The power dynamics of bullying:
Negotiating the social & emotional
world of the school community
Brenda Morrison
Centre for Restorative Justice
Simon Fraser University
Bullying has been associated with:








Anger
Violence
Hyperactivity
Externalizing Problems
Delinquency
Criminality
Depression
Suicidal ideation
Victimization has been associated with:







Stress-related illness
School avoidance and disinterest
Poor academic performance
Increased fear and anxiety
Emotional distress
Depression
Suicidal ideation
What works in preventing bullying.
(Ttofi and Farrington, 2009, Journal of
Aggression, Conflict and Peace Research)
Whole-school anti-bullying policy
Classroom Curriculum Materials
Individual work (victim)
Classroom Management
Play Ground Supervision
Teacher Information
Teacher Training
Virtual Reality Comp. Games
Response (Consequence/Punishment)
Response (Non-punitive/Support)
Classroom Rules
School Assemblies
Individual work (bully)
Coop. Group Work
Peer Engagement
Parent Information
Parent Training
Videos
School Tribunals
What works in preventing bullying
Whole-school anti-bullying policy
Classroom Curriculum Materials
Individual work (victim)
Classroom Management
Play Ground Supervision (*)
Teacher Information
Teacher Training
Virtual Reality Comp. Games
Response (Consequence/Punishment)(*)
Response (Non-punitive/Support)
Classroom Rules
School Assemblies
Individual work (bully)
Coop. Group Work
Peer Engagement
Parent Information
Parent Training (*)
Videos (*)
School Tribunals
What works in preventing victimization
Whole-school anti-bullying policy
Classroom Curriculum Materials
Individual work (victim)
Classroom Management
Play Ground Supervision (*)
Teacher Information
Teacher Training
Virtual Reality Comp. Games
Response (Punishment/Consequence) (*)
Response (Non-punitive/Support)
Classroom Rules
School Assemblies
Individual work (bully)
Coop. Group Work
Peer Engagement
Parent Information
Parent Training (*)
Videos (*)
School Tribunals
What works in preventing bullying.
(Ttofi and Farrington (2009).
“No anti-bullying programme was based on
well-developed and tested theories of bullying
such as defiance theory or re-integrative
shaming theory. Research is needed to
develop and test better theories of bullying
and victimization as a basis for new
intervention programs”
Theory and Practice
“Nothing is as practical as a good theory”
(Lewin, 1950’s)
Bullying, restorative justice & power

Bullying is defined at the “systematic abuse
of power”; in other words, domination

Restorative justice values non-domination
and deliberation, the aim is empowerment, as
such it must be “on guard against imbalance
of power” (Braithwaite, 2002, p. 264).
Responsive Regulation and Restorative
Justice: Theory behind the practice






Motivational Postures (Braithwaite, Braithwaite,
Gibson & Makkai, 1994)
Procedural justice (Tyler & Blader, 2000)
Social Identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979)
Self-categorization theory (Turner et al., 1987)
Re-integrative shaming theory (Braithwaite,
1989; Ahmed, Harris, Braithwaite & Braithwaite,
2001)
Unacknowledged shame (Scheff, 1994)
Nepal – Himalayan Mountains
Australia – Wilderness Adventure
Australia - Inner City Sydney
From Me to We:
The individual, the group & the community

The power of community to keep us safe.

The power of the group to keep us sane.

The power of one to give us hope.
Power of Community: School Connection

Protective Factor




Substance Abuse (Alcohol, Drugs, Smoking)
Emotional Distress (Suicidal Ideation)
Anti-social Behavior (Violence and Deviance)
Pregnancy (Early Sexual Behavior)
Adolescent Health Surveys:
USA: McNeely et al., 2002; Blum & Libby, 2004.
Adolescent Health Survey
“Independent of race, ethnicity, family
structure and poverty status,
adolescents who are connected to their
parents, to their families, and to their
school community are healthier than
those who are not”
Adolescent Health Surveys:
USA: McNeely et al., 2002; Blum & Libby, 2004.
Positive Relationships
“Positive relationships provide the
most potent protective factors for
vulnerable teens” (p. 8).
Building Resilience in Vulnerable Youth, McCreary Centre, 2006.
Status and School Violence
(National Research Council, 2003)
“One message that comes through loud and
clear in the [deadly school rampage] cases is
that adolescents are intensely concerned
about their social standing in their school and
among their peers. For some, their concern
is so great that threats to their status are
treated as threats to their very lives and
status as something to be defended at all
costs” (p. 336)
Rampage: The Social Roots of School
Shooting (Newman et al., 2004)



