STANFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT

The Menace Within What happened in the basement of the psych building 40 years ago shocked the world. How do the guards, prisoners and researchers in the Stanford Prison Experiment feel about it now? Stanford Prison Experiment View photo album >> By Romesh Ratnesar It began with an ad in the classifieds. Male college students needed for psychological study of prison life. $15 per day for 1-2 weeks. More than 70 people volunteered to take part in the study, to be conducted in a fake prison housed inside Jordan Hall, on Stanford's Main Quad. The leader of the study was 38-year-old psychology professor Philip Zimbardo. He and his fellow researchers selected 24 applicants and randomly assigned each to be a prisoner or a guard. Zimbardo encouraged the guards to think of themselves as actual guards in a real prison. He made clear that prisoners could not be physically harmed, but said the guards should try to create an atmosphere in which the prisoners felt "powerless." The study began on Sunday, August 17, 1971. But no one knew what, exactly, they were getting into. Forty years later, the Stanford Prison Experiment remains among the most notable—and notorious—research projects ever carried out at the University. For six days, half the study's participants endured cruel and dehumanizing abuse at the hands of their peers. At various times, they were taunted, stripped naked, deprived of sleep and forced to use plastic buckets as toilets. Some of them rebelled violently; others became hysterical or withdrew into despair. As the situation descended into chaos, the researchers stood by and watched—until one of their colleagues finally spoke out. The public's fascination with the SPE and its implications—the notion, as Zimbardo says, "that these ordinary college students could do such terrible things when caught in that situation"—brought Zimbardo international renown. It also provoked criticism from other researchers, who questioned the ethics of subjecting student volunteers to such extreme emotional trauma. The study had been approved by Stanford's Human Subjects Research Committee, and Zimbardo says that "neither they nor we could have imagined" that the guards would treat the prisoners so inhumanely. In 1973, an investigation by the American Psychological Association concluded that the prison study had satisfied the profession's existing ethical standards. But in subsequent years, those guidelines were revised to prohibit human-subject simulations modeled on the SPE. "No behavioral research that puts people in that kind of setting can ever be done again in America," Zimbardo says. The Stanford Prison Experiment became the subject of numerous books and documentaries, a feature film and the name of at least one punk band. In the last decade, after the revelations of abuses committed by U.S. military and intelligence personnel at prisons in Iraq and Afghanistan, the SPE provided lessons in how good people placed in adverse conditions can act barbarically. The experiment is still a source of controversy and contention—even among those who took part in it. Here, in their own words, some of the key players in the drama reflect on their roles and how those six days in August changed their lives. THE SUPERINTENDENT Phil Zimbardo Zimbardo joined Stanford's psychology department in 1968 and taught there until his retirement in 2007. The study was focused originally on how individuals adapt to being in a relatively powerless situation. I was interested in prisoners and was not really interested in the guards. It was really meant to be a single, dramatic demonstration of the power of the situation on human behavior. We expected that we would write some articles about it and move on. Courtesy Phil Zimbardo Zimbardo.After the end of the first day, I said, "There's nothing here. Nothing's happening." The guards had this antiauthority mentality. They felt awkward in their uniforms. They didn't get into the guard mentality until the prisoners started to revolt. Throughout the experiment, there was this conspiracy of denial—everyone involved was in effect denying that this was an experiment and agreeing that this is a prison run by psychologists. There was zero time for reflection. We had to feed the prisoners three meals a day, deal with the prisoner breakdowns, deal with their parents, run a parole board. By the third day I was sleeping in my office. I had become the superintendent of the Stanford county jail. That was who I was: I'm not the researcher at all. Even my posture changes—when I walk through the prison yard, I'm walking with my hands behind my back, which I never in my life do, the way generals walk when they're inspecting troops. We had arranged for everyone involved—the prisoners, guards and staff—to be interviewed on Friday by other faculty members and graduate students who had not been involved in the study. Christina Maslach, who had just finished her PhD, came down the night before. She's standing outside the guard quarters and watches the guards line up the prisoners for the 10 o'clock toilet run. The prisoners come out, and the guards put bags over their heads, chain their feet together and make them put their hands on each other's shoulders, like a chain