Stopping fights in school

[pendell]

Saw this video (http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/11/video-texas-teacher-stands-by-while-bully-repeatedly-slugs-student-in-class/). Bully repeatedly punches student in geometry class, teacher stands by. Administrator backs him up, stating that a teacher should never touch a student under any circumstances -- it's a job for the administration.

I'm curious as to the response of teachers in the playground. How would you handle this?

If *I* were the teacher -- I used to be a sub -- I would stand between the students and tell the bully "Go to the principal's office. Now."

But it's been a few years since I've been in the game. Might not be the best way to handle it.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[valadil]

Not a teacher but I was a camp counselor for several summers. We absolutely broke up fights. I don't think I ever had to get between two kids who were fighting, but I frequently picked up the attacker and carried him off to the camp director.

The "never touch a student under any circumstances" didn't apply though. We played sports with the kids or carried them if they got tired on nature hikes. Breaking up a fight took less physical contact than teaching a kid to swim.

[Telonius]

From my own personal experience, I went to Catholic schools. Any kid that pulled that kind of nonsense would get the snot knocked out of him by Fr. McLanahan (former bareknuckles fighter) or Sr. Willamina (fastest ruler-draw north of the Mason-Dixon), shortly before being expelled and then shot by his parents.

Exaggerations aside, this really is a safety concern for some school districts. Teachers are hired to teach, not to be security personnel. The last thing you want to do is escalate, especially if you have no training about what to do in that situation. But especially post-Columbine, it would be really surprising to me if the teacher didn't have some kind of training to handle violent episodes in the classroom when no security is around. If there's no training or no policy in place, that's the fault of the administration.

[Anxe]

Why were the filming it? Why did the "victim" just stand there as well? Why does the victim casually address the camera afterwards?

To me this looks like the kids betting each other, "Let's see if we can punch each other in the head during class and have the teacher do nothing."
"Yeah! That sounds awesome! Let's film it too!"

[valadil]

Why were the filming it? Why did the "victim" just stand there as well? Why does the victim casually address the camera afterwards?

I assume "they" is just some student with a cellphone camera who wanted to be popular on YouTube.

[101jir]

I plan to become a Special Education teacher. this could be useful, (although I am sure at college they will address this). Looking forward to seeing more advice. Also,regardless of what the situation actually was in that incident, the question is still valid.

[Zen Monkey]

As a teacher, I'd break up the fight by safely restraining the aggressor or acting as a spacer in between if neither seems helpless. Yes, there are 'no touch' rules, but you can easily argue that the safety of another student briefly trumped that rule. It gets tricky when you're a male teacher and two females are fighting. It's very easy for one student who is in serious trouble to try and put the spotlight elsewhere by saying that they were touched someplace inappropriate in the process of separating the two.

[101jir]

As a teacher, I'd break up the fight by safely restraining the aggressor or acting as a spacer in between if neither seems helpless. Yes, there are 'no touch' rules, but you can easily argue that the safety of another student briefly trumped that rule. It gets tricky when you're a male teacher and two females are fighting. It's very easy for one student who is in serious trouble to try and put the spotlight elsewhere by saying that they were touched someplace inappropriate in the process of separating the two.

Just brainstorming here, but what about calling the principal/superintendant (whichever is female being preferable) or getting a female teacher, or would that be too weird?

[pendell]

Just brainstorming here, but what about calling the principal/superintendant (whichever is female being preferable) or getting a female teacher, or would that be too weird?

Speaking as a former sub -- early 90s -- there are two problems with this.

1) The principal is a few minutes away, and in the time it takes her/him to roll down the halls to your classroom, the victim could be jelly.

2) The one time I called the principal for help, I was never invited back to that particular school again. It turns out that, while you'll be told to call the principal if you need help, the unwritten subtext is they will consider you incompetent if you do. Principals don't like having to leave their own work to go straighten out a classroom 'cause the teacher isn't up to the job. They expect you to keep your classroom under control WITHOUT having to call security or the principal. Further, they prefer you to do this without laying a finger on any students.

They prefer you nip this in the bud and never escalate to this point in the first place. But that isn't always possible.

What administration wants is No Trouble. They want you to fix the problem in the class without getting outside parties or parents involved and ESPECIALLY without having viral youtube videos that embarrass the school. A teacher who never comes to the attention of the principal except to discipline the occasional troublemaker will probably do well. A teacher who constantly needs the principal to intervene will probably not survive their probationary period.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[valadil]

Just brainstorming here, but what about calling the principal/superintendant (whichever is female being preferable) or getting a female teacher, or would that be too weird?

The principal would be too slow. I can't see them arriving in anything less than a few minutes and that's assuming they weren't busy. I guess it could work in a smaller school, but would be impossible in larger schools.

If there's a teacher next door you can grab, that might be fast enough, but then you're disturbing their class as well as your own. And you're leaving your room to get someone else while your students are fighting.

[Tyndmyr]

Not a teacher but I was a camp counselor for several summers. We absolutely broke up fights. I don't think I ever had to get between two kids who were fighting, but I frequently picked up the attacker and carried him off to the camp director.

The "never touch a student under any circumstances" didn't apply though. We played sports with the kids or carried them if they got tired on nature hikes. Breaking up a fight took less physical contact than teaching a kid to swim.

Was also a camp counselor(albeit a fair number of years back). The same was also true. Preventing violence or harm was certainly considered more important than not touching a camper.

Note that we had a rifle and an archery range as well, and if a camper broke the safety rules and refused to immediately relinquish the gun/bow, we were supposed to physically take it from them. While such events are quite rare, I cannot imagine how a 100% no-contact policy can apply to every possible situation.

[RS14]

Not a teacher.

What I have always heard with regards to other people's fights is that it is best not to get involved. Doing so is a good way to 1) die or 2) wind up in jail.
If the school wants me to do so, they can provide me with training, insurance, and a lawyer. Paying a bit extra wouldn't hurt.

If the little thugs wants to murder or assault somebody in front of a room of witnesses, that is indeed unfortunate. But I'm going to let them to that, and I trust that the DA would see to it that they go to jail for an appropriately long amount of time.

