent invention. What is recent, is the 'tying of the hands' of those who have in the past been able to deal fully with the problem.

Secondly, on the basis of one video of a child being bullied, plus his media statements, you believe you should be sacked and sued, and the teachers should be required to attend a star chamber stye inquisition. Yet we have no information on whether the child had reported the incidents. We don't know much at all, for sure, which makes your strident claims of proof of negligence, rather empty.

What we do know for sure is that a portion of our society is continually undermining individual responsibiliy in favour of blanket state/corporate responsibility. It is behind the epidemic of frivalous lawsuits that has arisen in the past 20 years. It can be seen in sentencing guidlines for criminals, which regularly gives significant weight to the childhood of adult accused, at the expense of their own responsibility in the matter.

And its corollary here is the desire to blame the school for the inability to solve bullying, whilst at the same time, taking away the schools right to effectively punish those they do catch. Talk about rock and a hard place.

Prison wardens can't guarantee the safety of the inmates and they have locks, cages and guns. How a school, which has to meet the touchy feely politically correct orthodoxy, can guarantee that no act of violence occurs at school is beyond me.

Otokonoko,
I have considerable doubts about suspensions.

If ever politician who carried out bullying was sacked, there would be no politicians left.

And if every teacher who carried out bullying was sacked, there would be no teachers left.

And would girls be suspended if they carried out bullying, or would suspensions only be applicable for boys?

I have considerable doubts regards corporal punishment also.

Would it become excessive or unnecessary corporal punishment?

And would girls receive corporal punishment if they carried out bullying, or would corporal punishment only be applicable for boys?

And would it become a matter of cane the boy first, then ask questions latter, or ask no questions at all?

If teachers believe that their life is difficult, think not.

In a class room there are few risks for the student, except perhaps eye strain, or back injuries due to poor seating arrangements. There is also the risk of bullying inside the classroom.

In the playground there are more possible risks, including falling, tripping, sunburn, falling down stairs etc, and more chance of bullying occurring.

Basically, the teacher only has to contend with a few risks inside the classroom, and just a few more risks outside the classroom.

Compare to an industrial work environment, with everything from possible exposure to hazardous substances, exposure to industrial noise, working near moving equipment, having to carry out confined space entry, having to carry out effective isolation, having to work at heights, having to avoid spills or leaks, having to carry out manual lifting, having to monitor for possible equipment failure or equipment wear, and also risks such as falling, tripping, sunburn, falling down stairs etc.

Also there is a problem of fatigue in the workforce if they work shift work or work long hours, and having to reduce possible bullying amongst the workforce.

I believe teachers shouldn’t be too ready to think that they have insurmountable problems, because their problems pale in significance compared to the problems faced by many others in their daily job, and quite often paid a lot less than teachers, with a lot less holidays.

Paul L

"SCHOOL bullying victims have received almost $1 million in compensation from the Department of Education since January last year. "

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/school-bully-victims-paid-1m/story-e6freuy9-1225973555354

Personally I don’t like litigation as much as many other people, but in the case of schools I have seen, I believe litigation is more than necessary, as it would be one of very few things to grab the attention of many teachers.

I do not know of any school that publishes its safety statistics, when safety statistics are being readily displayed on the front gate of many companies.

Stepping into a school is like stepping back 20-30 years in terms of management and administration.

As for risk management, it is now the number one principle of management in many companies, and yet I have known of teachers who have the most minimal interest or knowledge about risk management.

Duty of care was actually superseded some time ago by risk management, but in the case of many teachers, they want risks to be the responsibility of the public.

Fair enough.

Your doubts about suspensions and corporal punishment are well-founded - particularly where corporal punishment is concerned. I can't imagine how we would expect students to learn not to be violent when the people who are meant to be setting an example are committing violent acts.

As for suspension, I'm still not sure. I'm talking about suspension for violence and for acts that endanger others. Just as there are degrees of risk, there are degrees of bullying. Mild name-calling should not draw a suspension, but violence, in my opinion, should. Online smear campaigns/rumours that make life unbearable are even more serious. A black eye heals, while the belief that a girl is promiscuous, or that a boy has an STI, or that a teacher likes lifting skirts, does not heal.

If the bullying is carried out to that extent, the damage is permanent. No questioning, no suspension will undo that. While expelling the child will not undo it either, it will at least indicate to peers that such vindictive behaviour is not welcome in a certain school.

As I asked before, though: what do you propose?

As a further note, I'm guessing the teachers who have spurred your distaste frequently complained of insurmountable problems. While I don't expect to change your perceptions, my experience of teachers is, once again, very different. Of the teachers I know, only a few seem to think their lives are fraught with unmanageable difficulties, and they are the ones who last a year or two before quitting. While an equally small number would agree that a teacher's life is as simple as you say, most of us are aware that there are people with much worse jobs and much worse pay. Maybe that's why so many people quit their jobs in the "real" world and go to uni for four years to become teachers relatively late in their working lives.

We tend to have a stronger grip on reality than you give us credit for. Once again, I think you must have been exposed to a concentration of particularly bad eggs.

Otokonoko,
What do I propose or suggest?

I have already given a simple strategy for teachers to quickly and effectively reduce or eliminate bullying (ask the bully a series of questions until they can’t answer one, then send them away to think about their answer)

Very effective even with adults in reducing bullying at the name-calling stage before it escalates.

There are a vast array of other possible strategies. Some other posters have mentioned peer group pressure that creates bullies. It does, and peer group pressure can be used to educate bullies.

Have you noticed during school concerts that the students become riveted when another student is performing on stage, and then lose attention when a teacher or adult walks onto the stage.

Good.

The students are paying attention to their peers.

The students could also produce a video on bullying, and this video could be shown to the students during their school inductions. It can also be shown to bullies during normal school hours if they are caught. They may pay attention to a video produced by their peers.