gang. They're yelling and cursing at them. Christina starts tearing up. She said, "I can't look at this." I ran after her and we had this argument outside Jordan Hall. She said, "It's terrible what you're doing to these boys. How can you see what I saw and not care about the suffering?" But I didn't see what she saw. And I suddenly began to feel ashamed. This is when I realized I had been transformed by the prison study to become the prison administrator. At that point I said, "You're right. We've got to end the study." [As the study was underway], there was an escape attempt at San Quentin prison and [former Black Panther] George Jackson was shot and killed. Three weeks after that, there's the Attica prison riot [in New York]. Suddenly, prisons are hot. Two government investigative committees start hearings and I'm flown out to Washington to present to a congressional subcommittee on the nature of prisons. I went from knowing nothing firsthand about prisons to being an expert. But I worked hard to learn more. I visited a number of correctional facilities all over the country. I organized a program for Stanford students to teach a course at a prison. For years I had an active correspondence with at least 20 different prisoners. It wasn't a formal experiment. My colleagues probably never thought much of it. But as a result of the prison study, I really became more aware of the central role of power in our lives. I became more aware of the power I have as a teacher. I started consciously doing things to minimize the negative use of power in the classroom. I encouraged students to challenge me. I think I became more self-reflective. I'm more generous and more open because of that experience. I think it made me a better person. THE WHISTLEBLOWER Courtesy Christina Maslach-Zimbardo Maslach.Christina Maslach Maslach, PhD '71, became a professor at UC-Berkeley. She and Zimbardo married in 1972. They live in San Francisco. I had just finished my doctorate and was about to leave Stanford to start my new job. Phil and I had started dating. The prison study was never anything I was considering playing a part in. During the first few days of the experiment, I did hear from Phil, but not in great detail. What I was getting, though, was a sense that it was becoming a real prison—people were not just fooling around but actually getting caught up in the situation. But it still wasn't evident to me what that might mean. At first Phil didn't seem different. I didn't see any change in him until I actually went down to the basement and saw the prison. I met one guard who seemed nice and sweet and charming, and then I saw him in the yard later and I thought, "Oh my God, what happened here?" I saw the prisoners being marched to go down to the men's room. I was getting sick to my stomach, physically ill. I said, "I can't watch this." But no one else was having the same problem. Phil came after me and said, "What's the matter with you?" That's when I had this feeling like, "I don't know you. How can you not see this?" It felt like we were standing on two different cliffs across a chasm. If we had not been dating before then, if he were just another faculty member and this happened, I might have said, "I'm sorry, I'm out of here" and just left. But because this was someone I was growing to like a lot, I thought that I had to figure this out. So I kept at it. I fought back, and ended up having a huge argument with him. I don't think we've ever had an argument quite like that since then. I feared that if the study went on, he would become someone I no longer cared for, no longer loved, no longer respected. It's an interesting question: Suppose he kept going, what would I have done? I honestly don't know. The clearest influence the study had on me was that it raised some really serious questions about how people cope with extremely emotional, difficult situations, especially when it's part of their job—when they have to manage people or take care of them or rehabilitate them. So I started interviewing people. I started with some prison guards in a real prison, and talked to them about their jobs and how they understood what they were doing. At first I wasn't sure what I was looking for. I was just trying to listen. I interviewed people who worked in hospitals, in the ER. After a while I realized there was a rhythm and pattern emerging, and when I described it to someone they said, "I don't know what it's called in other professions, but in our occupation we call it 'burnout.'" And so I spent a good chunk of my professional life developing and defining what burnout is—what are the things that cause it and how can we intervene and help people cope with it more effectively. All of that work on burnout had some origins in the experience I had in the prison experiment. People will sometimes come up to me—at conferences, or maybe they're students who have taken psychology classes—and they'll say, "Oh my God, you're such a hero! What is it like to be a hero?" And it's always a little surprising to me because it sure didn't feel heroic at the time. The prison study has given me a new understanding of what "heroism" means. It's not some egocentric, I'm-going-to-rush-into-that-burning-building thing—it's about seeing something that needs to be addressed