Category Archives: Bullying and Harassment

Pepsi commercial models bullying

You might have seen this. Millions have.

A man shows up to a car dealership and eyes a hot sports car. The salesman engages him in conversation and offers to put him behind the wheel to try it out. The buyer, a middle-aged, timid mini-van driver, says the Camaro would be too much car for him. He didn’t know if he could handle it. The salesman reassures him it is safe so, after he signs all the necessary papers, they go for a test drive.

Then all hell breaks loose. He drives like a maniac, speeding recklessly and doing stunts that would give anyone a heart attack. The panicked salesman looks afraid for his life. He tells the driver to slow down, to stop the car before he wrecks it, that he’s going to kill him, and when they finally screech into the car lot, the traumatized salesman bolts from the car to call the police.

But, wait the driver tells him. It’s not what you think it is. It’s a prank. We were just having some fun.

The joke is on him.

The “test driver” is actually Jeff Gordon, a professional NASCAR/Stock car driver, in disguise. Pepsi sent Jeff to a Chevy dealership to get him behind the wheel of a Camaro, to “scare the bejesus out of the salesman riding shotgun.” http://www.sportsgrid.com/nascar/jeff-gordon-pepsi/)

The Pepsi Max commercial immediately went viral on YouTube with 31 million views in one week and, as of March 22, it became the 14th most viewed ad of all time. The Internet is abuzz. (http://www.unrulymedia.com/article/22-03-2013/new-test-drive-ad-puts-fizz-back-pepsi)

The accolades pour in:

  • It’s genius.
  • The funniest video in years!
  • The car salesman’s reaction is hilarious.
  • That guy definitely got poned. (according to Internetslang.come poned is an acronym for “Powerfully owned, dominated”)

A controversy surfaces:

  • The ad world and many YouTube viewers say it’s all a fake.
  • That it was staged with actors and done with multiple takes.
  • A stunt driver stood in for Gordon.
  • Maybe Pepsi shouldn’t fake out consumers like that.

Some mixed feelings are voiced:

  • While it is definitely mean, it is funny.
  • This is cruel but also enjoyable and funny.
  • A sort of mean but incredibly funny prank by Pepsi and Jeff Gordon
  • It was funny as can be, but my heart still went out to the poor guy.

The real message is missed.

The upsetting issue is the negative message the prank sends: If something is funny, it excuses cruel, dominating, demeaning bullying behavior.

My first reactions to the video, like the woman whose heart went out to the poor guy, were shock and empathy for the salesman. I felt so bad for him, not only because he was scared, but also because his suffering was a joke played on him and shared with the world. Staged or not, what it showed, under the guise of humor, was outright mean and callous. This is the opposite of what we are trying to teach our children about how to treat each other; that they should go beyond the traditional Golden Rule to the Golden Rule of Empathy that teaches us to treat others as they want to be treated, with the understanding that everyone has basic unalienable rights that must be respected.

It all hinges on empathy.

The foundation of non-violence and respect for others is our ability to put ourselves in their shoes, to see things from their perspective, to feel this empathy for them, and then to act with compassion. Empathy allows us to evaluate what we see happening, make informed decisions, and choose our actions wisely. It leads to respectful and compassionate conduct toward others, something this Pepsi commercial, entertaining or not, does not model.

Bullying take s a village of bystanders.

I wish more people had spoken up about how cruel a practical joke the commercial was and were less concerned about whether  it was real or a fake, or if it was a good marketing tool to sell more Pepsi Max. The popularity of this ad illustrates the role of bystander in bullying, the audience that lets the bullying continue.

My child is being bullied

My child doesn’t want to go to school. The reason? She’s being bullied.

No child should have to suffer being bullied or need to change schools to feel safe. In the span of two weeks, in two separate medical offices, I had a conversation with a doctor and a nurse about bullying in schools. The doctor expressed concern for her own daughter and dismay at how her receptionist had to move her daughter to a new school to avoid being bullied.  The nurse’s situation was not new to me, as we had talked about her first-grade daughter being bullied by other girls while it was happening, and how she finally went to the principal for help.

It was when I recently asked her how things were going that she welled up and told me things had turned around and were going well, thanks to a principal who took her concerns seriously and acted immediately. She was so grateful for the principal’s actions and couldn’t say enough about how much she respected and appreciated her. She wished all schools were blessed with a principal of her professionalism and compassion. I had to agree.

