The power dynamics of bullying: Negotiating the social & emotional world of the school community Brenda Morrison Centre for Restorative Justice Simon Fraser.

The power dynamics of bullying: Negotiating the social & emotional world of the school communityBrenda Morrison Centre for Restorative JusticeSimon Fraser University

Bullying has been associated with: Anger Violence Hyperactivity Externalizing Problems Delinquency Criminality Depression Suicidal ideation

Victimization has been associated with: Stress-related illness School avoidance and disinterest Poor academic performance Increased fear and anxiety Emotional distress Depression Suicidal ideation

What works in preventing bullying.(Ttofi and Farrington, 2009, Journal of Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research)

Whole-school anti-bullying policy Classroom RulesClassroom Curriculum Materials School AssembliesIndividual work (victim) Individual work (bully) Classroom Management Coop. Group WorkPlay Ground Supervision Peer EngagementTeacher Information Parent InformationTeacher Training Parent TrainingVirtual Reality Comp. Games VideosResponse (Consequence/Punishment) School TribunalsResponse (Non-punitive/Support)

What works in preventing bullying

Whole-school anti-bullying policy Classroom Rules

Classroom Curriculum Materials School Assemblies

Individual work (victim) Individual work (bully)

Classroom Management Coop. Group Work

Play Ground Supervision (*) Peer Engagement

Teacher Information Parent Information

Teacher Training Parent Training (*)

Virtual Reality Comp. Games Videos (*)

Response (Consequence/Punishment)(*) School Tribunals

Response (Non-punitive/Support)

What works in preventing victimization

Whole-school anti-bullying policy Classroom Rules

Classroom Curriculum Materials School Assemblies

Individual work (victim) Individual work (bully)

Classroom Management Coop. Group Work

Play Ground Supervision (*) Peer Engagement

Teacher Information Parent Information

Teacher Training Parent Training (*)

Virtual Reality Comp. Games Videos (*)

Response (Punishment/Consequence) (*) School Tribunals

Response (Non-punitive/Support)

What works in preventing bullying.(Ttofi and Farrington (2009).“No anti-bullying programme was based on

well-developed and tested theories of bullying such as defiance theory or re-integrative shaming theory. Research is needed to develop and test better theories of bullying and victimization as a basis for new intervention programs”

Theory and Practice

“Nothing is as practical as a good theory”

(Lewin, 1950’s)

Bullying, restorative justice & power Bullying is defined at the “systematic abuse

of power”; in other words, domination

Restorative justice values non-domination and deliberation, the aim is empowerment, as such it must be “on guard against imbalance of power” (Braithwaite, 2002, p. 264).

Responsive Regulation and Restorative Justice: Theory behind the practice Motivational Postures (Braithwaite, Braithwaite, Gibson & Makkai, 1994)

Procedural justice (Tyler & Blader, 2000) Social Identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) Self-categorization theory (Turner et al., 1987) Re-integrative shaming theory (Braithwaite,

1989; Ahmed, Harris, Braithwaite & Braithwaite, 2001)

Unacknowledged shame (Scheff, 1994)

Nepal – Himalayan Mountains

Australia – Wilderness Adventure

Australia - Inner City Sydney

From Me to We:The individual, the group & the community The power of community to keep us safe.

The power of the group to keep us sane.

The power of one to give us hope.

Power of Community: School Connection Protective Factor

Substance Abuse (Alcohol, Drugs, Smoking) Emotional Distress (Suicidal Ideation) Anti-social Behavior (Violence and Deviance) Pregnancy (Early Sexual Behavior)

Adolescent Health Surveys:

USA: McNeely et al., 2002; Blum & Libby, 2004.

Adolescent Health Survey

“Independent of race, ethnicity, family structure and poverty status, adolescents who are connected to their parents, to their families, and to their school community are healthier than those who are not”

Adolescent Health Surveys:

USA: McNeely et al., 2002; Blum & Libby, 2004.

Positive Relationships

“Positive relationships provide the most potent protective factors for

vulnerable teens” (p. 8).

Building Resilience in Vulnerable Youth, McCreary Centre, 2006.