and saying, I need to help and do something to make it better. THE GUARDS Dave Eshelman The son of a Stanford engineering professor, Eshelman was a student at Chapman University at the time of the experiment. He was the prison's most abusive guard, patterning himself after the sadistic prison warden (portrayed by Strother Martin) in the movie Cool Hand Luke. Today he owns a mortgage business in Saratoga. Photo: Toni Gauthier Eshelman.I was just looking for some summer work. I had a choice of doing this or working at a pizza parlor. I thought this would be an interesting and different way of finding summer employment. The only person I knew going in was John Mark. He was another guard and wasn't even on my shift. That was critical. If there were prisoners in there who knew me before they encountered me, then I never would have been able to pull off anything I did. The act that I put on—they would have seen through it immediately. What came over me was not an accident. It was planned. I set out with a definite plan in mind, to try to force the action, force something to happen, so that the researchers would have something to work with. After all, what could they possibly learn from guys sitting around like it was a country club? So I consciously created this persona. I was in all kinds of drama productions in high school and college. It was something I was very familiar with: to take on another personality before you step out on the stage. I was kind of running my own experiment in there, by saying, "How far can I push these things and how much abuse will these people take before they say, 'knock it off?'" But the other guards didn't stop me. They seemed to join in. They were taking my lead. Not a single guard said, "I don't think we should do this." The fact that I ramped up the intimidation and the mental abuse without any real sense as to whether I was hurting anybody? I definitely regret that. But in the long run, no one suffered any lasting damage. When the Abu Ghraib scandal broke, my first reaction was, this is so familiar to me. I knew exactly what was going on. I could picture myself in the middle of that and watching it spin out of control. When you have little or no supervision as to what you're doing, and no one steps in and says, "Hey, you can't do this"—things just keep escalating. You think, how can we top what we did yesterday? How do we do something even more outrageous? I felt a deep sense of familiarity with that whole situation. Sometimes when people know about the experiment and then meet me, it's like, My God, this guy's a psycho! But everyone who knows me would just laugh at that. John Mark Mark was about to begin his junior year at Stanford. He graduated in 1973 with a degree in anthropology. He lives in the Bay Area and has worked for the last 18 years as a medical coder for Kaiser Permanente. Photo: Toni Gauthier Mark.I had spent my sophomore year at Stanford in France and returned to campus that spring. It was one of the most pivotal times in my life. Over Thanksgiving of the year before, I went with a friend to Amsterdam. You have to remember this is 1970, it was basically the '60s. We went to one of those clubs where you could buy drugs. We bought hash and actually brought some back with us, and I was caught at the French border. For a few hours I was told by French border guards that I was going to prison. In the end they let me go, but I definitely had been scared out of my wits. When I saw this thing about a prison experiment, I thought I had some life experiences to bring to it. I felt this was going to be an important experiment. I told them all about what I'd been through and why it was important to me to be a prisoner. It was very disappointing to be assigned to be a guard, but I did the best I could. During the day shift, when I worked, no one did anything that was beyond what you'd expect in a situation like that. But Zimbardo went out of his way to create tension. Things like forced sleep deprivation—he was really pushing the envelope. I just didn't like the whole idea of constantly disturbing people and asking them to recite their prisoner numbers in a count. I certainly didn't like when they put a guy in solitary confinement. At that time of my life, I was getting high, all day every day. I got high before I went to the experiment; I got high on my breaks and lunch. I got high afterwards. I brought joints with me, and every day I wanted to give them to the prisoners. I looked at their faces and saw how they were getting dispirited and I felt sorry for them. I didn't think it was ever meant to go the full two weeks. I think Zimbardo wanted to create a dramatic crescendo, and then end it as quickly as possible. I felt that throughout the experiment, he knew what he wanted and then tried to shape the experiment—by how it was constructed, and how it played out—to fit the conclusion that he had already worked out. He wanted to be able to say that college students, people from middle-class backgrounds—people will turn on each other just because they're given a role and given power. Based on my experience, and what I saw and what I felt, I think that was a real stretch. I don't think the actual events match up with the bold headline. I never did, and I haven't changed my opinion.