I can't fault them for not intervening. They weren't hired to be a bouncer; they were hired because they wanted to teach math. They have no obligation, IMHO, to intervene. If you want teachers to be bouncers, start hiring big muscled guys to do that, and train them appropriately.

[valadil]

Note that we had a rifle and an archery range as well, and if a camper broke the safety rules and refused to immediately relinquish the gun/bow, we were supposed to physically take it from them. While such events are quite rare, I cannot imagine how a 100% no-contact policy can apply to every possible situation.

No rifles for us, but I was the archery instructor at my camp. Only had one incident. One kid wouldn't shut up and was narrating his every movement while shooting. The kid next to him turned and pointed the bow at the first kid. Not sure if he was intending to release or just being a jerk, but I snatched the arrow right off the bow. No contact necessary :-p

As long as I'm on the topic though, contact is necessary if a kid runs down range. Small children are excitable. When they run out of arrows, their first reaction is to run out there and start retrieving arrows. Usually I was able to grab them by their arms or shirts and hold them there until everyone else was done shooting. But, hypothetically if someone did run on to the range, an archery instructor is supposed to (after yelling "hold" of course) run onto the range, tackle the person, and cover them. I guess it was a liability thing that an employee is better off taking an arrow than a camper. Oh and that was a National Archery Association rule btw, not something that was specific to that camp. (And yes I still have my NAA instructor card in my wallet, even though it expired almost 10 years ago.)

[Zen Monkey]

One high school I was asked to sub for had requested me precisely because I supposedly am big and intimidating, and the smaller, older, female teachers were having problems with threats and even physical violence.

During one class, a girl picked up a compass and attempted to stab a classmate. Since I'm a guy and these are two female students, the female teacher from the neighboring classroom came to help me separate them. Of course, while she was briefly absent, her class set that room on fire. In the ensuing evacutation, a lot of the students stampeded like cattle, running for the edges of the property and not coming back at all.

Yeah, I don't work for public schools anymore, as it gets pretty difficult to play by all of their rules and still get any actual educating done.

[pendell]

I can't fault them for not intervening. They weren't hired to be a bouncer; they were hired because they wanted to teach math. They have no obligation, IMHO, to intervene. If you want teachers to be bouncers, start hiring big muscled guys to do that, and train them appropriately.

It's been awhile since I went over the material, but IIRC keeping order in the classroom is indeed a teacher's job. So, yes, they do have an obligation to stop the fight, especially if it's done right in front of their faces. For pragmatic reasons if for no other. If the kids catch on that they can do what they want in your room, up to beating each other up, and you won't interfere, you won't get any useful teaching done ever. The kids will ignore you and do what they want. Complaints will go up, grades will go down. You will be completely ineffective as a teacher.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[pendell]

No rifles for us, but I was the archery instructor at my camp. Only had one incident. One kid wouldn't shut up and was narrating his every movement while shooting. The kid next to him turned and pointed the bow at the first kid. Not sure if he was intending to release or just being a jerk, but I snatched the arrow right off the bow. No contact necessary :-p

As long as I'm on the topic though, contact is necessary if a kid runs down range. Small children are excitable. When they run out of arrows, their first reaction is to run out there and start retrieving arrows. Usually I was able to grab them by their arms or shirts and hold them there until everyone else was done shooting. But, hypothetically if someone did run on to the range, an archery instructor is supposed to (after yelling "hold" of course) run onto the range, tackle the person, and cover them. I guess it was a liability thing that an employee is better off taking an arrow than a camper. Oh and that was a National Archery Association rule btw, not something that was specific to that camp. (And yes I still have my NAA instructor card in my wallet, even though it expired almost 10 years ago.)

So ... your job required you to take an arrow for the kids if you had to?

Did they mention this in the job description?

Regardless, you have earned 100 badass points as far as I am concerned.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[valadil]

So ... your job required you to take an arrow for the kids if you had to?

Did they mention this in the job description?


My job required me to be a Level 1 NAA certified instructor. Level 1 NAA instructors are told that they're better off taking an arrow than letting someone else get shot.

I told this to my boss at the time and we agreed that I'd probably do more damage tacking a kid 1/5th my weight than letting them get hit with a blunt arrow from a toy bow. I think that rule applied more to adults who could a) absorb a tackle without breaking bows and b) use a bow with enough power to break skin. The bows the kids were using could barely make arrows stick in the targets, so it didn't really apply there.

[Trog]

Huh. Back in my day teachers always broke up fights. Or rather if fights were seen and a particular few male teachers were present they'd step in and intervene. Sometimes it only took the teacher's presence and saying "break it up" to get things to stop, really. Sometimes they had to get in the middle and separate the two. Sometimes it took more than one teacher. These men took it upon themselves to stop fights from happening and only by accident did any of the fighters land a blow on the teacher.

On the other hand I've seen a student push a female teacher to the ground before. Male teacher intervened and hauled the kid off.

Maybe things have changed now but back then it was sort of accepted that the larger male teachers kept the peace to the best of their ability.

That video, however, isn't a "fight" - it's a beating. The other kid is completely passive - or is so at least physically. I have no idea if anything was said to goad the other kid.

If I were that teacher I would have stepped in between them and taken the punching kid to the office. If he tried to punch me I can block well enough though I'd try and restrain myself from punching in response despite that being my innate reaction to such a thing. Saying something along the lines of "Right, you know I can't allow that here. We're going to the office, you and I. NOW." Then, obviously, parents would be notified and detention would be handed out as needed.

[101jir]

OK, wierd idea, (again), but what about threatening more hours of detention/suspension if the fight does not subside right away? (In the male teacher stopping female students situation)

[pendell]

OK, wierd idea, (again), but what about threatening more hours of detention/suspension if the fight does not subside right away? (In the male teacher stopping female students situation)

Dunno what other people's experiences are, but people in a fight typically don't pay attention to people gabbling in the background, even if "people" are teachers or police officers.

I believe it IS possible to break something up through verbal control alone -- something like "STOP IT NOW!" in your most commanding voice. A command voice shouldn't be screaming or whining or pleading. Calm, authoritative, and loud enough to be heard without being hysterical. When you're 6'2'' and I am and have a deep voice already, it can get attention.