CDC, Secret Service, National Research
Council
In all but one case, there was evidence of
social marginalization. Approximately 2/3
had been bullied.
Through the rampage: “They claim the power
and status their peers have denied them” (p.
154)
The Need to Belong and Bullying
(Leary et al., 2003)
1) The school shooters were typically male
students, who were ostracized and had been
chronically taunted, teased, harassed and
publicly humiliated.
2) Bullying and malicious teasing is a serious
problem in schools that:


Induces feelings of shame, humiliation,
depression, anxiety, and low self esteem
…
Building School Connections

3 Levels of Sustaining Healthy Relationships




Universal (Primary): Affirming Relationships
Targeted (Secondary): Repairing Relationships
Intensive (Tertiary): Re-building Relationships
3 R’s of Restorative Justice



Respect for the Person (self and other)
Responsibility for Behavior
Repair the Harm Done
Justice and Institutions

Distributive Justice




Adversarial Justice




Distribution of just outcomes. (Rewards/Punishment)
Who is involved? Who is not involved?
Who has the final say?
Arguing the fact brings out the truth.
Who wins? Who loses?
What do we lose when we focus on the facts?
Retributive Justice


Get what they deserve (Just Deserts).
What are the outcomes of Punishment/Exclusion?
Justice, Relationships and Schools

Can we develop healthy relationships within schools
when we:





Distribute outcomes unfairly?
Capitalize on win/lose solutions?
Focus only on the facts?
Punish and Exclude?
Is our system of justice within our schools creating a culture
of disrespect? Passive citizenship? Us and them?
Alienation? Distrust?
Transformation of human character
TED: Philip Zimbardo shows how people
become monsters ... or heroes ...



Dispositional: Internal (The bad apples)
Situational: External (The bad barrel)
Systemic: Broad (Institutional) influences:
political; economic; legal; cultural (The bad
barrel makers – Toxic Factory)
Defining Restorative Justice
(Johnstone and Van Ness, 2007)



Encounter: “that victims, offenders and other
‘stakeholders’ … should be allowed to encounter
one another outside highly formal, professionaldominated settings.”
Reparative: “the harm which the crime (or
wrongdoing) has caused to people and relationships
needs to be repaired.”
Transformative: “to transform the way in which we
understand ourselves and relate to others in our
everyday life.”
3 Concerns of Restorative Justice



Conflict as Property (Christie, 1977)
System steals conflict/voices;
System uses 3rd party decision making
Punishment as the just response (Zehr,1997)
System’s myopic focus on punishment
Reason for Emotion (Sherman, 2003)
System trumps emotion with reason,
System works towards win/lose solutions.
Beyond 3rd Party Decision Making

Conflict as Property (Christie, 1977)


Passive Bystanders (Dalai Lama)



Own our conflict (Individuals, Classrooms,
Schools)
Active Citizenship
Raised a generation of Passive Bystanders
Social Capital (Robert Putnam)


Decline
3rd parties now resolve our conflict
Decline of Social Capital
Beyond Punishment: New Q’s
Retributive Justice
Restorative Justice
What laws [rules]
have been broken?
Who has been hurt?
Who did it?
What are their needs?
What do they deserve?
Whose obligations are these?
Finding Reason for Emotion
Social and Emotional Learning (SEL):
“SEL is fundamental to children’s social and emotional
development, health, and mental well-being, ethical
development, citizenship, motivation to achieve, and
academic learning” (Weissberg, 2004)
Statement to U.S. Senate
Committee on Health, Education,
Labor and Pensions
CASEL: Meta-Analysis (2008)
(207 Studies; 288,000 students)


9% decrease in conduct problems (classroom misbehavior;
agression)
10% decrease in emotional distress (anxiety; depression)

9% improvement in attitude towards self, others and school
23% improvement in social and emotional skills
9% improvement in school and classroom behavior
11% improvement in achievement test scores

http://www.casel.org/



Horizontal and Vertical Relationships:
Social & Emotional Engagement

Relationships with individuals (Horizontal)

Relationship with school (Vertical)

Horizontal and Vertical Accountability and
Support
Social Responsibility Window
High
PUNITIVE
RESTORATIVE
TO
WITH
Accountability
(limit-setting,
obligation,
responsible)
NEGLECTFUL
PERMISSIVE
NOT
FOR
Low
High
Support
(encouragement, nurture)
Social Responsibility Window
High
PUNITIVE
“We”
TO
RESTORATIVE
WITH
(classroom,
school)
NEGLECTFUL
PERMISSIVE
NOT
FOR
Low
High
“I”
(individual)
From Me to We: Reason for Emotion

Instead of reason trumping emotion through
adversarial (us/them; win/lose) processes; emotional
engagement allows for win/win solution

Emotional engagement through strong horizontal (“I”
with “I”) and vertical (“I” with “we”) relationships.