The list of possibilities are considerable, and it can be left up to teacher initiative to develop something effective, without the necessity for expulsion or corporal punishment.

Blaming the parents could very much be a lazy approach, as it just uses the parents as an excuse to do nothing, and uses the parents as scapegoats.

I am having problems following vannas logic. On the one hand she uses the retail or industrial workplace as an analogy for the school environment.

On the other hand he/she claims that in all circumstances a few well prepared questions can combat all manner of bad and potentially dangerous behaviours and attitudes and suggests that in his/her line of work (Health & Safety I'm assuming) this is all it has ever taken to solve bullying as well as myriad other 'human' issues.

I can't for the life of me imagine what industry this person works in.

Let me raise a couple of workplace 'actions' which would not be tolerated by any industry - nor work colleagues.

Workplace assault.
Being under the influence of alcohol or illicit drugs.

Now depending on the workplace the remedy would be instant dismissal or instant suspension. The next installment, pending results of drug testing or investigation of the incident, would likely be dismissal or at very least, workplace probation.

That's because the HEALTH & SAFETY of the MAJORITY - not to mention the physical workplace or environment are placed at risk of such INDIVIDUAL bad behaviours.

So what did our Mummies & Daddies teach us as kiddy-winks in the 50s & 60s? Well mine, and my relatives and friends of that era, all have pretty much the same recollection: That is - given to understand we are responsible for our own actions. Those actions will either earn us approval and/or acceptance and/or reward or disapproval and/or rejection and/or punishment.

Having raised 3 kids of our own and played a part in the lives of 6 young people who were in need of guidance and a chance at life, and being involved in business for the past 25 years I absolutely agree that effective communication is at the core of human management. While I also agree that the behaviour challenging questioning is an effective tool, it cannot be the only one as it is NOT appropriate to a number of situations .... continued

I believe through quite extensive life experience that the best approach to children and young people is the carrot and stick. One sets rules and boundaries then encourages and provides role models for appropriate behaviours. When the subject responds favourably rewards follow. If the opposite occurs then there is an unpleasant consequence.

In both cases communication is paramount as both parties need to understand the process and the other POV. If I have had to discipline anyone the conversation is about what was the problem and what was appropriate response. Sometimes some form of punishment would be called for and that would also be discussed so that the perpetrator understood the consequences but also the fairness of any punishment could be established. I often found it useful to impose a slightly harsh penalty with an offer of early release for 'good behaviour' - in other words a chance to prove they had taken the lesson on board and were prepared to make good on 'mistakes'.

I have had very good results with this approach and it teaches some lessons that are lacking in todays society - a sense of responsibility to self and others and the concept of accountability.

Call me old fashioned but I think we need to re-establish these values BEFORE we preach to the kiddies that they have RIGHTS

Vanna,

If you are in HSEC then you would well know that companies are doing their utmost to divest themselves of their responsibilities to the individual worker.

They are able to do this by the FARCE that is, training, authorisation and ticketing. This style of risk management, which you talk of so admiringly, is an ongoing attempt by business to shed all risk associated with employee injuries. It is purely driven by a desire to maximise profit, not minimise injury.

I worked at a mine site where their HSEC tripled the cost of doing business for contractors. Payouts to employees dropped significantly, but injury rates didn't change much at all.

On startup I was taken aside, after my 2 days training and asked to complete 75 SOP's and another 25 standards and hazard plans. They gave me the answers to these questions to help facilitate the process. Then they gave me all the authoristations they needed me to have. I have no problem with that, except they would undoubtedly have claimed that they had given me the necessary training to safely carry out all the aspects of my job. Its called blame shifting. HSEC are masters at it.

Industry don't manage risk that much better, they just do it far more profitably. I've got no qualms about not compensating idiots who behave fooloishly. But this goes far beyond that. It is the pursuit of no financial risk of personal injury. Not no risk of injury.

The empire building that is the HSEC of most major industries reminds me of the 70's show 'Yes Minister'. These departments have become pathways to upper managment and are often entirely removed from the business process. Beyond ther essential role in shedding risk (read responsibility) they seem to produce enough work(almost always misguided ) to justify their existence. There's a term for HSEC departments, its called ' a self licking ice-cream cone'.

Industry HSEC is NOT a model for how we should protect our children at school.

Divine_msn,

I'll put it to you another way.

In many companies, if the supervisor cannot handle potential bullying in the workforce, the supervisor is removed.

Why?

Because there are many other risks besides bullying that the supervisor is unlikely to cope with also.

Compare this to the schools, where basically the teachers cannot handle bullying, so they want thye students removed. Eventually all students will have to be removed, because they will all try bullying at sometime.

This is a typical example of teachers showing no innovation or responsibility, but continually attempting to blame parents, while continually asking the taxpayer (which includes parents) to give them more and more and more and more money.

That is now teaching.

Paul L.
I currently do at least one risk assessment each day, and as a supervisor, I did up to about 20 per day, plus confined space entry forms and filled out numerous isolation tags.

I signed my name to the bottom of each, and took responsibility for something that could happen if I got it wrong.

I was just one out of 1000's of supervisors throughout the country doing similar.

Are teachers so cowardly they want to take no responsibility and continuously blame parents.

As for their attitudes regards safety, what a joke.

The greatest risk for the students is not when they are in the classroom, but when when they are on the playgrounds, and I have seen so many schools with no teacher supervision at all on the playgrounds.

The teachers are too busy gossiping in their air-conditioned staff rooms while having their cake and cups of coffee.

What is a joke, vanna, is not teachers' attitudes regarding safety. As you continue to post, it becomes clearer and clearer that the joke is you believing that you know what you are talking about.

Why not stop talking in vague terms. Try naming ONE of the many schools with no teacher supervision on the playgrounds. You and I both know that you can't and won't, because you would make yourself guilty of slander.