IRAN S NUKE CAPABILITIES

INTERPRETING 1ST YEAR MATERIA ASPECTOS DE LA REALIDAD SOCIAL CONTEMPORANEA THE PHANTOM MENACE ARTICLEW FRON NEWSWEEK http://mag.newsweek.com/2013/10/04/the-phantom-menace.html

A POLITICAL HEADACHE FROM THE ECONOMIST

Do you know how to say arrtimia in English ? Our president is suffering from this condition . Find out how to say this in English This and many other words will appear in THE ECONOMIST ARTICLE Cristina Fernández's health A political headache Oct 7th 2013, 8:32 by H.C. | BUENOS AIRES .. NEWS from Argentina can resemble a David Lynch film: the more you learn, the less you fathom. In the past year alone the government signed a pact with Iran to investigate a bombing in 1994 of a Jewish centre which the Iranians were suspected of executing, invited tax evaders to buy financial instruments with preferential rates of return, and puffed up growth rates so much it may have to shell out billions of dollars in GDP-linked securities. Last weekend’s goings-on are no less bizarre. On October 5th the president, Cristina Fernández was rushed to hospital on account of an irregular heartbeat. On arrival the 60-year-old complained of a severe headache. Neurological tests revealed that Ms Fernández was suffering from a subdural hematoma, an accumulation of blood between the tissues surrounding the brain. Such internal bleeding can be caused by trauma. Following her diagnosis, the president’s press secretary casually explained that on August 12th, the day after Ms Fernández's Front for Victory (FPV) party was drubbed in nationwide legislative primaries, she fell and hit her head. The president was briefly hospitalised but tests concluded that she was fine. The public were never informed. That head bump is now blamed for triggering the hematoma. Doctors have ordered Ms Fernández to rest for one month. The vice-president, Amado Boudou, immediately called back from an official visit to Brasil but he has yet formally to assume presidential duties. Convalescence would put Ms Fernández out of action until after the midterm elections on October 27th. The results of the August primaries as well as recent polls have been boding ill for the FPV, which may be in for its worst-ever showing. It is far from assured that Ms Fernández's health shock will win her any sympathy votes. After the sudden death of her husband and predecessor, Nestor Kirchner, in October 2010 her popularity shot up from a meagre 36% to 55% in a month, according to Poliarquia, a pollster. The widow, dressed in black ever since, rode the sympathy wave to win re-election with an unprecedented 54% of the vote a year later. This time may be different, however. For a start, Mr Boudou is not the ideal standard-bearer. Last year he faced allegations of illegal enrichment and influence-peddling. Prosecutors ultimately failed to provide convincing evidence of wrongdoing, but Argentines may be reminded of the imbroglio now that Mr Boudou will once again come into the spotlight. More important, perhaps, the hematoma is Ms Fernández’s second big health scare in less than a year. Last December she underwent surgery to remove a suspected tumour. This ultimately proved to be healthy tissue but the president was still unable to work for 20 days. All this risks making her appear fragile—and lead Argentines to ask searching questions about her physical ability to govern, just as they have been about her political capacity to do so.

SAME SEX MARRIAGES

If interested in the topic, see how AMERICA is faring on this controversial issue The article is from our long old friend NEWSWEEK http://mag.newsweek.com/2013/09/27/what-s-next-for-the-gay-rights-movement.html

gliphosate

BATTLING AGAINST MONSANTO DEFENDING OUR RIGHT TO LIVE Last Thursday, environmental activists and residents of this municipality ran a big event, inviting artists, scientists, and human rights organisations to a stop on route 88, where Monsanto, a global agricultural corporation specialising in genetically modified (GM) crops, is building Latin America’s biggest seed plant. The ‘Spring Without Monsanto’ protest in Malvinas Argentinas (photo: Paola Castillo, via Tierra Negra) The event brought over 2,000 people together, with participants from the provinces of Córdoba and Buenos Aires, as well as visitors from other countries, such as Colombia and Brazil. As the festival organisers were afraid of possible obstacles by the provincial government and Monsanto itself, they set up an encampment at the company’s entrance on Wednesday night to ensure the event would take place as planned. Since then, the encampment has remained in place, expanding into a “selective roadblock.” Celina Molina, from the organisation ‘Malvinas Assembly Fights for Life’ told The Indy: “Our objective was to make the fight against Monsanto visible, to demand enforcement of the [environmental] law, scientific studies, and a public audience.” The rapid expansion of Argentina’s agricultural sector – particularly the soy industry – has created tensions along the agricultural frontier, with disputes over territory, particularly in northern Argentina, resulting in violence and repression of peasant farmers and indigenous communities. The controversial decision to build Monsanto’s plant in Malvinas Argentinas came just a few days after an unprecedented trial on the excessive use of agrochemicals that took place in August 2012 in Ituzaingó Anexo, also in the province of Córdoba. After a decade of legal struggles, a group of mothers convinced that excessive use of chemicals on nearby soy fields was behind high levels of disease and deformations in the town, received vindication in a court ruling that condemned two agricultural workers to a three-year suspended sentence for contamination. However, in the same month as the historic verdict was delivered, the national government also approved the use of new GM seeds, including new soybean and corn varieties, the latter of which will be “conditioned” in the plant in Malvinas Argentinas, due to be inaugurated in 2014. Monsanto denies any risks of contamination, claiming that it promotes “sustainable agriculture”. However, social media campaigns like Millones contra Monsanto (Millions against Monsanto) and Fuera Monsanto (Go away Monsanto) have emerged in Argentina, gathering thousands of volunteers who organise regular marches, conferences, and seminars, spreading information on agrochemicals around the country. The anti-Monsanto movement has received a lot of support from other environmental movements, like anti-fracking, anti-mining, and others. Molina lives in Malvinas Argentinas and is very concerned about the current situation: “We are not given these basic rights and no one can guarantee there will be no impact on our health”. She and other protesters are demanding that a referendum is held to give local residents the chance to make their own decision on the new plant. She says she doesn’t like to use the word “roadblock” to describe the current protest, opting instead for “selective manifestation” as the idea is to limit further progress on construction works without harming the workers. “We let workers pass as we understand they need this job to feed their families”, continues Molina and adds: “This measure is very strong, but we’ve already done everything we could by informing the local population about the risks and filing the lawsuits against Monsanto.” So far, protesters say neither the government or Monsanto have offered dialogue. “We knew it would be hard,” Molina confesses. “We were not used to this struggle, and we basically didn’t know anything about Monsanto.” The assembly says they ran a survey among local residents some time ago and determined that over 60% were against Monsanto’s presence in the vicinity. “Unfortunately, only 5% take to the streets,” Molina adds. Those that are there say the ‘selective roadblock’ doesn’t have an end date, with volunteers planning to “keep up the fight” until their demands are met. All updates and information about the protest and further events can be found on two Facebook pages, here and here. This post was written by:marc - who has written 629 posts on The Argentina Independent. Contact the author Facebook comments