But what struck me was her anxiety over reporting the incidents in the first place, and the fear of being labeled a problem mother who is always complaining, and the repercussions of getting a group of her daughter’s classmates in trouble. Even with her child refusing to do homework and read each night as she usually did, and not wanting to go to school, she wasn’t sure how to handle it. It was with her heart broken over the pain her daughter was enduring that she went to the principal and exposed the bullying.

She knows she did the right and necessary thing, but it was not easy. The message that bullying is not tolerated and should be reported had not reached her and likely not reached the other parents. It took courage and some outrage to walk through that school door and march into the principal’s office. It took facing up to her peers – the other children’s parents – and righting a terrible wrong. And she feared reprisal and making her daughter’s life even more difficult.

She shouldn’t have had to feel this way. Effective school climate efforts are intentional and boldly advertised: We don’t do that here. We are better people than that. We know how to treat others with empathy and respect. This message changes school culture to where the protection of our students’ physical, psychological, and emotional safety becomes the norm. It is critical, and in most states a legal requirement, to have a school policy on bullying and harassment, but effecting change in the school culture to make violence taboo takes a concerted and visible effort by the school leadership. A policy is not a piece of paper; it is a living thing. Teachers, students, staff, parents, and administrators all need education about the many forms of school violence and accept that none of it is okay. They need to know there is a difference between “telling on” someone and reporting an abuse, and that the administration will listen to their concerns and bring the problem to resolution. The bottom line is they need to believe the school will and has an obligation to make the bullying stop.

Schools need to get out this message: Please speak up. We will listen and make it right. We promise.

My nurse’s daughter is now happy at school, back to reading for enjoyment and tackling her schoolwork. Her mother is a hero; she will look back with pride and satisfaction to the time when she stepped up and used her personal power to protect her child. We now need to change the way we do things so that we welcome all parents when they come to us with a concern and that we thank them for helping us keep our promise that our school is a safe haven for their children.

Bullying happens in all schools at all grade levels. This incident was in a first grade in a very small parochial school. For more information on what bullying looks like and what you can do, check out my other posts and my book, The Violence Continuum: Creating a Safe School Climate.

Create a no competition zone

Competition…

  • For the teacher’s attention
  • grades
  • prizes
  • approval
  • To be first in line
  • most popular
  • richest
  • prettiest
  • coolest

…undermines the positive learning climate we need in our classrooms. We now realize the damage competition does if left unchecked and recent anti-bullying and safe school climate efforts require that we actively work to make school an emotionally, socially, and physically safe place for every child.

This is especially important when we look at the unique nature of a school. Children go to school to learn things they don’t know or cannot yet do. Progressing from not knowing to knowing is an incremental process that requires risk taking and tenacity, and makes students vulnerable. The classroom is not like an athletic field, where the players already have the requisite knowledge and skills to compete. Students are still in the process of learning and classroom competition does not build character or a strong work ethic. What does build good character is challenge and encouragement,  realistic goals, and working hard to reach them – and all the while treating others with respect and compassion.

School, then, is inherently stressful.

Everything we do in our classroom, intentionally or without knowing, affects the stress level. Healthy classrooms thrive on cooperation, collaboration, and mutual support, which reduce this stress. In this climate, under the patient guidance of the teacher and community of respectful peers, students feel safe and can keep trying until they master the material or skill.

But the stress of the organized competition we sometimes use to motivate children and of the competition that happens when children vie for social status compound each other. Being compared to others and put on the spot to perform breed insecurity and can interfere with a student’s academic learning. We have learned that competition in the classroom leads to diminished, not increased, personal and group effort. Why? Because it substitutes extrinsic motivation for development of  self-discipline and an internal desire to try hard and to do well. Students work only as hard and as long as it takes to reach the artificial goal, or, when they see they cannot win, they give up or act out.  The competition establishes a pecking order, and students do not learn how to cooperate and help each other learn.  Instead they become competitors and the climate of the classroom becomes more stressful and less conducive to learning.