Status and School Violence(National Research Council, 2003)

“One message that comes through loud and clear in the [deadly school rampage] cases is that adolescents are intensely concerned about their social standing in their school and among their peers. For some, their concern is so great that threats to their status are treated as threats to their very lives and status as something to be defended at all costs” (p. 336)

Rampage: The Social Roots of School Shooting (Newman et al., 2004) CDC, Secret Service, National Research

Council In all but one case, there was evidence of

social marginalization. Approximately 2/3 had been bullied.

Through the rampage: “They claim the power and status their peers have denied them” (p. 154)

The Need to Belong and Bullying (Leary et al., 2003)1) The school shooters were typically male

students, who were ostracized and had been chronically taunted, teased, harassed and publicly humiliated.

2) Bullying and malicious teasing is a serious problem in schools that: Induces feelings of shame, humiliation,

depression, anxiety, and low self esteem …

Building School Connections

3 Levels of Sustaining Healthy Relationships

Universal (Primary): Affirming Relationships Targeted (Secondary): Repairing Relationships Intensive (Tertiary): Re-building Relationships

3 R’s of Restorative Justice

Respect for the Person (self and other) Responsibility for Behavior Repair the Harm Done

Justice and Institutions

Distributive Justice Distribution of just outcomes. (Rewards/Punishment) Who is involved? Who is not involved? Who has the final say?

Adversarial Justice Arguing the fact brings out the truth. Who wins? Who loses? What do we lose when we focus on the facts?

Retributive Justice Get what they deserve (Just Deserts). What are the outcomes of Punishment/Exclusion?

Justice, Relationships and Schools Can we develop healthy relationships within schools

when we:

Distribute outcomes unfairly? Capitalize on win/lose solutions? Focus only on the facts? Punish and Exclude?

Is our system of justice within our schools creating a culture of disrespect? Passive citizenship? Us and them? Alienation? Distrust?

Transformation of human character

TED: Philip Zimbardo shows how people become monsters ... or heroes ...

Dispositional: Internal (The bad apples) Situational: External (The bad barrel) Systemic: Broad (Institutional) influences:

political; economic; legal; cultural (The bad barrel makers – Toxic Factory)

Defining Restorative Justice(Johnstone and Van Ness, 2007)

Encounter: “that victims, offenders and other ‘stakeholders’ … should be allowed to encounter one another outside highly formal, professional-dominated settings.”

Reparative: “the harm which the crime (or wrongdoing) has caused to people and relationships needs to be repaired.”

Transformative: “to transform the way in which we understand ourselves and relate to others in our everyday life.”

3 Concerns of Restorative Justice Conflict as Property (Christie, 1977)

System steals conflict/voices;

System uses 3rd party decision making Punishment as the just response (Zehr,1997)

System’s myopic focus on punishment Reason for Emotion (Sherman, 2003)

System trumps emotion with reason,

System works towards win/lose solutions.

Beyond 3rd Party Decision Making Conflict as Property (Christie, 1977)

Own our conflict (Individuals, Classrooms, Schools)

Passive Bystanders (Dalai Lama) Active Citizenship Raised a generation of Passive Bystanders

Social Capital (Robert Putnam) Decline 3rd parties now resolve our conflict

Decline of Social Capital

Beyond Punishment: New Q’s

Retributive Justice Restorative Justice

What laws [rules] Who has been hurt?

have been broken?

Who did it? What are their needs?

What do they deserve? Whose obligations are these?

Finding Reason for Emotion

Social and Emotional Learning (SEL):

“SEL is fundamental to children’s social and emotional development, health, and mental well-being, ethical development, citizenship, motivation to achieve, and academic learning” (Weissberg, 2004)

Statement to U.S. SenateCommittee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions

CASEL: Meta-Analysis (2008)(207 Studies; 288,000 students)

9% decrease in conduct problems (classroom misbehavior; agression)

10% decrease in emotional distress (anxiety; depression)

9% improvement in attitude towards self, others and school 23% improvement in social and emotional skills 9% improvement in school and classroom behavior 11% improvement in achievement test scores

http://www.casel.org/

Horizontal and Vertical Relationships: Social & Emotional Engagement Relationships with individuals (Horizontal)

Relationship with school (Vertical)

Horizontal and Vertical Accountability and Support

Social Responsibility WindowHigh

PUNITIVE RESTORATIVE TO WITH

Accountability(limit-setting, obligation, responsible) NEGLECTFUL PERMISSIVE

NOT FOR

Low HighSupport

(encouragement, nurture)

Social Responsibility Window

High

PUNITIVE RESTORATIVE

“We” TO WITH (classroom, school)

NEGLECTFUL PERMISSIVE NOT FOR

Low High“I” (individual)

From Me to We: Reason for Emotion Instead of reason trumping emotion through

adversarial (us/them; win/lose) processes; emotional engagement allows for win/win solution

Emotional engagement through strong horizontal (“I” with “I”) and vertical (“I” with “we”) relationships.