Then perhaps you can go back and substantiate some of your other ludicrous accusations against teachers.

Yes vanna, your consistent attacks on teachers are ludicrous.

I'm a homeschooler, but I don't blame the teachers for the situation in schools - I blame the system....which is one of segregating children away from the wider community...and then looking around in dismay and wondering why the "normal" checks and balances don't kick in.

Vanna - are you claiming that in your workplace/s ALL problems of bullying (and that has to include incidents of physical intimidation and acts of violence) have been dealt with by you asking the offender a series of loaded questions, with the matter considered 'solved' once the person can't answer the last question?

Can you be serious? I can't think of any workplace where an assault on a co-worker, supervisor, visitor or customer (unless committed in some act of self defense) is likely to NOT result in instant suspension with dismissal likely to follow. Not to mention Police involvement....

Please enlighten all of us who are surely wondering what type of industry you work in?

As have others, I will ask you what you believe is the appropriate action to take against perpetrators of violence within the School environment, taking into account the duty of care the School has to protect students, staff and visitors on site?

What is your duty of care to the victim of workplace bullying when an assault occurs? Where does accountability lay if the 'questioning' fails to prevent a change in behaviour and offences escalate?

Please make an effort to answer these questions instead of sprouting the same anti-school/teacher/discipline rethoric that is coming across as capital B Bogus

Divine_msn
I have rarely seen “incidents of physical intimidation and acts of violence” in a workplaces I have been in.

Incidents of physical intimidation and acts of violence normally occur at the later stages of bullying, but bullying has been controlled so that these latter stages do not develop.

I have seen horseplay occurring, but supervisors in the better companies are also required to keep horseplay to the very minimum because it so often ends in injury.

(EG. If someone wets another person with a water hose, and the other person runs away, they can run into something and gets injured)

As for dismissing teachers if they can’t control bullying amongst the students, well I have seen the whole top management structure of a major factory dismissed in one an afternoon because there was a high rate of injuries and lack of motivation in the workforce.

Every head of department was sacked or transferred, as it was believed management was not good enough, and this resulted in a high rate of injuries and lack of motivation in the workforce.

If there is extensive bullying in a school, then probably sack every teacher at senior level in the school, because they are incapable of controlling it.

Quite frankly bullying is one of the easy risks to control in some work environments. There are often many other risk that are much more difficult to control than bullying.

NB.
Duty of care was superseded a number of years ago by risk management legislation. Read up about risk management legislation.

So you have RARELY seen "incidents of physical intimidation and acts of violence" in the workplace. RARELY, but not NEVER. So what happened when such incidents DID occur?

Poriot,
I would agree that schools exist in a world of their own, and are totally separate to the rest of the country.

As an example, there is a town in QLD that is known as the Skin Cancer Capital Of The World, because it has the highest rates of skin cancer of any town in the world.

The biggest school in the town has over 1,500 students (a public high school), but the school does not have a hat and sunglass policy.

Not only are the students not supervised when they are on the sports oval during lunch break, they do not have to wear a hat or wear sunglasses when they are in the sun during the hottest part of the day, and when the UV Index is normally at Extreme.

When the principle was asked why the students aren’t required to at least wear a hat, the principle replied that it would “mess up their hair”.

I can imagine if any employer in a company was told that their workforce is not required to wear a hat if they work in the sun during the hottest part of the day.

They would instantly burst out laughing.

Otokonoko

I'll probably run out of posts shortly.

“So what happened when such incidents DID occur?”

I saw incidents of it many years ago.

This was back in the days where safety was given minimal regard in many companies, and if a worker was injured, the company simply brought in another worker.

It may still occur in some of the poorly managed companies, but those companies will probably go out of business anyway.

As I have mentioned in a previous post, walking into a school is like stepping back 20-30 years in terms of management and administration.

While many towns in Queensland lay claim to the title of 'skin cancer capital of the world', one in particular stands out. I'll assume we're talking about the same NQ location. The largest school there - a school closer to 2000 students than 1500 - does indeed have quite a poor policy when it comes to hats. The uniform policy states that students are "strongly encouraged" to wear hats. I agree - pretty poor.

That said, we CAN'T be talking about the same school, because the principal there - a good friend of mine, though admittedly a controversial figure around town - would never state that students don't have to wear hats because it would mess up their hair. Indeed, he is very dismissive of hairstyles in general. Furthermore, the playground duty roster has not one, not two but three teachers on the ovals during break times. Quite severe disciplinary action is taken on the rare occasion that teachers either do not show up or are late for their duty.

Again I ask: what happens to employees who initiate acts of violence in industry? Surely (just as any good school must have a hat policy) there is a policy in place for this? I suspect you don't want to tell us because the answer would reinforce the argument that violent students should be suspended or expelled.

Otokonoko,
The school I mentioned had a female principal, and currently has a cap of 1500 students. I have also noticed at least two other schools in that town that do not have a hat and sunglass policy for students.

If teachers cannot get students to wear a hat and sunglasses when the temperature is 35+ degrees, and the sun is fierce, and the UV Index is in Extreme, then I can understand why teachers have problems controlling bullying in the schools.

On an industrial site, the workforce will be wearing a safety helmet. They will also be wearing long sleeve shirt, long pants and safety boots. That is standard dress, or level one dress. From that the levels go up depending on the tasks, and can include hearing protection, safety glasses, full face shield, gloves, gas masks etc.

For a supervisor, to get an employee to wear their safety helmet is easy.

“Where is your safety helmet?”

“What happens if something drops on your head?”

“What happens if you hit your hear on a pipe?”

“Who has the time to pick you up?”

“Who has the time to take you to hospital?”

“When will you get out of hospital?”

Etc, etc, etc.