Sometimes it works.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Don Julio Anejo]

No experience as a teacher (unless you consider TAing a university bio class), but as a student...

Bullies don't care about punishment. Taking them to the principals office is about as effective as talking about how they're hurting somebody's feelings. If they cared, they wouldn't fight in the first place.

The teachers most effective at stopping fights were the ones who either subjected attackers to public ridicule or were physically intimidating enough (there was one socials teachers who was something like 300 pounds of pure muscle, for example).

Also, my experience with American administration system (Canadian one is better in this regard) is that if you fight back instead of just getting beat into a pulp, you're MORE at fault than whoever attacked you. Because apparently you're supposed to somehow run away and tell the teacher when there's a fist in your face. As soon as you punch back, you're the bad guy and get punishment. I still fail to see the logic behind this, as well as behind zero-tolerance policies for stuff.

Oh yeah, and my favourite way of getting someone to stop attacking you in front of an audience is accusing them of trying to do inappropriate things to me. And apologize for not swinging their way.

[valadil]

I still fail to see the logic behind this, as well as behind zero-tolerance policies for stuff.

That sort of policy wasn't designed by logic. It was designed by committee and compromise, and I'm willing to bet that everyone on such a committee is so far removed from school bullying that they don't have enough relevant info to make a useful decision.

[Phishfood]

Rules at our place do allow staff to restrain pupils in situations like a fight. Or about to fall into a power saw or something. Which I'm assuming means its legal. Same as you are protected from getting sued if you give someone CPR and break a rib.

[Gaelbert]

A teacher at a school I went to kept a cricket bat in the classroom to break up gang fights. He used it, too.

[lord of kobolds]

I only work with toddlers over the summer, so I can't really contribute much there. "zero contact" is not really a practical way to run things with 2-year-olds. Even the best of them can't always control themselves.

With my high school experience, I can tell you that teachers at my school will break up a fight. It's a boarding school, so everybody knows eachother, and just separating kids is not really possible. Last year, on a school trip, one of the teachers was forced to actually tackle a kid to get him to stop beating up another kid. This was a last resort, but at a certain point the safety of the victim needs to be placed above any sort of legal issues.

[_Zoot_]

Not a teacher.

What I have always heard with regards to other people's fights is that it is best not to get involved. Doing so is a good way to 1) die or 2) wind up in jail.
If the school wants me to do so, they can provide me with training, insurance, and a lawyer. Paying a bit extra wouldn't hurt.

If the little thugs wants to murder or assault somebody in front of a room of witnesses, that is indeed unfortunate. But I'm going to let them to that, and I trust that the DA would see to it that they go to jail for an appropriately long amount of time.

I can't fault them for not intervening. They weren't hired to be a bouncer; they were hired because they wanted to teach math. They have no obligation, IMHO, to intervene. If you want teachers to be bouncers, start hiring big muscled guys to do that, and train them appropriately.

They do have an obligation. They have a Duty of Care to prevent the students coming to harm (or at least in Australia we do) it doesn't matter what the students are doing, the teacher is meant to protect them, and if that means breaking up a fight, so be it.



... the safety of the victim needs to be placed above any sort of legal issues.

Right on the money.

I'm training to be a teacher in Australia (and while it does sound like our laws are very different from those over there) if a fight was so bad that it couldn't be broken up then the teacher should AT THE VERY LEAST get in between the two parties to prevent them from getting at each other.

I don't think that gender would come into it, if two girls were fighting (again at a level that could not be broken up in another way) then it is the duty of the teacher to make sure that they do not come to harm, and the teacher should get intervene.

Other points: What ever that video was, it was not a fight. I have no idea what was meant to be happening, but in my experience that is not how fights work, with one party getting hit in the head with out ANY effort to defend them selves or to protect areas like the head and then smiling at the camera when it is all over.

[RS14]

Well, it's pretty clear that I'll never be a teacher in any capacity where the students aren't paying through the nose to be there. I have no interest in dealing with such nonsense.


It's been awhile since I went over the material, but IIRC keeping order in the classroom is indeed a teacher's job. So, yes, they do have an obligation to stop the fight, especially if it's done right in front of their faces. For pragmatic reasons if for no other. If the kids catch on that they can do what they want in your room, up to beating each other up, and you won't interfere, you won't get any useful teaching done ever. The kids will ignore you and do what they want. Complaints will go up, grades will go down. You will be completely ineffective as a teacher.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

I'm not saying there should be no consequences for fighting. But fighting is a criminal matter: assault. Someone who is trained and paid to deal with nasty, violent people can haul them off in cuffs if they're going to commit assault.

Is there any reason they should not be exposed to criminal liability because the crime is committed in the classroom?


They do have an obligation. They have a Duty of Care to prevent the students coming to harm (or at least in Australia we do) it doesn't matter what the students are doing, the teacher is meant to protect them, and if that means breaking up a fight, so be it.


The Duty of Care is not without its limits, however. A teacher is not expected to risk his physical safety (or the safety of students) in that intervention. From Moran v. VIT (http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2007/1311.html):


In our view, there is no immutable rule that a teacher should physically intervene in a fight between students. There are many occasions when it would be physically dangerous to the teacher, or to one of the students, to do so. A teacher is not required to risk his physical safety, or that of another student in the discharge of his professional responsibility.
There may be some occasions where a teacher can intervene physically in a fight without risk to his or her safety or to the safety of other students. This must be a judgment call on the teacher’s part. It may be appropriate response for a teacher of small children, where there would be little risk of danger to the teacher. The Applicant is relatively tall and well built. He was the school’s football coach. It may be that students observing the fight expected, by reason of his physical characteristics, that he should intervene. This may be why they displayed such aggression to him after the event for not intervening.

There appear to be no general guidelines available to teachers as to the circumstances in which a teacher should intervene in a school ground fight. Teachers have a responsibility to protect students. However, we do not consider that extends to placing himself or herself physically in harms way, or taking the risk of harming another child. There may be some situations where a teacher can intervene physically without risk of harm to himself or to other students. We do not consider this to be such a case. The fight was a vicious one. It involved up to eight fully grown teenage girls.