This competition is harmful to school climate and our students because it…

  • Puts children in a heightened emotional state of flight, fight or freeze.
  • Causes fear and embarrassment.
  • Labels students as good or bad at something.
  • Leads to winners and losers.
  • Defines an in and an out crowd.
  • Creates a power imbalance.
  • Leads to emotional and physical bullying.
  • Fosters fear of failure and a tendency to give up.
  • Is a constant reminder of self-defeating beliefs children may already have.
  • Increases performance anxiety in highly driven students and those expected by themselves or others to be perfect.

Competition and rewards also reinforce existing social hierarchies where the more socially and academically adept get the bulk of the positive feedback, rewards, and sense of accomplishment. So, instead of a secure climate where all children feel safe and can learn, we get a climate that encourages…

  • Cheating to win or come out on top
  • Meanness to build social status
  • Callous attitudes toward the success of our peers
  • Reliance on extrinsic motivation
  • Praise junkies who expect rewards for their efforts – verbal or tangible

And it damages instead of builds the critical personal connections, sense of  community, and caring relationships students and teachers need.

What can teachers do to minimize competition?

  1. Create a classroom climate of respect and empathy where we always treat each other in a caring way.
  2. Refrain from comparing students or pitting them against one another, and from offering artificial rewards.

For example, teachers sometimes use competitive games, such as a spelling bee or Jeopardy-type activity, to teach or to review material for a test. We view competitive games as something students like, a break from the routine that adds a little excitement.  But these games often fail to teach much, and, even worse, they are emotionally and socially counterproductive. While competition does get students’ adrenaline pumping, it also heightens emotions and causes discord that make it hard to calm down after the competition is over. And it is difficult to justify a spelling bee for instructional purposes when there are more effective and considerate ways to teach spelling than to make students spell words out loud in front of their classmates.

It is true that some children might enjoy spelling bees (usually the best spellers), but more find them just one more opportunity to fail…with an audience. And if not necessary, why use a teaching strategy that causes anxiety and taints the atmosphere?

Consider how you felt as a child and how you feel as an adult.
  • Did you enjoy spelling bees?
  • Would you like to participate in a spelling bee at a faculty meeting?
  • How about math flash cards or a game of American history “Around the World” at a staff-development workshop?

What an eye-opener. If we think of it from this perspective, we might feel differently about competitive games that pit one child or a group of students against one another. The brain can’t learn if it is in an anxious, fearful state. And we don’t want to make our students feel uncomfortable.

Keeping these understandings of human nature in mind may motivate us to stop using spelling bees, races to read the most books, and rewards for test scores or good behavior that result in pride for some and feelings of failure and embarrassment for others. Unless, that is, the competitive activity…

  • Is optional for self-selected students (no peer or teacher pressure),
  • Is a fun activity for the participants,
  • Does not waste instructional time,
  • Teaches students to play fair and be gracious winners and losers.

Otherwise, let’s make schools a healthy, competition-free zone.

We have to fight to protect children’s rights

The unfortunate reality is we need legal protections to stop discrimination of targeted groups.

Bullies target those they see as different, feel superior to, and feel power over, and every child has a right to be safe and to learn and prosper emotionally, psychologically, and socially. But history shows that we need to fight hard for human rights. Recent legislation by almost all states that compels schools to protect students from bullying acknowledges the power of legal remedies to bring about change. This is especially true in the case of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender students who are bullied more than any other group and are not yet protected by civil rights legislation.

In my book, Story Power: Breathing Life Into History,  I included a timeline of women’s rights to illustrate their journey. Progress was painfully slow until laws were finally enacted that gave women equal rights in all areas of their lives. If you ever doubted the value of legislation that protects targeted groups from discrimination, read through this timeline.

My Timeline of the History of Women’s Rights in America

Put yourself on the timeline and see where you fit in the legal evolution of women’s rights.

(This timeline is not all inclusive. There are many other milestones in women’s history.)

1776            Declaration of  Independence claims all men are created equal.

1789            US Constitution ratified and goes into effect.

1848            1st Women’s Rights Convention held in Seneca Falls, New York.

1861            The American Civil War begins – fight for women’s rights put on hold.

1865            Civil War ends; Reconstruction begins.

1866            Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony form the American Equal Rights Association dedicated to the goal of universal suffrage.

1868             14th Amendment to the US Constitution gives all male citizens the right to vote.