Social and Emotionally Intelligent Individuals and Schools

Horizontal Relationships: 1st person engagement; building social & emotional understanding; repairing the harm

S

S

S

S

S

S

T

A

Beyond Punishment: Ask different questions

To the person who harmed (OOPS!):What happened?Who has been affected/harmed?What needs to happen to repair the harm?

To the person who was harmed (OUCH!):How have you been affected/harmed?What’s the hardest part for you?What would you like to see happen?

Vertical Relationships: Motivational Postures

Commitment: Moral obligation to act in the interest of the collective and complies as a virtuous citizen

Capitulation: Accepts the authority as legitimate and complies as a “law (rule) abiding” citizen

Resistance: Doubts the intention of the authority; defiant and argumentative

Disengagement: Disenchanted with the authority; defiant and escapist

Vertical Relationships: Positive Affect

Vertical Relationships: Negative Affect

Affect Theory (Topkins)

Enjoyment - affiliate Interest - engage Shame - seek to restore Surprise - stop, look, listen Distress - comfort Disgust - get rid of Anger - attack Fear - get away Dissmell - stay away

Motivational Postures

Commitment Capitulation Resistance Disengagement

Soc

ial D

ista

nce

Re-integrative Shaming Theory

Shame over wrongdoing, and as a victim of wrongdoing, can act as a barrier to individual’s sense of belonging.

Discussion with those affected, following wrongdoing, structures shame awareness into a restorative justice conference

It is the shame in the eyes of those we respect, and not that of police or judges, that is most able to get through to us.

Shame-Management:Acknowledgement & DisplacementFamilye.g. harmony

Acknowledgementnegative

School Shame-management Bullyinge.g. hassles

positiveDisplacement

Individual e.g., empathy/impulsivity

Shame-Management:Acknowledgement & DisplacementACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Feeling shame Taking responsibility Making amends

DISPLACEMENT Retaliatory anger Externalizing blame Displaced anger (hitting/kicking object/person)

Shame-Management:Acknowledgement & DisplacementHigh

VICTIM NON-BULLY/persistent NON-VICTIM

Take on dischargedResponsibility/Accountability

BULLY/ BULLYVICTIM by-passed

denied by-passedLow

High Feel Supported/Accepted

Safe School Communities &Shame-management“…once we have reached the point where a major act of

bullying has occurred or a serious crime is being processed by the justice system, it may be that shame management is more important than pride management to building a safer community. … Our conclusion is that the key issue with shame management is helping wrongdoers to acknowledge and discharge shame rather than displace it into anger. … Part of the idea of [restorative] undominated dialogue is that the defendant will jump from the emotionally destructive state of unresolved shame to a sense of moral clarity that what she has done is either right or wrong” (Ahmed et al.,p. 17).

Whole School Model

Re-building

Relationships

Repairing

Relationships

Reaffirming relationships through

Developing social and emotional skills

Intensive

Community Conference

Targeted

Classroom Circle;

Peer Mediation.

Universal

Social & Emotional

Learning, etc

Whole School Model: What keeps us safe, sane and hopeful?Individual level: Give each individual reason for a

hopeful future, allow them to find reason for social and emotional engagement.

Classroom level: Socially and emotionally engage them in a community of care within their classroom, where accountability and support are everyone’s responsibility.

Community level: Bridge the social and emotional waters between families, police, child welfare, and others when things get tough, and difficult conversations are necessary.

Justice and Universal Human RightsWhere, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small

places, close to home – so close and so small that they can not be seen on any map of the world. Yet they are the world of the individual person: the neighborhood he lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory, farm or office where he works. Such are the places where every man, woman and child seek equal justice, equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination. Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to uphold them close to home [and school], we shall look in vain for progress in the larger world.

Eleanor Roosevelt (1884 – 1962)

Happy Birthday Sesame Street