INTERPRETING : SECTORS OF THE ECONOMY

Sectors of the Economy Primary, Secondary, Tertiary, Quaternary, and Quinary By Matt Rosenberg, About.com Guide . A nation’s economy can be divided into various sectors to define the proportion of the population engaged in the activity sector. This categorization is seen as a continuum of distance from the natural environment. The continuum starts with the primary sector, which concerns itself with the utilization of raw materials from the earth such as agriculture and mining. From there, the distance from the raw materials of the earth increases. Primary Sector The primary sector of the economy extracts or harvests products from the earth. The primary sector includes the production of raw material and basic foods. Activities associated with the primary sector include agriculture (both subsistence and commercial), mining, forestry, farming, grazing, hunting and gathering, fishing, and quarrying. The packaging and processing of the raw material associated with this sector is also considered to be part of this sector. In developed and developing countries, a decreasing proportion of workers are involved in the primary sector. About 3% of the U.S. labor force is engaged in primary sector activity today, while more than two-thirds of the labor force were primary sector workers in the mid-nineteenth century. Secondary Sector The secondary sector of the economy manufactures finished goods. All of manufacturing, processing, and construction lies within the secondary sector. Activities associated with the secondary sector include metal working and smelting, automobile production, textile production, chemical and engineering industries, aerospace manufacturing, energy utilities, engineering, breweries and bottlers, construction, and shipbuilding. Tertiary Sector The tertiary sector of the economy is the service industry. This sector provides services to the general population and to businesses. Activities associated with this sector include retail and wholesale sales, transportation and distribution, entertainment (movies, television, radio, music, theater, etc.), restaurants, clerical services, media, tourism, insurance, banking, healthcare, and law. In most developed and developing countries, a growing proportion of workers are devoted to the tertiary sector. In the U.S., more than 80% of the labor force are tertiary workers. Quaternary Sector The quaternary sector of the economy consists of intellectual activities. Activities associated with this sector include government, culture, libraries, scientific research, education, and information technology. Quinary Sector Some consider there to be a branch of the quaternary sector called the quinary sector, which includes the highest levels of decision making in a society or economy. This sector would include the top executives or officials in such fields as government, science, universities, nonprofit, healthcare, culture, and the media. An Australian source relates that the quinary sector in Australia refers to domestic activities such as those performed by stay-at-home parents or homemakers. These activities are typically not measured by monetary amounts but it is important to recognize these activities in contribution to the economy.