If a supervisor cannot get their employees to wear their safety helmet, then the supervisor is removed, because there are many, many other tasks that are much more difficult than wearing a safety helmet.

Vanna seems to think we should live in a nanny state. Where kindly and well meaning 'supervisors' would tell everyone what to do and all would be well. No doubt Vanna would be putting her hand up for that job as well.

Vanna, please tell me why it is not the responsibility of the parent to ensure that a child has a hat, and wears it?

In virtually every industry I'v been in. HSEC have attempted to impose "safety" in the smallest possible sense.

They are ALWAYS far more concerned with the right shirt or pants, than whether the work instructon that actually made you safe was effective. And that was almost ALWAYS because HSEC had no idea about the actual industry, and it was preffered that way by upper management because then they didn't interefere in production.

Large numbers of warnings issued about non compliant shirts, or no 'take 5', makes it look like your doing something about safety, whilst not doing anything effective at all.

You can't stop bullying by sacking teachers, because the attitudes that children come to school with are develloped at HOME. The idea that a teacher ( who has 1/60th of the influence on each child in their class(assuming 2 parents), and far less than that on children in other classes) should be the resposnsible party is ABSURD.

You are either not a parent, or if you are, seem to have no belief in the importance of instilling in a child a sense of reponsibility. Children with no sense of responsibility can be kept in line when appropriately supervised, but watch out when there's no there to tell them what to do. Or do you, or someone you delegate, plan on being there to supervise every second of your childs existence?

Paul L
Once the student enters the gate of the school, the teachers and principal have primary responsibility for the safety of the student.

That is legal fact.

In fact, if a burglar goes into the school, the school has primary responsibility for the safety of the burglar.

The teachers now have more face to face contact with the child then their parents, and they often have more resources available than their parents, or in our feminist society it is often parent instead of parents (so they could be called parents/parent)

While all schools state that they are concerned about the wellbeing of the child, it is a joke.

As for skin cancer, I have seen girl school pupils walking past a teacher with no hat, no sunglasses, with their dresses as short as possible, and the sleeves of their top rolled up above their shoulder, and the teacher said nothing.

Now in our feminist society, the teacher may not be able to do much about the length of the dresses, but they can certainly do something about their lack of hats, lack of sunglasses and sleeves rolled up.

“Why are your sleeves rolled up?”

“What is skin cancer?”

“How long does it take to get skin cancer?”

“What is the treatment for skin cancer?”

“Will anyone visit you in hospital if you have skin cancer?”

Etc, etc, etc

It doesn’t look too good for teachers.

After 4 years in a teachers college, they now want specialist teachers to teach maths and science to primary school students, (and you can’t get much more basic maths and science than primary school maths and science).

They want specialist teachers to teach English.

They want special training to control bullying.

Shortly they will want special training to get students to roll their sleeves down and wear a hat and sunglasses.

But all the way through they want no responsibility, they want to be able to use the parents/parent as a scapegoat, and they want more and more and more and more money from the taxpayer.

Perhaps they should just try another job.

Once again vanna FAILS to answer direct questions put to him/her.

Vanna - with responses so far that have totally ignored or sidestepped very specific requests for information that you should have at the tips of your fingers, one has to doubt whether you would recognise an appropriate answer to a question?

Maybe the response doesn't matter? The questions keep coming until the person concerned stops replying out of desire to escape and complies. (Probably irritated to Hell and ready to do something else out of line)

With vanna's attitude and intellect I'm starting to think this individual is either a bureaucrat or training for a career in politics. Can't be working in the real world!

Vanna,

You say teachers have more face time with their students than their parents do. Since classes are often as large as 30 children, a teacher will usually be able to devote 2mins per child per class. In a high school anyway. If it is really true that teachers have more face time with their students, then that is a crisis of parenting.

You say teachers have more funding than parents. In what world do you live. Schools don’t have enough money to buy the things they need to fulfil their primary objective, which is to educate. Next you’ll be saying that schools should supply the uniforms, the shoes, the books , sunglasses etc.

Where does a parents responsibility begin. You have stated clearly that they aren’t responsible for the violent behaviour of their children at school. How about anywhere else? You also seem to have implied that parents shouldn’t have to buy their kids hats, or sunglasses or sunscreen. So what is it a parent is responsible for?

You point to workplaces, where (according to you) all safety standards are adhered to. But at the workplace, the worker can, and often is excluded, ie sacked, when they misbehave. Your account of supervisors being sacked for not getting their employees to meet certain requirements is BOGUS. I have never in my time seen a supervisor sacked for the failings of an employee. I have on the other hand seen many workers sacked for the failings of a supervisor.

How deluded are you to think that speaking rationally to someone will always convert them to your position. Children aren’t rational beings, that’s why we don’t allow them to vote or carry guns or drink. Pollyanna on her best day would not go so far as to suggest that she had a cure for all aberrant behaviour.

Wake up. Workers do what you want them to because you have some power over their future employment. Not because of your ironclad logic. Schools of course, do not have the same power, which is why they have so much more trouble.

divine_msn
“With vanna's attitude and intellect”

You haven’t explained yourself, and you are actually carrying out a form of bullying. Go immediately to the principal to be dismissed.

PaulL
Once again, check with a solicitor and ask if the parent or the school has primary responsibility for the safety of the student once the student walks past the school gate.

If the teachers believe that they cannot ensure the safety of the students, then they always have an option to close the school.

If they keep the school open, but cannot ensure the safety of the student, then they are liable for prosecution.

As well, bullying is just one of many possible risks to someone in industry, but most of industry seems to be able to reduce bullying to a low level risk and many other risks as well.

Vanna your scathing, illogical, unsubstantiated attacks on schools and teachers (bully behaviour?) are what causes me to question your attitude.

Your seeming inability to address questions which are clearly posed cause me to question your intellect.