1870             15th Amendment to the US Constitution says the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. (Sex not included)

1878             The Woman Suffrage Amendment is first introduced in the US Congress: “Equality of  rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.”

1893             New Zealand first country to give women right to vote.

1903             National Women’s Trade Union established for better working conditions.

1917             Russia gives women right to vote.

1919             My father is born.

1920            19th Amendment gives US women right to vote; National American Woman Suffrage Association (NAWSA) becomes the League of Women Voters.

1921            My mother is born.

1923            The Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) first proposed to Congress.

1940-45      WWII Propaganda campaign to get women to work in typically male jobs.

1951             I’m born.

1956            Number of women in the work force up from 8.5 million in 1947 to almost 13 million.

1959             American Medical Association sanctions birth control for the first time.

1960            FDA approves “the pill.”

1963            President’s “Commission on Status of Women” finds women discriminated against in almost all aspects of US life.

1964            Title VII Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination in employment by race or gender.

1970             Congress approves the Equal Rights Amendment, first step toward adoption.

1972             ERA sent to states for ratification.

Title IX becomes law: no one can be discriminated against based on their sex in education programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance.

1973             Rowe v. Wade – women’s right to choose abortion – upheld by US Supreme Court.

1977             My first child is born.

1976             Nebraska adopts the first law making it illegal for a husband to rape his wife.

1979             My second child is born.

1986            Supreme Court rules sexual harassment on the job is sex discrimination.

1992             American Association of University Women release their report, “How Schools Shortchange Girls.”

1993             Violence Against Women Act passes: acknowledges domestic violence and sexual assault as crimes.

2001            American Association of University Women releases “Beyond the ‘Gender Wars’: A conversation about girls, boys, and education.”

2009            Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Restoration Act passed.

2012             Affordable Care Act requires insurance plans to include coverage for birth control without a co-pay.

GOP and Democratic platforms differ on contraception and abortion.

ERA not yet ratified by a three-fourths majority of US states.

Ban assault rifles in our society; teach non-violence in our homes and schools.

It has been a while since I’ve posted a new blog. Everyday life happens, and sometimes what you think will be a simple, straightforward topic turns into a research project. (Look for a future post on the unhealthy art of sarcasm.)

But nothing gets everyone’s attention like a mass shooting of innocent people going about their everyday lives. The people of Colorado and the rest of the world are trying to wrap their heads around the mental and physical effort that went into a systematically, finely-calculated plan to kill people as they watched a movie.

On the “violence continuum” this is off the chart, an extraordinary, disturbing act by one individual. It shatters our sense of the safe haven– places where we can just be that we count on as being secure. Incidents of mass gun violence re-energize heated arguments about access to guns, a critical constitutional issue over which Americans constantly wrestle, often to little avail. But below is link that gives everyone a chance to come together and take positive action. No matter where we stand on Second Amendment rights, we should all be able to agree there is no place in our society for machines designed for no other purpose than to massacre. And while we work jointly to ban these assault weapons, we can work on fixing our culture of violence.

Fixing our culture of violence-one that is pervasive, not extraordinary – especially as we try to teach our children to choose peaceful ways of living, is lost in the blurring immediacy of a deadly tragedy. We call the incident senseless, but is it any more senseless than a child being taunted for the way she looks, or being excluded from the group because she is poor or has special learning needs, or being harassed and assaulted for being gay? From one end of the violence continuum to the other, it is all senseless, and physically and emotionally scarring. This everyday violence is where we need to focus. We have remarkable control over our homes and schools. We create the climate and culture that define what is right and wrong. We can make sure these are safe havens where adults model and children practice peaceful, respectful, and compassionate ways to treat each other.

Sure, make a commitment to ban assault rifles in our society, but also make a commitment to consistently model, teach, and expect non-violence in our schools and homes.

“President Obama and Governor Romney: Issue a joint call asking Congress to reinstate the expired federal assault weapons ban now.”

and also

“Stop Bullying!”

Hitting students? Legally? Really?

Many schools across America control their students through fear and physical violence. And they do it legally. Whether your child can be paddled in public school as a form of punishment depends on where you live.