Social and Emotionally Intelligent Individuals and
Schools
Horizontal Relationships: 1st person engagement; building
social & emotional understanding; repairing the harm
S
S
T
S
S
S
A
S
Beyond Punishment: Ask different questions
To the person who harmed (OOPS!):
What happened?
Who has been affected/harmed?
What needs to happen to repair the harm?
To the person who was harmed (OUCH!):
How have you been affected/harmed?
What’s the hardest part for you?
What would you like to see happen?
Vertical Relationships: Motivational
Postures




Commitment: Moral obligation to act in the interest
of the collective and complies as a virtuous citizen
Capitulation: Accepts the authority as legitimate
and complies as a “law (rule) abiding” citizen
Resistance: Doubts the intention of the authority;
defiant and argumentative
Disengagement: Disenchanted with the authority;
defiant and escapist
Vertical Relationships: Positive Affect
Vertical Relationships: Negative Affect
Affect Theory (Topkins)









Enjoyment
Interest
Shame
Surprise
Distress
Disgust
Anger
Fear
Dissmell
- affiliate
- engage
- seek to restore
- stop, look, listen
- comfort
- get rid of
- attack
- get away
- stay away
Social Distance
Motivational Postures
Commitment
Capitulation
Resistance
Disengagement
Re-integrative Shaming Theory



Shame over wrongdoing, and as a victim of
wrongdoing, can act as a barrier to
individual’s sense of belonging.
Discussion with those affected, following
wrongdoing, structures shame awareness
into a restorative justice conference
It is the shame in the eyes of those we
respect, and not that of police or judges, that
is most able to get through to us.
Shame-Management:
Acknowledgement & Displacement
Family
e.g. harmony
Acknowledgement
negative
School
e.g. hassles
Shame-management
Bullying
positive
Displacement
Individual
e.g., empathy/impulsivity
Shame-Management:
Acknowledgement & Displacement
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
 Feeling shame


Taking responsibility
Making amends
DISPLACEMENT
 Retaliatory anger


Externalizing blame
Displaced anger (hitting/kicking object/person)
Shame-Management:
Acknowledgement & Displacement
High
VICTIM
persistent
Take on
Responsibility/
Accountability
NON-BULLY/
NON-VICTIM
discharged
BULLY/
BULLY
VICTIM
by-passed
denied by-passed
Low
High
Feel Supported/Accepted
Safe School Communities &
Shame-management
“…once we have reached the point where a major act of
bullying has occurred or a serious crime is being
processed by the justice system, it may be that shame
management is more important than pride management
to building a safer community. … Our conclusion is that
the key issue with shame management is helping
wrongdoers to acknowledge and discharge shame rather
than displace it into anger. … Part of the idea of
[restorative] undominated dialogue is that the defendant
will jump from the emotionally destructive state of
unresolved shame to a sense of moral clarity that what
she has done is either right or wrong” (Ahmed et al.,p.
17).
Whole School Model
Intensive
Community Conference
Re-building
Relationships
Targeted
Classroom Circle;
Peer Mediation.
Repairing
Relationships
Universal
Social & Emotional
Learning, etc
Reaffirming relationships through
Developing social and emotional skills
Whole School Model: What keeps us safe,
sane and hopeful?
Individual level: Give each individual reason for a
hopeful future, allow them to find reason for social
and emotional engagement.
Classroom level: Socially and emotionally engage
them in a community of care within their classroom,
where accountability and support are everyone’s
responsibility.
Community level: Bridge the social and emotional
waters between families, police, child welfare, and
others when things get tough, and difficult
conversations are necessary.
Justice and Universal Human Rights
Where, after all, do universal human rights begin? In small
places, close to home – so close and so small that they
can not be seen on any map of the world. Yet they are
the world of the individual person: the neighborhood he
lives in; the school or college he attends; the factory,
farm or office where he works. Such are the places
where every man, woman and child seek equal justice,
equal opportunity, equal dignity without discrimination.
Unless these rights have meaning there, they have little
meaning anywhere. Without concerted citizen action to
uphold them close to home [and school], we shall look in
vain for progress in the larger world.
Eleanor Roosevelt (1884 – 1962)
Happy Birthday Sesame Street