Would you please explain why you denigrate the entire teaching profession and schools in general? (Note: This is a QUESTION. Please respond)

Now on the subject of QUESTIONS - these were asked previously. Please prove that you are a person who may know something about what you write by giving straight honest answers to each one. I suggest you copy and paste and respond to each individually, in order, in the same way as you expect answers from others.

Are you claiming that in your workplace/s ALL problems of bullying (including incidents of physical intimidation and violence) have been dealt with by you asking the offender a series of loaded questions, with the matter considered 'solved' once the person can't answer the last question?

Please enlighten all of us who are surely wondering what type of industry you work in?

As have others, I ask what you believe is appropriate action to take against perpetrators of violence within the School environment, taking into account the duty of care the School has to protect students, staff and visitors on site?

What is your duty of care to any victim of workplace bullying when an assault occurs?

Where does accountability lay if the 'questioning' fails to prevent a change in bad behaviour and offences escalate?

So please explain yourself! It's a chance to reclaim credibility.

Divine_msn,
As I have said, in the workplaces I have been in there was no “physical intimidation and violence”

There was horseplay occurring in some workplaces, which can be difficult to control, particularly amongst men.

There was frequent “bitchiness” amongst female employees in some places, which is also difficult to control.

But no “physical intimidation and violence”.

Why was there no “physical intimidation and violence”?

Because workplace bullying had been controlled so that it didn’t get out of hand.

Also understand that the supervisors were being employed to solve problems and meet company goals, and not employed to be excuse makers.

The excuse from teachers that the parents are to blame is very thin ice.

In our feminist society, the students may only have one parent, because the father has been removed from the children’s lives, or the children have basically no parents and are raised in a day care center or raised by their grandparents.

I have not seen any attempt by the education system to reduce feminism, or reduce the risk that the child will have only one parent, or no parents.

Vanna

you say .... "I have not seen any attempt by the education system to reduce feminism, or reduce the risk that the child will have only one parent, or no parents... "

Since when have schools be charged with this mission? They haven't. EVER. And they couldn't because there would never be any agreement on the fundamental issues involved, let alone how to do anything about them.

You are fundamentally misunderstanding the role of the education system. Schools teach to the curriculum that they are set, to a large degree. They don't get to make it up as they go along. Clearly you think they should be making it up as they go along, just as long as they're pushing your point of view. As you can tell there are plenty here who will disagree with you. DO you really think that schools can implement any policy that is opposed by large sections of the community.

Feminism, and one parent families, are societal issues that can ONLY be dealth with by individuals. Certainly the education department has no power to impose its will in these areas, nor should it.

Paul L

I’ve seen every attempt in the education system to encourage feminism, and there would be more feminists in the education system than someone could count.

In fact, if someone didn’t declare themselves “feminist”, it would be highly unlikely that they would ever get a job in a university, and the universities train primary and secondary school teachers.

So it is now a factor of whatever goes around comes around.

There wouldn’t be one aspect of education that is improving over time, and if bullying in the schools is increasing, it represents just one area amongst many that is getting worse.

There is everything from declining student marks to declining interest amongst students in education.

While teachers might find it convenient to could point there fingers at parents/parent, they are not solving problems, just becoming professional excuse makers.

Vanna,

First off, being a feminist is not a criminal offence, or even an act of immorality, so I don’t see how schools could ever count them. It would be like counting mounting staff members who belonged to the liberal or labour parties, a gross intrusion on a persons privacy.

Secondly, you haven’t shown any evidence of the encouragement of feminism, nor have you shown any evidence of the ill effects of feminism. No political party that I know of has come out against feminism. There is certainly no education dept policy regarding feminism. So where is it your rant is coming from?

Everything from declining student marks to declining interest in school can be attributed to the lack of commitment to education in this county. It can be attributed to a far more selfish generation of parents whose interest in their childrns education is secondary to their own wants and needs. But first and foremost it has been driven by the undermining of our educational system from extremists on the left and the right.

On the left the campaign has been to elevate the whims of children to the realm of rights. In doing so the left ensured that the tools that schools used to keep order and discipline have been confiscated. On the right, parents with money have removed their children from public schools, castigating them for not maintaining standards.

You narrowly ascribe problems which affect our whole society as educational failings. This is a NONSENSE.

Whatever attitude a child has when he/she goes to school, it is UNDENIABLY a product not only of the parents attitude but also of their consent. Attitudes are developed at home. That is where the one on one time is spent. Find me an expert who will elevate the importance of a teacher, over the importance of a parent in the role of a childs life, and I'll show you someone who has lost touch with reality.

Its seems your patent inability to even understand your own workplace dynamic, is matched by your inability to understand the larger issue.

PaulL.
Once again, the teachers and principal are primarily responsible for the safety of the students once they walk past the school gate.

But if teachers or others want to use "parents" as an excuse for anything, they should be careful who they are referring to, because about 25% of children are being raised in single parent households, and this number is expected to keep rising in future years.

I would think that if the flood gates were opened for schools to carry out suspensions and corporal punishment for bullying, then this would result in punishment being given almost exclusively to boys, while any bullying being carried out by girls would go unchecked and unpunished.

I also have no doubts that the statistics regards bullying would be skewed and manipulated to make it look as though boys exclusively carry out bullying.

This has occurred regards domestic violence and similar issues, and in the feminist education system, it is 110% likely to happen also.

Eventually, instead of innovative solutions requiring thought and good management, the teachers would simply opt for the laziest and most feminist approach, which is suspensions and corporal punishment of boy students.

Incidentally I have just finished a 4 hr "call out". There was a large crane that was being repositioned at a building site, and the electectrics wouldn't work. Eventually there were electricians, riggers, crane drivers and truck drivers involved, and we were finally able to get the crane operational without any physical violence or bullying, even though everyone was tired and wanted to be at home, and there was pouring rain and high winds, and everyone was soaked and cold.