Most states ban the use of corporal punishment in U.S. juvenile correction facilities and in the prison system.  Yet nineteen states still allow the use of corporal punishment by school adults against students who misbehave, break a rule, have a bad attitude, perform poorly in schoolwork, or do something that annoys them. It is even harder to understand the thinking behind this when we discover that ten of these nineteen states that allow students to be disciplined physically, paradoxically prohibit corporal punishment in their penal systems! How can this be so? They do this with the blessing of the U.S. Supreme Court, which in 1977,  ruled that the Eighth Amendment of the Bill of Rights only protects convicted criminals from cruel and unusual punishment, not students confined to a classroom. (State-by-state analysis of the legality of corporal punishment in the US)

Not unlike prisoners, students are a confined audience at the mercy of those in power. They are vulnerable to whatever their classmates and adults dish at them. Thankfully there is a growing awareness of the frequency and harm of bullying and harassment, especially of certain groups of students. In recent years, many states and school districts have enacted laws and implemented policies that prohibit such abuse. We acknowledge that we owe our students a school climate that is safe and nurturing.

Much of a teacher’s influence on her students comes from modeling, often unintentionally, and we ask teachers and principals to intentionally model what they expect from their students. In addition to the moral and ethical questions of adults hurting children, paddling is not compatible with the understanding of how children learn. Corporal punishment does not model positive social skills, is not a deterrent, does not teach better behavior, and it does not improve academic performance. Paddling teaches our children that adults have the authority, power, and right to abuse them, emotionally and physically, when they are frustrated, angry, or believe we ought not spare the rod. It erodes students’ respect for adults and their belief in non-violent ways to solve problems, and fans disenfranchisement and rebellion. And disturbing is the knowledge that it is administered disproportionately toward the most vulnerable of our children. The US Office of Civil Rights reports that students with disabilities and African American children are paddled at twice the rate of the general school population. The poor, disabled, and racial and ethnic minorities are the overwhelming targets of this sanctioned school violence.

School violence of any kind sickens the climate and has a negative effect on students’ attitudes toward themselves and others, and their academic success. When adults inflict the violence it is an even more egregious abuse of physical and positional power.  So how can we justify sitting by while adults discipline students by hitting them?

We can’t.

As we outlaw bullying in schools, we have a chance to extend these protections even further, to all children on a national level.  The hope lies in our vigilance and support of the “Ending Corporal Punishment in Schools Act,” HR 3027 introduced in Congress on Sept 22, 2011 by NY Rep Carolyn McCarthy.

Learn more about the topic and how you can help eliminate corporal punishment in America’s schools.

Huffington Post blog post “Corporal Punishment in American Schools — Teaching Through Terror?”

Public schools are for every child.

I cherish the concept of a free and public education for all children.

It intends, at least on paper, to provide each child with an opportunity to become a successful, self-sufficient adult and citizen. Theoretically, an educational system open to all is a way to ensure that life circumstances – who you are, where you were born, the educational level of your parents, and your social and economic standing – do not determine your future chances for a fulfilling life. This is the heart of a meritocracy, a system in which advancement in society is based on individual ability or achievement, not on wealth or birthright. The premise is a simple one: the choices you make, especially how hard you work in school, decide your future.

So on paper a meritocracy in the form of a public school sounds ideal. Most Americans believe we have such a system, and that it serves everyone equally and well. But considering the realities of American society, this was and still is naïve. The premise is fundamentally flawed because the playing field was not and is not level, and the opportunities were not and are not equal or equitable.

Throughout our history, different levels of government and powerful people were able to control who went to a certain school, who went to school at all, and even to make it illegal to teach slave children how to read and write. Classmates were selected and rejected by gender, race, ethnicity, mental ability, and behavior. With groups separated into somewhat homogenous groups, the need to learn tolerance and acceptance of those we saw as different or of a lesser status or ability was minimized. This segregation maintained a status quo of separate classes – the privileged and under-privileged, the powerful and powerless – and undermined the concept that schools and society were meritocracies.

Public education policies and laws did evolve over time as people spoke out forcefully about human rights issues and wrongs were corrected. Yet the system is still not perfect: education funded according to the tax base of each district results in widely disparate per pupil expenditures that favor the well-to-do and economically healthy areas, and bias and discrimination against certain groups influence the assessment of individual potential, academic expectations, opportunities available, discipline used, and hopes for the future.