Given the difficulty of all the above issues, we do not consider that Mr Moran’s failure to physically intervene to break up the fight once it started can be characterised as incompetence, much less serious incompetence. We would expect that it would only be in the rarest situations that failure to physically intervene, once a fight between teenagers had commenced, could be characterised as incompetence, let alone serious incompetence. In this case, the physical fight lasted 30 seconds. We are not prepared to characterise failure to intervene for 30 seconds in a fight involving up to eight mature teenage girls, surrounded by a crowd of up to fifty students, serious incompetence.

In coming to this conclusion, we wish to record that there was no reason why Moran should not have gone in closer to where the fight took place. To stand back in the position he did was a serious error of judgment. We would have expected to have seen him at this stage in the camera’s view.

[BarroomBard]

Also, my experience with American administration system (Canadian one is better in this regard) is that if you fight back instead of just getting beat into a pulp, you're MORE at fault than whoever attacked you. Because apparently you're supposed to somehow run away and tell the teacher when there's a fist in your face. As soon as you punch back, you're the bad guy and get punishment. I still fail to see the logic behind this, as well as behind zero-tolerance policies for stuff.


As I understand it, this is usually just because, by the time a fight gets broken up, someone fighting back looks exactly like someone throwing the first punch.

[lord of kobolds]

I'm not saying there should be no consequences for fighting. But fighting is a criminal matter: assault. Someone who is trained and paid to deal with nasty, violent people can haul them off in cuffs if they're going to commit assault.

The problem is that there are very rarely law enforcement officials in a classroom while a lesson is going on. The teacher cannot be required to intervene, but in many cases there is nobody else there to do so. It all comes down to the teacher. I personally feel like I would risk the beating if it meant taking it off of somebody else, but you can't force anybody to make that choice. It's just something that you need to decide for yourself, in the moment.


Is there any reason they should not be exposed to criminal liability because the crime is committed in the classroom?


I would agree that legal repercussions are totally reasonable. A crime is a crime, regardless of where it is committed. However, the main issue is what should be done WHILE the crime is being committed.




None of this should be taken as an expert opinion, just the feelings of somebody who is willing to take that hit for someone else.

[Kislath]

When I was still in High School, students were still allowed to have guns on campus. ( deer season, you know ) We didn't have problems with fights until I was in 12th grade and they took away the guns. Guns make people mighty polite.

[Juggling Goth]

In Britain, at least, teaching staff who work with kids with special educational needs can be taught to safely restrain, redirect and move students. It's called Team Teach (http://www.team-teach.co.uk). (I'm not involved with them in any way - though my partner has done one of their courses due to her job - and that's not a plug.) I guess it's easier to justify with those students because of the risk of them hurting themselves, but I don't really see a good reason why mainstream schools shouldn't use it.

[_Zoot_]

The Duty of Care is not without its limits, however. A teacher is not expected to risk his physical safety (or the safety of students) in that intervention. From Moran v. VIT (http://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/sinodisp/au/cases/vic/VCAT/2007/1311.html):

Ok, credit where it is due. You did your research on that one, I forfeit the point, I was under the impression that we were required to break up a fight if necessary (though obviously not if we would risk doing more harm to a student than the fight would).

Well played. :smallsmile:

[101jir]

As I understand it, this is usually just because, by the time a fight gets broken up, someone fighting back looks exactly like someone throwing the first punch.

Not in my experiance. I live in MN, and I did get blamed worse, even when the teachers were there and saw someone else started it. It was 6-7ish years ago, when I was in 5th 6th grade. They said that I should have shown more restraint and let the teachers take care of it (which, of course, they wouldn't). This is dealing with verbal bullying, not fights, so that may be different. The mentality is still there though, that the victim should show "restraint"

[pendell]

I'm not saying there should be no consequences for fighting. But fighting is a criminal matter: assault. Someone who is trained and paid to deal with nasty, violent people can haul them off in cuffs if they're going to commit assault.


Not necessarily.

There are at least two good reasons not to get the police involved:

1) Five minutes after Johnny goes away in handcuffs, Mommie and Daddy are there with high priced lawyers arguing that Johnie was mistreated. There then follows months of legal wrangling, at the end of which little Johnie may or may not go to juvie, but the school and yourself will go through a great deal of legal hassle and paperwork at all which will get in the way of doing your job and will win you no friends among the administration.


2) I dunno about you, but I saw stuff in school that, if a police officer had been standing there, would have resulted in people going to jail for quite some time. But sometimes a kid does not need cuffs and a spell in juvie hall to become a productive citizen. My impression of our jail system is that it takes people who might be salvageable and with a high success rate spits them out as hardened criminals.

Of course, I'm 6'2'', weigh 200 pounds, and male. I had options available to me that weren't available to other teachers.




Is there any reason they should not be exposed to criminal liability because the crime is committed in the classroom?


Just because something is legally possible does not necessarily mean it is wise, either for the victim or the bully. Sometime kids can learn to straighten up and fly right if they have a teacher willing to discipline them, rather than waiting to bring in the cops and start putting them through that system.

I went through special ed myself. As a grade schooler, I did stupid stuff like throw a fraction pie in a teacher's face or otherwise act out quite badly. The result was a day-only psychological clinic. The police COULD have been called, but were not. The teachers and the school were able to restore order and put me on the right track without getting the legal system involved, and for that I am profoundly grateful. I'm a productive citizen today , which I might not have been if I'd been in and out of juvie. The special ed kids were a bad enough influence as it was.

Of course, what I did was not seriously meant to hurt -- it was more in the nature of a slapstick joke -- and I'm assuming the kid in question is unarmed. If someone pulled a knife in my class or a gun I would clear the room and call the police. As a 6'2'' 200 pound man, I'm willing to intervene in a fight between junior high school kids and take a punch or two. I can take a lot worse than that. But lethal weapons? Whole 'nother order of business.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[101jir]

My impression based on the previous posts seems to be that there doesn't seem to be one right answer in every culture. In Britain, US, and Australia, we all have certain do's and don'ts that vary. Even within countries, it seems that there are differences in approaches. The Sp. Ed teacher at my (small) school said that it would be perfectly normal for him to get the next door teacher or for her to get him (they are only seconds away). Then plausibility seems to differ from school sizes. Perhaps we should be thinking about what methods work for what types of schools where?