All the people involved were men, and this job was just 1 out of 1000's of jobs being performed by groups of men throughout the country.

I AM THEREFORE TOTALLY SUSPICIOUS THAT TEACHERS CANNOT MANAGE LITTLE SCHOOLBOYS.

Due primarily to the amount of bigotry, feminism, laziness, and excuse making that is rampant in the education system; I have not the slightest confidence that the education system can effectively manage bullying amongst students, or most other problems.

Vanna - you claimed earlier (Page 12):
"Divine_msn
I have rarely seen “incidents of physical intimidation and acts of violence” in a workplaces I have been in.

Now in my most recent attempt to get some factual answers:
"Divine_msn,
As I have said, in the workplaces I have been in there was no “physical intimidation and violence”

So which - RARELY or NEVER?

If as INSINUATED, you've considerable experience in supervisory roles including heavy industry, traditionally testosterone driven environments, I find claim of 'NEVER' incredible.

In 35 years working in Healthcare, Agriculture and Retail - more than 20 as Business owner/manager and supervisor of small work forces, be assured that while instances were rare, they did occur.

Where in 'Supervisor' role, my response has ranged from documented strong 'counselling' with written warning, through dismissal to one incident where I called Police, urging the victim to prosecute. (This incident occurred 2 years into employ of man who got on with colleagues, no reprimands of any type needed. Then someone accidently damaged a project he was working on. He exploded into a vicious assault.) Although victim declined legal action, this man was instantly dismissed.

Describe one of your 'rare instances' vanna? If you reiterate the 'never' I'll accuse you of spending most of your working hours in the site office, drinking coffee and gossiping ..... Like those teachers you said, who never notice schoolyard bullying.

Also - once again, 'FAIL' for not answering the questions. Before being sent to the Principals office for inattention and poor effort, in best Australian school tradition, you get another chance:

Please tell us what type of industry you work in?

What do you believe is appropriate action against perpetrators of violence within School environments, taking into account the Schools duty of care to protect students, staff and visitors on site?

What is your duty of care to any victim of workplace bullying when an assault occurs?

Where does accountability lay if 'questioning' technique fails to change bad behaviour and offences escalate?

Try and do better this time eh!

'Incidentally I have just finished a 4 hr "call out". There was a large crane that was being repositioned at a building site, and the electectrics wouldn't work. Eventually there were electricians, riggers, crane drivers and truck drivers involved, and we were finally able to get the crane operational without any physical violence or bullying, even though everyone was tired and wanted to be at home, and there was pouring rain and high winds, and everyone was soaked and cold."
Was this an emergency situation? I would have thought that under such extreme weather conditions this sort of project would be delayed due to workplace health & safety concerns until risk of injury and damage were minimised? No? That surprises me whose father-in-law was a site manager for a high rise building company ....

So your role was ....? To stand around and make sure no-one swore at each other? Sitting inside a warm dry vehicle sipping coffee from a thermos 'observing'? BTW - What are "electectrics"

"All the people involved were men, and this job was just 1 out of 1000's of jobs being performed by groups of men throughout the country."

So what has the sex of these workers got to do with the price of eggs? There are groups of female workers out there performing thousands of jobs throughout the country? Most commonly there are groups of men & women performing millions of jobs everyday throughout the country ...

I AM THEREFORE TOTALLY SUSPICIOUS THAT TEACHERS CANNOT MANAGE LITTLE SCHOOLBOYS"

"Little Schoolboys" can be 6ft plus, 90kg 17 - 18 year olds with bad attitudes (or much younger, smaller and nastier like the 12 yr old in the recent bully video that sparked this debate) especially if brought up in homes where respect and values are not taught or practised. Authorities have stripped schools and teachers of effective management options. Most nasty little schoolboys (and girls) would sneer at your "questions"

I am totally suspicious that you are bogus!

Vanna,

You seem to find it difficult to understand why grown men are easier to control. There are a host of factors at work. But I'll give you two.

1. These grown men are rational adults. You and you're ilk don't keep them in line. They keep themselves in line. HSEC merely remind employees of the tenous nature of their employment. Most have repsonsibilities, and those who can't manage their own behaviour rarely last long. This is not a dynamic you have anything other than LIMITED influence over.

2)These men that you refer to can be sacked without cause these days, let alone for infringements HSEC might dream up. This is a potent reason to toe the company line. ESpecially for a man with a familiy to support.

Children, especially teenagers aren't rational adults, they canj't be sacked and they laregly aren't interested in your pop psychology method. They'd tell you to get F@cked. I suspect then you'd be inclined to give them a smack over the ear, which would be my inclination as well.

I work in the coal industry, and your prescriptive solution for bullying and other behaviour is unbelievable. You seriously think that you can talk to a bloke like you have suggested you would, and that convinces them of the error of their ways. Have you lost touch with reality?

I'd check the duty of care as well. It would require of teachers and staff all reasonable measures. But all reasonable measures won't protect every child every day. In the US kids bring guns to school, despite armed security and metal detectors. Its a sign of the times. And it stems not from a failure of educators, but from a failure of society as a whole.

Attitudes and opinions are by and large, picked up at home. Racism is not taught at schools yet plenty of children exhibit racist behaviour. And I could go on and on.

You look at one small part of the whole disfunction annd proclaim it the problem. Your missing the woods for the trees.

The Divine_msn and of course the divine Paull,
Noted in all of your posts, you have never once made a positive comment about boys and men.

Everything is negative, and you have ignored anything positive about boys and men.

To put it more simply, in a feminist education system that is allowed to do whatever it wants, boy students would be outlawed.

Noted also that the author never said anything positive about boy students in his article, and has not very often said anything positive about men in his other articles either.

“So why don’t you say anything positive about boys or men?”

“Do you know what bigotry is?”