But people and governments may no longer intentionally segregate schools or classrooms by race or social status and children with special learning and behavioral needs now have the right to a placement in the least restrictive learning environment. Every child has the right to a free and appropriate public education regardless of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, and sexual orientation. And they all have our promise that they will be treated respectfully by the adults and students in their school.

There are competing cultural forces at work that again challenge the basic premise of schools as a meritocracy, where all are welcome and offered the same opportunities. The influence of religion in politics and on social issues and public policy has grown at the same time the federal government, individual states, and local school boards and communities have made a moral and legal commitment to build public schools that are safe havens. In these schools, discrimination and violence of any kind, including exclusion, bullying, and harassment, are not tolerated by anyone, against anyone, or for any reason.

This raises the question of the role of religious beliefs in an institution that by law and mandate must welcome, teach, and protect every child who comes to the schoolhouse door. May students deny basic human rights to those who do not share or reflect their religious beliefs, especially in the case of sexual identity? Are students whose religion teaches that homosexuality is immoral excused from showing respect and tolerance toward their gay, lesbian, transgender and bi-sexual peers? Can they discriminate against, refuse to work with, or bully students they do not approve of?

I believe the answer is no, they may not, the same way a student may not let his personal or his parents’ beliefs about race, ethnicity, political leanings, etc. affect how he treats his classmates. The code of conduct for proper behavior applies to everyone.

The strength of the public school system of the 21st century is that it more clearly guarantees that every child can expect the school to protect his rights regardless of perceived or real differences, or religious or social beliefs held by others. This is how we keep the public separate from the private, the secular separate from the sectarian, and public schools open and welcoming to the everyone.

Another violent school tragedy

Third student dies from Ohio school shooting

In Chardin, Ohio the morning-after talk is all too familiar…

  • Out of nowhere the killer just gunned them down.
  • The students were sitting ducks.
  • We never saw this coming.
  •  He was a quiet kid. He never bothered anybody. He had friends.
  • No he was an outcast, bullied, troubled, into Goth.
  • The community is reeling, what can we do to help.
  • We don’t have a motive yet, but we’ll keep looking.
  • Hug your children, talk with them, tell them you love them.

Our hearts go out to the families, the students and teachers, and the entire Chardin community.

Columbine shook us out of our reverie and made us realize that such violence could happen anywhere, and yes, it could even happen in our town. Even so, it hasn’t gotten any easier to hear that innocent children were shot in their school. We want  a motive, an explanation, something we can point to that will explain away how T. J. Lane got to the point of slaughtering his classmates as they sat talking in the cafeteria.

Killings in a school attract widespread media attention. Yet the reality is that serious, physical, violent crime in schools has decreased over the past decade. School shootings and other fatal acts are still very rare, and less than 2% of youth murders occur in school. When we only consider this school murder statistic, we get the distorted view that violence is very rare, involves a weapon, and is deadly.

So what about the other 179 days of the school year? Does this mean they violence-free? It all depends on your definition of violence.

Every day in every school, students are emotionally and physically victimized by other students and adults. With a broad view of violence, the statistics for taunting, bullying, harassment, gang activity, cyber-bullying, hazing, and hate crimes (especially toward students who are gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender), and discussions with students about what goes on in classrooms, on the bus, in the cafeteria and bathrooms, present a clearer view of reality. This is the violence they live with daily, that interferes with their learning and keeps them home from school out of fear. So to understand and prevent tragedies like this in the future and to create a healthy school climate, we need to look at behavior along the entire violence continuum, from subtle to obvious.

Violence that begins on the subtle end of the continuum escalates if we don’t intervene early and preemptively.  Something valuable can come from this tragic loss of life if it reminds us that our children deal with violence every day and that we spend our best efforts  in prevention by teaching students how to be good people of high character, and in early intervention by getting help for those who are struggling.

For more information, read my blogs about the McInerney murder trial, my web page about the violence continuum, and to learn why and how we can prevent violence every day of the school year, read my book, The Violence Continuum: Creating a Safe School Climate.

Cyber-Baiting Teachers: A sign of broken relationships.

It’s never a good sign when teachers and students are at odds.

Students have found a new target to abuse. The social media that they use to hurt each other is now aimed at their teachers, creating a new reality in the classroom: Everything any teacher says or does has the potential to be recorded and made public, and when baited into losing their composure, teachers are just a YouTube or Facebook posting away from ruining their careers.

