Addressing School Violence Requires More than High-Quality Teaching, By Gerald LeTendre
A recent report from the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) on teacher quality of life reports that a startling number of teachers have been threatened with physical violence.
“18% of all respondents have been threatened with physical violence at school or in a school setting; 27% of all special education teachers have been threatened with physical violence at school or in a school setting (who make up 12% of the total response).” AFT, Quality of Worklife Survey, p. 5
This statistic should shock the general public. In the AFT study, nearly one in five teachers, and over one out of four special education teachers, reported being threatened with physical violence last year alone. A Pennsylvania study (Fisher & Kettl, 2003: 81-82) found that 24% of teachers had been assaulted in school and that elementary school teachers were more likely to be victims of physical assault than other groups of teachers. Teachers in this study also indicated that they feared attacks from parents.
Teachers literally place themselves at risk far more frequently, and in many different ways, than the public realizes. National Rifle Association (NRA) propaganda about increasing arms in school, only serves to diminish the risk teachers face and bowdlerize the debate. For many teachers, facing potentially violent students (or parents) is part and parcel of the profession.
One reason teachers are at risk is that they are often legally required to teach violent students. In the early nineties, research on school violence and school law (Bon, Faircloth et al. 2006) showed that teachers and schools cannot legally prevent the return of some students who have exhibited violent behavior in the past. One teacher interviewed in this study felt that “I feel I have little rights and kids and parents have all the rights.” Schools are governed by sets of laws that make them distinct as institutions within modern society. Although we would assume the same expectations for safety would apply as they would to other public institutions, this is not the case. Rather, school teachers face working environments more similar to nurses in hospitals – they are frequently required to work with individuals who may be hostile, and occasionally, physically violent.
“Violence and the threat of violence erode the learning environment for both teachers and learners. Teachers need to have a supportive and secure environment in order to maintain high-quality instruction and obtain successful learning outcomes for their students.”
Research on school violence has tended to focus on the impact on students, obscuring the impact that violence and threats of violence have on educators. But, teaching in unsafe conditions can adversely affect teacher quality (Vettenburg 2002) and thus impact overall student outcomes. Osher, VanAcker et al. (2004) note this impact of threats of violence on teacher effectiveness (p. 30-31). Akiba, LeTendre et al. (2002) show that worldwide, about 14% of teachers reported their teaching was “extensively limited” by threats of violence.
What, realistically, can be done to increase teacher and student safety? Strong evidence points to the importance of addressing the overall school social climate and physical conditions (Plank, Bradshaw et al. 2009). However, a study by Gregory, Cornell and Fan 2012 found that a supportive climate is most conducive to reduced feelings of educator threats.
Gregory notes the limitations of their study, but still find considerable evidence to support the idea of an authoritative discipline system (p. 416). “Authoritative” does not mean simply strict or hierarchical, but implies a clear set of rules and fair application of these rules. This theory suggests:
“…that school staff should exercise a combination of structure and support, setting high standards and insisting that students follow school rules that are enforced consistently and fairly, yet at the same time communicating a supportive attitude and willingness to help students with their problems and concerns. “
The above theory requires teachers to be on the front lines of the difficult emotional work that goes into effective counseling and prevention. Simply enacting more rigid or punitive discipline policies is unlikely to work, and could even exacerbate violence against teachers by creating a more negative school climate. The research to date suggests that school rules have to be both strict and fair; that teachers have to enforce clearly these rules but be open to hearing and responding to student problems.
Given the incessant focus on raising test scores that has surrounded reforms like No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and Common Core, it is easy to lose focus that teachers do far more than simply instruct. Counselors, nurses and school-based patrol officers may provide critical support to schools, but these articles clearly suggest that the teachers themselves are both commonly placed at-risk in many schools and the most likely agents to improve school climate and reduce the threat of violence for all. To do this, teachers need the time, authority and training to address students’ problems in a comprehensive way, and it will require school leaders to clearly support teachers when dealing with stressful or even violent encounters within the classroom and school halls.
There is an implicit policy belief that high-quality teaching can overcome all other obstacles in students’ lives. But, good teaching does not always lead to successful learning (Fenstermacher and Richardson 2005). Violence and the threat of violence erode the learning environment for both teachers and learners. Teachers need to have a supportive and secure environment in order to maintain high-quality instruction and obtain successful learning outcomes for their students.
References:
Akiba, M., G. LeTendre, et al. (2002). “Student Victimization: National and School System Effects on School Violence in 37 Nations.” American Educational Research Journal 39(4): 829-853.
Bon, S., S. Faircloth, et al. (2006). “The School Violence Dilemma: Protecting the Rights of Students with Disabilities While Maintaining Teachers’ Sense of Safety in Schools.” Journal of Disability and Policy Studies 17(3): 148-157.
Fenstermacher, G. and V. Richardson (2005). “On Making Determinations of Quality in Teaching.” Teachers College Record 107(1): 186-213.
Osher, D., R. VanAcker, et al. (2004). “Warning Signs of Problems in Schools: Ecological Perspectives and Effective Practics for Combating School Aggression and Violence.” Journal of School Violence 3(2/3): 13-37.
Plank, S., C. Bradshaw, et al. (2009). “An Application of “Broken-Windows” and Related Theories to the Study of Disorder, Fear, and Collective Efficacy in Schools.” American Journal of Education 115(2): 227-247.
Vettenburg, N. (2002). “Unsafe Feelings Among Teachers.” Journal of School Violence 1(4): 33-49.