“Did you realise you were being bigoted?”

“Who pays you money?”

“Do you like the organisation that pays you money to be sexist and bigoted?”

vanna, have another read of PaulL's last post there are positives about men in that very post. Rational adults, men taking family responsibilities seriously.

PaulL is correct, there is a big difference between adult's and children, there is a big difference between those who can be sacked for bad behavior and those who see a suspension as a holiday, there is a big difference between those who know they might go to jail for an assault and those who think that the worst that will happen is a lecture and a few days at home playing the X-Box.

R0bert

Ok enough already.

Vanna is either bogus - trying to wind people up and those of us who keep replying to the nonsense and attempting to have rational discussion around this thread are just encouraging the mischief.

Or on the other hand this person may have some serious issues involving delusions and paranoia.

Either way, any further debate is useless.

Cheers all

Robert,

The author has not said anything positive about boys, and if you look through previous articles, he has made very few positive comments about boys or about men.

Nearly every comment has been negative of boys or men.

I have known groups of teachers who have also never said anything positive about boy students, although they tended to be a little bit numb about men, because they wanted men to come into the school to carry out maintenance on the school.

If someone is employed in a feminist environment such as the education system, then very few or no positive comments can be made about the male gender, or they simply will not have a job.

If you have raised children then you will know that they go through a variety of phases, because they are experimenting.

One of those phases is likely to be bullying other people, and most or all children will be bullies at some time, because they are experimenting.

I know that there are a considerable number of strategies that can be used to control bullying, but if left to people who have not the slightest positive opinion about boys or men, then eventually they will opt for expulsion or corporal punishment as being the only means to control bullying.

There is almost nothing in the education system that is improving in time, and because of the attitudes of so many of the teachers, I wouldn’t have any confidence that teachers could effectively control bullying.

vanna,

"...people who have not the slightest positive opinion of boys or men".

You commit an identical sin in this regard in that you "never" opine the slightest positive opinion of girls or women,

You indulge in precisely that which you criticise -except that you target the opposite gender.

Psst....you know that rhyme that you heard in nursery school about snips and snails and puppy dog's tails....and sugar and spice and all things nice....it wasn't really a feminist plot - most boys got over it by grade 3.

Sheesh...no hope there methinks.

Wise words PaulL, Poirot and Divine. Fact is adults are adults and for the most part mature and sober men in building sites can be trusted to make rational decisions.

Children are not adults yet and need guidance. Unfortunately civil behaviours cannot always be learnt via role modelling, although it is an important part, sometimes there has to be rules and consequences.

If we don't let children learn by their mistakes how will they learn? How will they find their place in the real world that is far less tolerant of whiney excuse makers.

Pelican,
One of the areas that schools fail, is in harbouring individuals that have nothing positive to say about the male gender.

It is ironic that when boys marks decline, girls marks eventually decline also.

Vanna,

You can't be talking about the school I went to. I had great male role models, my maths teacher, my footy coach and the deputy pricipal.

I NEVER had a female teacher that discriminated against me.

You have clearly had a very bad experience, and need to somehow, make it everyone else's experience as well. Stick to what you know. If XYZ school treated you badly, say so. But don't tell me that ALL/MOST schools discriminate against boys, unless you've had experience at ALL/MOST of them.

PaulL
You could provide a link to an article written by any academic in any school or university in this country that says something positive about boys or men.

You will be looking for a very long time.

The author is referred to as an “expert” in boys and men, but recommends to “send bullies to a tough boot camp for a week.”

All children will carry out bullying at some stage, and I am wondering if this “expert” advice is also applicable to girls or just boys

See
http://www.teachersandfamilies.com/open/parent/ra1.cfm

I am also wondering if there could be a problem with a student who is a perpetual bully. About 30% of male prisoners are believed to be schizophrenic, and the prisons being used as mental hospitals. Could a perpetual bully also have some type of mental problem?

Basically I would in no way trust the author with my children.

How he is employed by a university is almost beyond belief.

I say almost beyond belief, because there are plenty more like him employed in the education system.

PaulL
I have had a quick scan through your links, and not one made a comment that was positive of boys or men.

Most comments seemed to infer that boys were impaired in some way, and needed to be fixed.

EG.
“Men have a very particular role in working with boys to encourage them to be nurturing and caring and to be in touch with their feelings.”

So boys are not naturally “nurturing or caring” and have to be made to be “nurturing and caring”

Same old feminist claptrap.

I am also well aware of the inquiry into boys education conducted some years ago, and it developed a 10 point plan that did not mention any “boot camp”

I actually raised the issue at a P&C meeting at one of the largest schools in rural QLD.

Guess what?

Not one of the teachers at that meeting, including the principal had heard of the inquiry into boys education.

Did you have a quick look at the link for girls bullying.

EG.
“Researchers have found that, contrary to popular belief, girls are not less aggressive than boys, they are just more subtle or covert in their use of aggression.”

So should girls also be suspended or sent to a “boot camp” for a week, or will this only be used on boys?

Or another way of putting this, do certain people get their jollies out of punishing boys.

vanna as I've already pointed out PaulL made positive comments about men in a post just before one where you accussed him and divine_msn of not saying anything positive about men. You just don't want to see it.

Why are you so determined to see things in such black and white terms?

R0bert

Try and look for an article or book that says anything positive about women that is not in the context of old feminist dogma that was trying to prove women were capable human beings and not airheads to a very entrenched male patriarchy.

vanna, I also had great male role models at my school, in fact oddly most of my teachers in HS were male. All of my professors and lecturers at uni in the 70s/80s were men. They never said anything positive or negative about men either.

In fact my experience was nobody ever said anything positive about men or women. Most students go to university for education not to have their egos stroked about their gender.

Why do men or women need to go around seeking praise for their endeavours. Hard work and achievement are not accomplished by genders but by individuals.