[Don Julio Anejo]

Not in my experiance. I live in MN, and I did get blamed worse, even when the teachers were there and saw someone else started it. It was 6-7ish years ago, when I was in 5th 6th grade. They said that I should have shown more restraint and let the teachers take care of it (which, of course, they wouldn't). This is dealing with verbal bullying, not fights, so that may be different. The mentality is still there though, that the victim should show "restraint"
Exactly, except in my case it was 5-6 cases involving physical violence, 11 years ago when I was in grade 6. It was three different bullies. All the teachers knew they were bullies and were beating the snot out of kids they didn't like. I came from a culture (Russia) where if you get punched for no reason, you fight back and stand up for yourself, which is exactly what I did. Outside of that, I was a somewhat geeky straight-A student who never so much as said a bad word. All the teachers involved knew that.

Yet every single time all a bully would get is a detention, while I got a detention and a stern hour long lecture on how it's not nice to fight other people, how I should find a way to settle my differences using words and how if something is wrong I should let a teacher know. Once from a teacher who saw the entire thing (he was watching, I even made a motion with my eyes in regards to the bully) and took me to the principal.

How did that particular fight begin? A guy slammed a lunch tray with food on it into my face while I wasn't even aware he was nearby.

[Keld Denar]

Yet every single time all a bully would get is a detention, while I got a detention and a stern hour long lecture on how it's not nice to fight other people, how I should find a way to settle my differences using words and how if something is wrong I should let a teacher know. Once from a teacher who saw the entire thing (he was watching, I even made a motion with my eyes in regards to the bully) and took me to the principal.

I'd say at this point its a matter of expectations. Everyone expects a bully to bully. Hes not going anywhere in life, he's already lost. You, on the other hand, they probably had higher expectations of you because you were smarter and/or a harder worker and/or were more pleasant and/or whatever. your pedastal is higher than theirs because they like you and respect you more and know that you CAN succeed. The point at which you throw down and trade knuckle sandwiches means you are lowering yourself to their level, rather than staying up at yours. Its a much further fall, resulting in much more disappointment and a much sterner reproach.

At least thats what I've noticed.

[valadil]

I'd say at this point its a matter of expectations. Everyone expects a bully to bully. Hes not going anywhere in life, he's already lost. You, on the other hand, they probably had higher expectations of you because you were smarter and/or a harder worker and/or were more pleasant and/or whatever. your pedastal is higher than theirs because they like you and respect you more and know that you CAN succeed.

While I can understand that logic, I don't think it works in practice. If I'm getting punished worse than someone who bullied me, my reactions is going to be to distrust the teachers. And if I lose faith in them as authority figures, there's even less chance that I'd report bullying instead of standing up for myself.

[101jir]

I'd say at this point its a matter of expectations. Everyone expects a bully to bully. Hes not going anywhere in life, he's already lost. You, on the other hand, they probably had higher expectations of you because you were smarter and/or a harder worker and/or were more pleasant and/or whatever. your pedastal is higher than theirs because they like you and respect you more and know that you CAN succeed. The point at which you throw down and trade knuckle sandwiches means you are lowering yourself to their level, rather than staying up at yours. Its a much further fall, resulting in much more disappointment and a much sterner reproach.

At least thats what I've noticed.

I am afraid I don't quite understand how the mentality is important here. First, both could make something of themselves. It isn't right to just give up on someone. Second, the teacher is making the pain/abuse worse for the victim, which (at least I) would deem unethical. Third, you are encouraging the bully to become worse. If they don't make anything of themselves, at least don't let them get too bad.

[Keld Denar]

If you run under the assumption that everyone is equally as intelligent, ambitious, charismatic, and creative, then yea, that would be a flawed outlook. Most people, either consiously or subconsiously, think otherwise. Think back to high school. The kid that picked on you. Could he be president of the USA? Doubtful. CEO of a Fortune 500 company? Unlikely. Make a 6 figure annual salary before retirement, much less before 30? Possible, but not probable. Not to disparage anyone, but being realistic. Not everyone is creative enough to think of new ways to do things, intelligient enough to impliment them, ambitious enough to stick with it, and charismatic enough to convince everyone else that their way is better. Some people have facets of these, to different degrees, and some people can make up for a lack in one area with an abundance in another, but if you look at all of the most successful people, they generally have a high level of all of them.

The smart nerd who does well in class with creative ideas that most kids just laugh at? He has potential to go places and be someone. As a teacher, these are the kids you love to have, because you have the potential to amplify their gift and allow them to achieve that level of greatness.

The bully who has no foresight, no ambition, very little charisma, and who struggles in class? Yea, helping him succeed in class has its own reward...doing more with less and all that, but compare that with the math teacher who stoked Donald Trump's interest in business, or the science teacher who stoked Bill Gate's interest in technology? For one, a teacher could make the difference between a terrible life and a good life. For the other, the teacher could make the difference between a good life and a great life simply by holding them to higher standards and expecting better results and being more disappointed when those standards aren't met (which further drives the student to higher levels of success). Its the difference between teaching to each according to their ability, and teaching according to the lowest common denominator. If you hold everyone to the same standard, that standard has to be pretty dang low or most people won't meet it, and the really ambitious people won't feel appropriately challenged and won't undergo the level of growth they need to become truely great.

I'm not saying it's right, but it is there. People do it. You aren't surprised when you hear about Lindsey Lohan or Charlie Sheen doing drugs, because you don't expect any better from them. You would, however, be REALLY shocked if Bill Gates or Donald Trump or Barak Obama went on a 3 day coke bender and threw away their careers, wouldn't you? You expect more from certain people, and if they fail to meet certain expectations, you feel more let down by it. People do it. Teachers do it. Parents do it.

I don't know how better to explain it. I hope you get what I'm getting at.