BULLYING IN SCHOOLS

Bullying in Schools < 

By Ron Banks Educational Resource Information Center (U.S. Department of Education) Updated on Jul 15, 2013

Bullying in schools is a worldwide problem that can have negative consequences for the general school climate and for the right of students to learn in a safe environment without fear.
Bullying can also have negative lifelong consequences—both for students who bully and for their victims. Although much of the formal research on bullying has taken place in the Scandinavian countries, Great Britain, and Japan, the problems associated with bullying have been noted and discussed wherever formal schooling environments exist.
Bullying is comprised of direct behaviors such as teasing, taunting, threatening, hitting, and stealing that are initiated by one or more students against a victim. In addition to direct attacks, bullying may also be more indirect by causing a student to be socially isolated through intentional exclusion. While boys typically engage in direct bullying methods, girls who bully are more apt to utilize these more subtle indirect strategies, such as spreading rumors and enforcing social isolation (Ahmad & Smith, 1994; Smith & Sharp, 1994). Whether the bullying is direct or indirect, the key component of bullying is that the physical or psychological intimidation occurs repeatedly over time to create an ongoing pattern of harassment and abuse (Batsche & Knoff, 1994; Olweus, 1993). Extent of the Problem Various reports and studies have established that approximately 15% of students are either bullied regularly or are initiators of bullying behavior (Olweus, 1993).
Direct bullying seems to increase through the elementary years, peak in the middle school/junior high school years, and decline during the high school years. However, while direct physical assault seems to decrease with age, verbal abuse appears to remain constant. School size, racial composition, and school setting (rural, suburban, or urban) do not seem to be distinguishing factors in predicting the occurrence of bullying. Finally, boys engage in bullying behavior and are victims of bullies more frequently than girls (Batsche & Knoff, 1994; Nolin, Davies, & Chandler, 1995; Olweus, 1993; Whitney & Smith, 1993). Chracteristics of Bullies and VictimsStudents who engage in bullying behaviors seem to have a need to feel powerful and in control. They appear to derive satisfaction from inflicting injury and suffering on others, seem to have little empathy for their victims, and often defend their actions by saying that their victims provoked them in some way. Studies indicate that bullies often come from homes where physical punishment is used, where the children are taught to strike back physically as a way to handle problems, and where parental involvement and warmth are frequently lacking. Students who regularly display bullying behaviors are generally defiant or oppositional toward adults, antisocial, and apt to break school rules. In contrast to prevailing myths, bullies appear to have little anxiety and to possess strong self-esteem. There is little evidence to support the contention that they victimize others because they feel bad about themselves (Batsche & Knoff, 1994; Olweus, 1993).Students who are victims of bullying are typically anxious, insecure, cautious, and suffer from low self-esteem, rarely defending themselves or retaliating when confronted by students who bully them. They may lack social skills and friends, and they are often socially isolated. Victims tend to be close to their parents and may have parents who can be described as overprotective. The major defining physical characteristic of victims is that they tend to be physically weaker than their peers--other physical characteristics such as weight, dress, or wearing eyeglasses do not appear to be significant factors that can be correlated with victimization (Batsche & Knoff, 1994; Olweus, 1993).