However I think you know all that and you are just stirring the pot. If you really think so lowly of women and really believe that women do not appreciate the men in their lives then may I suggest you need to look inward first.

Robert,

PaulL seems to think men have to be supervised with the big stick of being sacked from their employment.

Sort of forgets all the voluntary work men carry out from Air Sea Rescue to the Lions Club.

Many men do work as an act of duty.

As for teachers, there are teachers that cannot get students to wear a hat and roll their sleeves down in some of the worst areas for skin cancer, and I have seen so many schools with no teachers at all on playground duty.

Their ability to motivate and supervise is minimal, while the risks they have to cope with are minimal compared to risks that other people have to cope with in their daily job.

But you will notice the article doesn’t mention girls much, when the incidence of bullying from girls is about the same as bullying from boys.

And you will notice that the author mentions teacher’s pay.

Sort of makes one think that some teachers might try using boys as an excuse to get more money from the taxpayer.

EG.
I have to put up with these awful, dreadful evil male boy students, so I should get more money.

Vanna,

In some countries in Europe there are mothers who elevate their boys to the status of angels. And worship at their feet. In this coutry we find that practice obscene and destructive, for both parties.

You seem to have a deep psychological trauma. If someone hurt you, or someone you love, I'd suggest telling someone, preferable someone qualified.

I can't help wondering how you find the time to shut down workplaces for safety infringements and ask probing questions of workplace bullies when you clearly spend so much of your life surveilling local schools to tally the teachers on playground duty and listening in to hear if they make positive comments about boys. When you add in attending school concerts to see who the children listen to, examining school management structures, watching teachers' reactions to girls' uniform infringements, keeping tabs on the levels of feminism in education, making unsubstantiated accusations against teachers and carefully avoiding answering questions, I can only assume that you have chosen to forego sleep. That may explain the increasing irrationality of your arguments.

Some advice, though:

Write a letter to the Director-General of Education Queensland informing her of the breaches you observe in not one, not two, but so many of the schools for which she is responsible. Make sure you name the schools and give details of how and when you came by your information. If you don't receive an adequate response, take it to A Current Affair or Today Tonight. They'll probably be able to do a hidden camera expose on the case and force the department into action. If you are telling the truth (and I have my doubts), then you certainly have a moral responsibility to take action to protect those vulnerable kiddies from the big bad teachers and their lazy, errant ways.

Otokonoko,
What you say has been done. There was a large school where the principal decided to take early retirement when the heat was turned up, and one large university completely changed a number of its courses, after many complaints were made.

I would think men and fathers should be very concerned about what teachers are doing in the schools, or we could become like states such as Florida in the US where about 1 in 10 boys were being given Ritalin.

When schools in that state were investigated, it was found that teaching methods were normally "chalk and talk", and Ritalin was dispensed to boys who became restless or bored.

Noted also that no posters or the author has mentioned what should be done to girls who are bullies, and I would think most posters and the author want to avoid that issue, or their sexism and bigotry because more easily noticed.

I personally have not differentiated between boys and girls in my posts because it is appopriate to apply the same consequences to both. Perhaps it is a complete lack of sexism and bigotry that leads others to do the same.

Otokonoko,

From that I would suppose that you are agreeable to also sending girls to a "boot camp" (as proposed by the author) if they are found to be carrying out bullying.

From all studies undertaken, bullying amongst girls is widespread, and there will have to be very large boot camps.

I've been reading this discussion with some bemusement. I note that 'vanna' hasn't posted a single comment that is positive about girls, women, schools or teachers.

Was s/he bullied by girls at school?

Morgabzola,
From that I would suppose that you are agreeable to also sending girls to a "boot camp" (as proposed by the author) if they are found to be carrying out bullying.

Or would you like to see boys only sent to a "boot camp"?

Interesting that the author gave some evidence to the inquiry into boys education years ago.

But none of what he recommends in any article he has written that I have read, is contained in the recomendations of the inquiry.

Millions were spent on the inquiry, and milions wasted, because seldom have the full set of recommendations ever been carried out by any school I am aware of.

The education system is too feminist to carry out the full recomendations.

Hi vanna. I don't think that sending boys or girls to 'boot camp' would be effective in addressing bullying behaviour, quite simply because such places operate on bullying their inmates.

Now, why won't you address the point that I and others have made, i.e. that you go on (and on, and on) about the supposed lack of positive comments made about men and boys, when you never ever make positive comments about girls, women, teachers or schools?

Morganzola (or perhaps C.J Morgan the Giant)
“I don't think that sending boys or girls to 'boot camp' would be effective in addressing bullying behaviour, quite simply because such places operate on bullying their inmates.”

Exactly.

How a so-called Australian university could pay the author money is almost beyond belief.

Or perhaps our feminist universities simply don’t like boys, and don’t believe girls can be bullies.

You want to know about girls and teachers such as the author.

Well in another article the author compares boys to girls, none of which was complementary to boys, and I think this was well addressed by an “eet”

“The sad thing is that you’re an ‘expert’ on boys’ education, yet you can’t see past a feminist perspective; a premises that boys are some type of deficient girl. What hope do boys have?”

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5119#61964

I personally would not regard the author as being an expert in men or boys, but I would regard the author as being a feminist paid money by a university in Australia.

The epitaph for this article:-

"A FORMER student who said she woke up every day at the age of 12 wishing she was dead has won her bullying case against a Sydney private girls' school.

Ms Oyston, who was not present for the judgment, sued the college for negligence, contending it breached its duty of care to her."

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/ex-private-school-pupil-jazmine-oyston-wins-bullying-case-against-st-patricks-college/story-fn3dxity-1226038665102

About time.

Once the student is past the school gate, the school has primary responsibility for the student, and blaming parents is not an excuse for negligence on the part of the teachers.