[Lord Loss]

Call me a cynic, but most teachers aren't very competent at breaking up fights and stopping bullies. I was bullied like crazy in elementary and got into plenty of fights, most of them not very close to teachers, admittedly. One of the worst events I remember was (not very violent compared to others, but the teacher's reaction was terrible). Some kid punched me, I pushed him away, my friends told her that he has attacked me out of nowhere, she understood it the other way around and I got in trouble. Also, no punishment was issued to kids who TRIED TO DUNK MY HEAD IN A TOILET... :smallsigh:

As for the actual breaking up of fights, it seems to me that letting a kid get beaten up isn't a very good idea and that you should get in the way of fights, but legal repercussions on the part of parents are always a possiblity...

[Don Julio Anejo]

Interesting tidbit: a dumbass jock who picked on a lot of people in grades 7-10 (I didn't know him before grade 7 by virtue of not living in Canada) is currently in med school, which is at least 2 years away from me. Almost straight A student council president from a grade above me? Retailing macs (as in, Apple products, not Big Macs, he's not doing that bad) with his business degree.

Don't judge people based on their behaviour. If anything, I wouldn't expect nerds to go places - they usually lack the ambition to do so. Plus they often choose intellectual pursuits like science or engineering - it guarantees you an above average standard of living, but at the same time it caps you pretty low. Most engineers never break the $100k limit. Most scientists make even less unless they're university professors. Etc.

People like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are a rare exception, and even then largely happened because 1. you had to be tech savvy instead of charismatic to get into a rapidly growing IT business and 2. Gates had an inordinate amount of connections and family wealth (dad worth $200m or so, mother was on IBM's board of directors when he was pitching MS-DOS).

On the other hand, people like Barak Obama or Donald Trump are generally the people who went out and said "I want to be the best" and then went out and worked for it. Most execs got where they are not through studying hard and getting good grades (that's only a part of it), but also through office politics, a large dose of ambition and the desire to outcompete everyone. They also have damn good people skills, which meant they actively socialized instead of simply reading books.

[101jir]

If you run under the assumption that everyone is equally as intelligent, ambitious, charismatic, and creative, then yea, that would be a flawed outlook. Most people, either consiously or subconsiously, think otherwise. Think back to high school. The kid that picked on you. Could he be president of the USA? Doubtful. CEO of a Fortune 500 company? Unlikely. Make a 6 figure annual salary before retirement, much less before 30? Possible, but not probable. Not to disparage anyone, but being realistic. Not everyone is creative enough to think of new ways to do things, intelligient enough to impliment them, ambitious enough to stick with it, and charismatic enough to convince everyone else that their way is better. Some people have facets of these, to different degrees, and some people can make up for a lack in one area with an abundance in another, but if you look at all of the most successful people, they generally have a high level of all of them.

The smart nerd who does well in class with creative ideas that most kids just laugh at? He has potential to go places and be someone. As a teacher, these are the kids you love to have, because you have the potential to amplify their gift and allow them to achieve that level of greatness.

The bully who has no foresight, no ambition, very little charisma, and who struggles in class? Yea, helping him succeed in class has its own reward...doing more with less and all that, but compare that with the math teacher who stoked Donald Trump's interest in business, or the science teacher who stoked Bill Gate's interest in technology? For one, a teacher could make the difference between a terrible life and a good life. For the other, the teacher could make the difference between a good life and a great life simply by holding them to higher standards and expecting better results and being more disappointed when those standards aren't met (which further drives the student to higher levels of success). Its the difference between teaching to each according to their ability, and teaching according to the lowest common denominator. If you hold everyone to the same standard, that standard has to be pretty dang low or most people won't meet it, and the really ambitious people won't feel appropriately challenged and won't undergo the level of growth they need to become truely great.

I'm not saying it's right, but it is there. People do it. You aren't surprised when you hear about Lindsey Lohan or Charlie Sheen doing drugs, because you don't expect any better from them. You would, however, be REALLY shocked if Bill Gates or Donald Trump or Barak Obama went on a 3 day coke bender and threw away their careers, wouldn't you? You expect more from certain people, and if they fail to meet certain expectations, you feel more let down by it. People do it. Teachers do it. Parents do it.

I don't know how better to explain it. I hope you get what I'm getting at.

I get it. Its the way people naturally think, and you have to cut them some slack because they are people and people make mistakes. This is an example of an easy one to make. I just wanted to clarify that it is, in fact a mistake.
For the purpose of this discussion, I suppose that it might be important to mark that it is a mindset we should watch out for, but let's get talking about some good ideas again. So, any other good ideas that have not yet been mentioned?

[Traab]

Best way is to get in between them and do your best to separate them. Hopefully with at least one other teacher there helping you. Most fights tend to die out once the participants are kept from hitting each other for a few seconds. And yeah, american school fight rules are stupid. You get attacked out of nowhere and get the snot kicked out of you, and you get the exact same punishment as the guy who assaulted you.

It USED to matter who started it. You know, back when teachers had actual authority in school, and didnt have to be worried about getting sued for "laying their hands on my precious baby boy!" But then the admins got lazy, created zero thought, err I mean zero tolerance policies, which let them auto punish every situation without having to think about it. Of course, then you get the fun scenarios of kindergarten students being expelled for offering their inhaler to another kid, (omg drug dealing!) or bringing in a spork. (Omg weapons!)

[druid91]

Being a terrifying weirdo, In high school bullying lasted for one year. Then it stopped.

Apparently everyone thought I was insane, and thus pushing me to snap was not the best idea.

I have no idea how they got this impression, Aside from me laughing at nothing, wearing a coat that had innumerable random objects stuffed in my pockets... Including at one point a sharp object (Shingle scraper IIRC) that I remembered at the last minute and pulled out to stuff in the mailbox in full view of the bus, A tendency to eat anything... Whether fresh or stale(Also I usually eat the whole apple/strawberry and try to eat at least part of the melon rind), and general oddness.

WeirdFTW:smallcool:

[101jir]

Um... I think the rules say I can say this, but I think we are getting a bit off topic. Yes, I too have a rather cynical attitude towards teachers (part of the reason that I intend to become one, ironically). I think we need to maybe focus on what the proper solution(s) for teachers handling bullying in what scenario(s) and not so much what is wrong with the system. Unless, of course, Pendell agrees that this can be incorperated into the discussion. I think it might be a good idea to disclaim that I am not a mod and I don't think this even comes close to breaking any rules, but we might want to avoid too much talk about our negative experiances if they are not strongly interlinked with what we think teachers should do to stop it.