Consequences of Bullying

As established by studies in Scandinavian countries, a strong correlation appears to exist between bullying other students during the school years and experiencing legal or criminal troubles as adults. In one study, 60% of those characterized as bullies in grades 6-9 had at least one criminal conviction by age 24 (Olweus, 1993). Chronic bullies seem to maintain their behaviors into adulthood, negatively influencing their ability to develop and maintain positive relationships (Oliver, Hoover, & Hazler, 1994).Victims often fear school and consider school to be an unsafe and unhappy place. As many as 7% of America's eighth-graders stay home at least once a month because of bullies. The act of being bullied tends to increase some students' isolation because their peers do not want to lose status by associating with them or because they do not want to increase the risks of being bullied themselves. Being bullied leads to depression and low self-esteem, problems that can carry into adulthood (Olweus, 1993; Batsche & Knoff, 1994). Perceptions of BullyingOliver, Hoover, and Hazler (1994) surveyed students in the Midwest and found that a clear majority felt that victims were at least partially responsible for bringing the bullying on themselves. Students surveyed tended to agree that bullying toughened a weak person, and some felt that bullying "taught" victims appropriate behavior. Charach, Pepler, and Ziegler (1995) found that students considered victims to be "weak," "nerds," and "afraid to fight back." However, 43% of the students in this study said that they try to help the victim, 33% said that they should help but do not, and only 24% said that bullying was none of their business.Parents are often unaware of the bullying problem and talk about it with their children only to a limited extent (Olweus, 1993). Student surveys reveal that a low percentage of students seem to believe that adults will help. Students feel that adult intervention is infrequent and ineffective, and that telling adults will only bring more harassment from bullies. Students report that teachers seldom or never talk to their classes about bullying (Charach, Pepler, & Ziegler, 1995). School personnel may view bullying as a harmless right of passage that is best ignored unless verbal and psychological intimidation crosses the line into physical assault or theft. Intervention ProgramsBullying is a problem that occurs in the social environment as a whole. The bullies' aggression occurs in social contexts in which teachers and parents are generally unaware of the extent of the problem and other children are either reluctant to get involved or simply do not know how to help (Charach, Pepler, & Ziegler, 1995). Given this situation, effective interventions must involve the entire school community rather than focus on the perpetrators and victims alone. Smith and Sharp (1994) emphasize the need to develop whole-school bullying policies, implement curricular measures, improve the schoolground environment, and empower students through conflict resolution, peer counseling, and assertiveness training. Olweus (1993) details an approach that involves interventions at the school, class, and individual levels. It includes the following components:An initial questionnaire can be distributed to students and adults. The questionnaire helps both adults and students become aware of the extent of the problem, helps to justify intervention efforts, and serves as a benchmark to measure the impact of improvements in school climate once other intervention components are in place. A parental awareness campaign can be conducted during parent-teacher conference days, through parent newsletters, and at PTA meetings. The goal is to increase parental awareness of the problem, point out the importance of parental involvement for program success, and encourage parental support of program goals. Questionnaire results are publicized. Teachers can work with students at the class level to develop class rules against bullying. Many programs engage students in a series of formal role-playing exercises and related assignments that can teach those students directly involved in bullying alternative methods of interaction. These programs can also show other students how they can assist victims and how everyone can work together to create a school climate where bullying is not tolerated (Sjostrom & Stein, 1996). Other components of anti-bullying programs include individualized interventions with the bullies and victims, the implementation of cooperative learning activities to reduce social isolation, and increasing adult supervision at key times (e.g., recess or lunch).
Schools that have implemented Olweus's program have reported a 50% reduction in bullying.ConclusionBullying is a serious problem that can dramatically affect the ability of students to progress academically and socially. A comprehensive intervention plan that involves all students, parents, and school staff is required to ensure that all students can learn in a safe and fear-free environment.ReferencesAhmad, Y., & Smith, P. K. (1994). Bullying in schools and the issue of sex differences. In John Archer (Ed.), MALE VIOLENCE. London: Routledge.Batsche, G. M., & Knoff, H. M. (1994). Bullies and their victims: Understanding a pervasive problem in the schools. School PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 23 (2), 165-174. EJ 490 574. Charach, A., Pepler, D., & Ziegler, S. (1995). Bullying at school--a Canadian perspective: A survey of problems and suggestions for intervention. EDUCATION CANADA, 35 (1), 12-18. EJ 502 058. Nolin, M. J., Davies, E., & Chandler, K. (1995). STUDENT VICTIMIZATION AT SCHOOL. National Center for Education Statistics--Statistics in Brief (NCES 95-204). ED 388 439. Oliver, R., Hoover, J. H., & Hazler, R. (1994). The perceived roles of bullying in small-town Midwestern schools. JOURNAL OF COUNSELING AND DEVELOPMENT, 72 (4), 416-419. EJ 489 169. Olweus, D. (1993). BULLYING AT SCHOOL: WHAT WE KNOW AND WHAT WE CAN DO. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. ED 384 437. Sjostrom, Lisa, & Stein, Nan. (1996). BULLY PROOF: A TEACHER'S GUIDE ON TEASING AND BULLYING FOR USE WITH FOURTH AND FIFTH GRADE STUDENTS. Boston, MA: Wellesley College Center for Research on Women and the NEA Professional Library. PS 024 450. Smith, P. K., & Sharp, S. (1994). SCHOOL BULLYING: INSIGHTS AND PERSPECTIVES. London : Routledge. ED 387 223. Whitney, I., & Smith, P. K. (1993). A survey of the nature and extent of bullying in junior/middle and secondary schools. EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH, 35 (1), 3-25. EJ 460 708. « prev page 1 2 3 4 next page »