Cyber-baiting is when students intentionally provoke a teacher so she loses control and acts unprofessional. They record the outburst and then give it a permanent, public home on YouTube. This behavior is a form of bullying, bullying is a form of violence, and violence is: Intentional physical force, emotional torment, or abuse of power, designed to intimidate, dominate, or inflict pain on another person.

Cell phones with cameras, tablets, laptops, text messaging, and social websites give students this  emotionally distant, underhanded, and very public way to hurt others. Schools are finally becoming aware that in-person and online bullying are a part of school life for most students and that they are expected to, in many states by law, make sure this doesn’t happen on their watch.

The Norton Online Family Report – November 2011

The issue of students cyber-baiting teachers has gotten a great deal of attention since the Norton security firm’s Online Family Report was released in November. They found:

One in five of the 2379 teachers of students aged 8-17 from the 24 countries they surveyed have personally experienced or know a teacher who has been the victim of cyber-baiting.

Teachers were once able to close their doors, and then teach and manage the classroom however they wanted. Now everything they do and say can easily be made public. We all know that some teachers are unreasonable and verbally, even physically, abusive toward students. Schools must protect students from teacher bullying just as they must protect students from being bullied by classmates. More scrutiny of what goes on in classrooms and follow-up on student complaints of teacher bullying means bad teachers can no longer hide behind closed doors.

But this is different. When students provoke and intentionally embarrass a teacher in public, it tells us that there are seriously broken relationships between students and teachers. Students would not likely do this to a teacher they liked and respected, one who cared about and respected them.

YouTube videos showing students intentionally taunting their teachers until they lose control of themselves and of the class are painful to watch. Anyone who feels empathy and compassion finds it hard to witness another person–adult or child, stranger or someone they know–being victimized and humiliated. It is particularly disturbing to see students and their teachers acting this way toward each other.

We know the problem is not the communication technology itself, but how people use it. Young people are still experimenting and developing their moral and ethical code of right and wrong, and they do not always consider the possible effects of their behavior before they act. Immaturity and poor judgment are often the root of behavior problems.

But, unfortunately, there are also some students who are so disenfranchised from school or desperate for peer recognition that they seem to enjoy causing trouble and hurting others. And there are some teachers who don’t realize how dis-spirited and negative they have become toward students. These demoralized teachers and disenfranchised students fight for power and control of the classroom.

Why do students cyber-bait teachers? Their motives are sincere or suspect::

  • To stop a teacher’s inappropriate behavior.
  • Because they are frustrated and want to prove that their complaints about a teacher are true.
  • To get a bad teacher fired.
  • To make fun of a teacher they don’t like.
  • As payback for disciplining them or another student.
  • To intentionally entrap weak teachers just for the fun of it.
  • Or do they publish it on the Internet just to cause a stir and earn street cred?

But no matter the problem or motivation, they need to know that it is never all right to post a video of someone without his permission or to do it to hurt them. Broadcasting videos of teachers acting badly–either because they were intentionally baited or because it is their typical behavior–is an extreme action for a student to take, and a red flag that there is a serious problem in that classroom. The problem is the breakdown of mutual respect and care, which is the core of a positive classroom climate and critical to a teacher’s smooth management of a classroom and of a child’s academic and social success.

What do students need to make better choices?

Communication technology is a powerful tool, readily available and tempting. To make good choices, students need a positive, respectful, secure classroom climate, caring adult support and guidance, problem-solving skills, policies for the use of the Internet, cell phones, and tablets in school. They also must understand and learn to believe that hurting another person emotionally or physically is not okay. This takes a strong sense of empathy and compassion, an understanding of cause and effect, and for them to self-monitor what they say and do, both in person and on social media. These positive social and thinking skills and attitudes are taught and reinforced at every grade level.

Technology is here and ever-changing. The constants are clear expectations for behavior and trustworthy adults students can talk to if they have a problem. This includes someone they can tell if there is a problem with a teacher who is harming them or other students, and they need a promise that their concerns will be taken seriously and investigated.

My Violence Continuum book is now available!

My latest book, The Violence Continuum: Creating a Safe School Climate, was released a few weeks ago and is the featured title on the publisher’s home page.

It is now available online at:

Amazon

Barnes and Noble

Rowman and Littlefield Education