Again, Pendell, is it OK to incorperate this as a ligitimate secondary discussion or not?

[THAC0]

Am a teacher. Have been in similar situations.

Short answer: It depends.

It depends on your country, your state, your country, your school district, and your school. Each of these provide layers of regulation that you must weigh.

In my case I tried to interpose myself between the combatants (unsuccessfully, I'm small), while other students pulled them off each other.

In other districts I have worked in, I would not have done this, as the risks to me would outweigh the benefits.

Every time you have contact with a student in this day and age, you are risking lawsuits. If your school policy and state laws back you up, it can be worth the risk. If they don't, it's not, IMO.

[The_JJ]

This reminds me of a hallway fight back in high school, a coupla freshmen started going at it just as our Head Boy, a buddy of mine and the captain of the wrestling team walked by. He stuck his arms out and let the two of them just sort of push off of him like he was a brick wall until he let out a 'break it up' that I'm fairly sure they heard a town over.

[Anuan]

A teacher at a school I went to kept a cricket bat in the classroom to break up gang fights. He used it, too.

Best teacher. Ever.

[pendell]

Again, Pendell, is it OK to incorperate this as a ligitimate secondary discussion or not?

I would say we permit it as a legitimate secondary discussion because it is part of the overall nature of dealing with bullying in schools. The discussion of why fights happen and the phenomenon of bullying is part and parcel of breaking up fights.

IMO, the best way to break up a fight is to ensure it never starts in your classroom in the first place. If a kid throws a punch at another in class, then as a teacher you've already failed. The rest is just damage control.

So a question *I* would ask of the teachers here is what they do to set the tone in class such that no student even *thinks* of raising a hand to another, or otherwise engaging in disruptive behavior.

As an admittedly not-terribly-competent sub, my solution was to enter a new class in tough-guy mode. I watched police officers and watched the way they talked, the way they moved, subliminally asserting command through their body language and their verbal cues. I was firm, assertive, and authoritative when I spoke to the class. I was also very, VERY quick to hand out detentions or other discipline. My rule was: I write your name on the board as a warning ONE time. After that, we go to detention.

Why did I do this? Because it used to be that I was in classes where the rules said you put the name and two checks before detention. I noticed that I would typically have five names on the board. Of which, three would be there once, and two would have EXACTLY TWO checks by their names.

Three kids just needed a warning. The other two were pushing their boundaries as far as they could.

So I did away with the checks and issued one warning, which is all most kids needed. I was quick to hand out discipline. After that, things were typically smooth for the rest of the day and I could let up on the iron hand.

The lesson was: If I establish a firm tone at the beginning, I'm able to loosen up and be a fairly gentle guy for the rest of the day. By contrast, if I was too gentle and nice at the beginning, the kids who push the boundaries would run wild and I'd have to pull out bigger and bigger guns during the course of the day to re-establish control.

I can truthfully say I never had a fight within my classroom except for one special ed kid who insisted on challenging me. I sent him to the office.

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[101jir]

Question, how should counterbullying be dealt with? That is probably the best word to describe me a few years ago. Someone that has been picked on turns the table on those that picked on him/her, even after the bullying has stopped. Should there be a different methodology? I honestly can't say I know what the best way to deal with me would have been.

[pendell]

Question, how should counterbullying be dealt with? That is probably the best word to describe me a few years ago. Someone that has been picked on turns the table on those that picked on him/her, even after the bullying has stopped. Should there be a different methodology? I honestly can't say I know what the best way to deal with me would have been.

I for one wish we could send all kids to mandatory martial arts classes. So that they could not only learn how to fight but when and where it would be a good idea.

They are rules that police officers follow as well: Physical violence is only permissible in defense of self or of others. Not for avenging injury or insults from years ago. That's the province of the courts or the school system.

I would like to hammer that into kid's heads along with their ABCs.

As it is, I think schools and others avoid the topic altogether. The result is that not only do kids not know when to fight , when they do fight they can cause serious injury to themselves or to others.

This would , of course, mean that we'd have to drop zero tolerance policies and be willing to not punish kids who were only defending themselves from violence, while bringing the hammer down on people who were troublemakers.

I'm not sure how we get there from here, realistically. Teachers aren't all-knowing gods -- I remember when I had to sort through things on the playground. What I had were two very angry kids each with their own story to tell. I had no choice but to send them both to detention. That probably means I busted the victim along with the bully. But I was a one-day sub. I couldn't simply let it pass and I didn't have time for a full investigation to determine the rights and wrongs of the case.

That, plus the lawyers get involved again. Zero tolerance policies are hard on victims but they DO prevent the school from being sued into oblivion. I wonder if things are different in private schools?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Crow]

One of my teachers "accidentally" (it could have been) threw a kid through a window while breaking up a fight. Pretty much the coolest thing I ever saw in high school.

That said, teachers should absolutely break up fights. Though the above incident isn't exactly the best example, I do believe that teachers have some responsibility for the safety of the kids in their class.

[Hazzardevil]

Having been in fights in school, just last tuesday in fact. I have been in a fight and the teacher stands there.
So it's like this:

Someone threatens you with a knife,
Teacher does nothing,
Pupil stabs you, you fight back , you get punished or you let them do it.
I once had a short person attack me. He put me in a headlock and the teacher stood there saying things like:
"Ryan stop putting that boy in a headlock"
and I just asked if I could fight back until he tried getting somethign sharp out. I then fought back, tripped him and put him in a headlock.
So I was standing there with a boy half my hieght under my arms flailing his legs.

I actually ended up having to have a Lunchtime detention for defending myself.
I don't have a problem with teachers not getting involved, it's when you are expected to let them do whatever that I find it unreasnable.

[101jir]

Having been in fights in school, just last tuesday in fact. I have been in a fight and the teacher stands there.
So it's like this:

Someone threatens you with a knife,
Teacher does nothing,
Pupil stabs you, you fight back , you get punished or you let them do it.
I once had a short person attack me. He put me in a headlock and the teacher stood there saying things like:
"Ryan stop putting that boy in a headlock"
and I just asked if I could fight back until he tried getting somethign sharp out. I then fought back, tripped him and put him in a headlock.
So I was standing there with a boy half my hieght under my arms flailing his legs.

I actually ended up having to have a Lunchtime detention for defending myself.
I don't have a problem with teachers not getting involved, it's when you are expected to let them do whatever that I find it unreasnable.

I have always kindof suspected intimidation being a reason for some teachers not getting involved. If he had a knife, that should have been a lockdown situation. Unless you aren't in US (or at least MN). Here, that would absolutely be a lockdown situation. Here, I can't blame the teacher for not doing something to the kid with the knife, that's pretty scary. Punishing you, though, makes no sense. How does that possibly happen without lockdown though:smallconfused:

[Traab]

Question, how should counterbullying be dealt with? That is probably the best word to describe me a few years ago. Someone that has been picked on turns the table on those that picked on him/her, even after the bullying has stopped. Should there be a different methodology? I honestly can't say I know what the best way to deal with me would have been.

Counterbullying is a term written by the department of redundancy department. Its the exact same thing as bullying. Especially when the other guy cant or wont fight back.

As for being punished for defending yourself because the teacher wont do anything? Refuse.

"I will not be punished because you are incapable of maintaining order in your classroom. I will not accept punishment for protecting myself from an assailant, while the "responsible adult" in the room did nothing."

Its one thing when its two or more people who are ticked at each other and start swinging, or in a scenario where the fight starts with no teacher around, and by the time they get there, both sides are fighting. Its another entirely to watch a kid attack another, see the guy getting attacked put up with it while waiting for the teacher to DO something, and then punishing him for getting tired of waiting and taking care of it himself. Thats garbage. Those are the types of events that see rules get changed if you are willing to stand up for yourself.

[pendell]

Counterbullying is a term written by the department of redundancy department. Its the exact same thing as bullying. Especially when the other guy cant or wont fight back.

As for being punished for defending yourself because the teacher wont do anything? Refuse.

"I will not be punished because you are incapable of maintaining order in your classroom. I will not accept punishment for protecting myself from an assailant, while the "responsible adult" in the room did nothing."

Its one thing when its two or more people who are ticked at each other and start swinging, or in a scenario where the fight starts with no teacher around, and by the time they get there, both sides are fighting. Its another entirely to watch a kid attack another, see the guy getting attacked put up with it while waiting for the teacher to DO something, and then punishing him for getting tired of waiting and taking care of it himself. Thats garbage. Those are the types of events that see rules get changed if you are willing to stand up for yourself.

How would a student do this and make it stick?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

[Traab]

How would a student do this and make it stick?

Respectfully,

Brian P.

Refuse to obey the punishment, tell your parents exactly what happened, no embellishments, and go from there. If your parents are even slightly supportive of you, then they will agree that the punishment was stupid beyond belief and highly unjust and will back you up. Most likely scenario, the teacher lets it drop. Less likely scenario, they try to make the punishment stand and you have to go through the school board to demand actual justice. Itll be a hassle, but at least you can comfort yourself by saying, "Im doing this not just for me, but to make sure everyone has a fair system of rules to follow in the future."

[101jir]

Refuse to obey the punishment, tell your parents exactly what happened, no embellishments, and go from there. If your parents are even slightly supportive of you, then they will agree that the punishment was stupid beyond belief and highly unjust and will back you up. Most likely scenario, the teacher lets it drop. Less likely scenario, they try to make the punishment stand and you have to go through the school board to demand actual justice. Itll be a hassle, but at least you can comfort yourself by saying, "Im doing this not just for me, but to make sure everyone has a fair system of rules to follow in the future."


And suppose that you that you lack the verbal abilitytoword it correctly and the ability to remember exactly what happened? That was my case, Icouldnot adequetely explain it to my parents forthem to understand what happened. I know it doesnot sound hard, but back then I wasn't good with words, and my memory is still pathetic. Especially when thereare multiple incidents the same day, you start to mix them up. So if inability leads to parents being unable tounderstand what happened, except the way the teachers say it, then what? This was my situation.

[Traab]

Well then you are screwed. If it happens that way again, write it all down before you lose track. Remember, it has to be clearly and indisputably not your fault, and that you lacked any other option besides, "Let him beat me till he gets tired." The scenario you mentioned fits VERY clearly in this heading, you had a teacher there, who did nothing to stop the fight, then punished you for protecting yourself. Way WAY wrong set of actions by the teacher there.

[101jir]

Well then you are screwed. If it happens that way again, write it all down before you lose track. Remember, it has to be clearly and indisputably not your fault, and that you lacked any other option besides, "Let him beat me till he gets tired." The scenario you mentioned fits VERY clearly in this heading, you had a teacher there, who did nothing to stop the fight, then punished you for protecting yourself. Way WAY wrong set of actions by the teacher there.

This case was verbal not physical. And yes, I did talk back even though it got me in trouble. Never take that stuff lying down!

EDIT: BTW, another complication was all of my enemies said opposite. There was one time when a new kid agreed with me, but the staff threatened to send him to the office unless he retracted his statement,which of course he did. He never stuck up for me after that.

EDIT: I would also like to point out that I have been involved in 2 kinds of counterbullying, the one where they stopped, and the one where if I didn't say something, they would. The first I understand is not acceptable, but sometimes, if they still bully you, sometimes Ihave found the only way to make them feel less in control is if they aren't picking all the battles. Otherwise, they always catch you offgaurd. If you initiate it, you catch them offgaurd. Of course, this does come at the cost of confusing the teacher. (And I did use this method long after the bullying started, the previous incidents mentioned, I was not yet a counterbully)

so meaning 1: Vengance
meaning 2: Preemptive strike

[Traab]

Sorry, confused you with hazzard devils post about being put in a headlock.

[Fuzzie Fuzz]

Not a teacher, but I can't imagine requiring one to physically put themselves between two students who are fighting. If they feel they are able to do so, then go for it, but requiring a teacher to try to break up a fight between larger, younger, and stronger students would be outrageous.