You are on page 1of 23

VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence

Module A: Definition, Context and Knowledge of School
Violence
Unit A1: Understanding the Definition and Context of School
Violence
Rosario Ortega1, Virginia Sanchez1,
Luc Van Wassenhoven2, Gie Deboutte2 and Johan Deklerck2
1
Spain
2
Belgium
Objectives of Unit A1




To be aware of a range of interpretations of school violence
To be able to consider the key factors involved in a definition of school
violence from a variety of perspectives
To understand the social and cultural contexts where school violence
takes place
To interpret violent behaviour within a complex social system
To evaluate and integrate different theoretical perspectives of school
violence

Facilitation skills to be developed through this Unit
Knowledge and understanding of:
• current thinking about definitions of school violence
• the relationships between social context and school violence
• the links between school climate and school violence
• the importance of creating a supportive and caring school community
Personal qualities and attributes include:
• being able to adopt a critical and reflective stance in the analysis of
complex social phenomena
• being able to reflect on others’ ideas through open debate
• being able to integrate different theoretical perspectives on school
violence

Pre-unit reading
Council of Europe. (2002). Violence in schools – A challenge for the local
community. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publications.
http://www.coe.int/t/e/integrated_projects/violence/06_Our_publications/Viol
ence%20in%20schools%20a%20challenge%20for%20the%20local%20com
munity.pdf
Smith, P. K. (2003). Violence in schools: An overview. In P. K. Smith (Ed.),
Violence in schools. The response in Europe (pp. 1-14). London:
RoutledgeFalmer,
Vettenburg, N. (1999). Violence in schools: Awareness-raising, prevention,
penalties. General Report. Luxembourg: Council of Europe Publications.

1

VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence

World Health Organization (WHO). (2002). Violence - a global public health
problem. Chapter 1, pp. 3-21, World Report on Violence and Health.
Geneva: Author.
http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/world_report/en/inde
x.html

Summary of current thinking and knowledge about the definition
and context of school violence
Definitions of school violence
What is school violence? In general, the definition can cover the following
categories: verbal, physical, sexual and psychological violence; social exclusion;
violence relating to property; violence relating to theft; threats; insults; rumourspreading (Smith, Morita, Junger-Tas, Olweus, Catalano, & Slee, 1999; Smith,
2003). Olweus (1999, p.12) defines it as ‘aggressive behaviour where the actor
or perpetrator uses his or her own body or an object (including a weapon) to
inflict (relatively serious) injury or discomfort upon another individual’. Definitions
which go beyond physical harm include the one given by the World Health
Organization (WHO, 2002) which includes threats as well as actual violence,
while Debarbieux (2003) identifies ideological and historical influences on the
ways in which a society chooses to define the phenomenon of violence. As he
writes:
‘What we call violence is ideologically and historically determined. Our current
concern about violence in education also reflects our changing relationship to
violence. From being accepted, if not actually encouraged, it has become
intolerable to us in Europe. This is not a universal phenomenon but it is an
indication of a new shared vision of childhood. This vision oscillates between the
continuing notion of totally uncivilised children requiring a form of orthopaedic
[sic] correction and the consequences of what in 1900 the Swedish educationalist
Ellen Key called the century of the child, with affection preferred to restraint, and
prevention to punishment’ (Debarbieux, 2003, pp. 43-44).
In her report to the Council of Europe, Vettenburg (1999) concluded that there
was no clear definition of school violence, which made it difficult, amongst other
things, to ascertain whether school violence was on the increase or to make valid
comparisons between different countries’ rates of school violence. However, as
Debarbieux (2003) points out, there is now greater awareness of the need to
accept a multiplicity of definitions of school violence from a range of
perspectives, including those of children and young people. This enables
researchers and practitioners to build up a solid base of knowledge and to
accumulate hypotheses which can be retained or discarded in the light of
research findings as they emerge.
The context of school violence
In order to be able to understand the complex phenomenon of school violence,
a comprehensive analysis of the economic, cultural, school and individual

2

interpersonal. we explore ways in which different contexts – individual. the interpersonal. including the individual.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence context in which it is generated is necessary. as well as those who become victims. In the next section. 2000). 1998). Risk and protective factors relating to violence are found at each level in the model.can either promote or reduce the phenomenon of school violence (Farrington. In order to understand why school violence occurs. Bronfenbrenner & Morris. school and the wider society . giving hostile attributions to ambiguous social 3 . 1979. Bio-ecological model for understanding the prevention of school violence (adapted from World Health Organization. such as race. several studies have shown that aggressive children display important cognitive deficits relating to the interpretation of social events. Wider Context School Context Interpersonal Context Individual Figure 1. so offering an evidence base for the design of interventions. Protective factors are those factors that act to protect an individual from developing a problem even in the face of adversity. they do not in themselves necessarily cause difficulties. 2002) Most researchers in the field now take account of social-cultural factors. the school and the wider social context. following Bronfenbrenner’s model. Risk factors are those factors that render an individual more likely to develop problems in the face of adversity. The VISTA analysis adopts a bio-ecological perspective (Bronfenbrenner. It is very hard to unravel specific causative factors since the interacting variables are multiple but longitudinal research studies that follow children’s development from an early age can identify those risk and protective factors that appear in chains of causation. (See Figure 1). gender and social class in their analysis of the problem. Aggressive boys and girls are impulsive. Individual context Researchers have studied in depth the individual characteristics of boys and girls who become aggressors. with low self control and low resistance to frustration (Baldry & Farrington. 1998). In addition. VISTA recommends an open and flexible approach rather than a simple cause-and-effect analysis.

Ortega. childhood activities. 1982). attitudes. Studies aimed at exploring the relationships between bullying problems and attachment have also found that insecure children are more likely to be involved in bully/victim problems (Smith & Myron-Wilson. violence must be considered in the context of interpersonal relationships. Key social and cognitive skills seem to protect girls from getting involved in these kinds of actions. Fundamentally. the victim’s psychological defencelessness and the perpetrator’s unjustified aggression. are able to notice others’ pain.1993). & Perry. in consequence. Attachment theory can help to explain. & Lo Feudo. 1999). & Ortega. 4 . for example. & Huesmann. • Absence of rules. Other studies found a relationship between mothers´ over-protectiveness and male victims. whereas victims tended to have authoritarian parents with low self-esteem. Interpersonal contexts At the same time. Costabile. studies have shown that they tend to have low self esteem. Bowers. Smith. although with limited empathy (Menesini. depending on the quality of the friendship (Adams. & Cowie.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence situations (Dodge & Frame. Recent research has also found that differences with regard to social and cognitive skills between girls and boys. the nature of family relationships plays a critical role in the development of peer relationships at school (Smith. Bullies seem to be good cognitive strategists. 2002. • Existence and use of physical or psychological violence in the family group. With regard to victims. there was a significant relationship with perceived mother rejection (Finnegan. guidelines and reasonable controls. 2003). 2005). Fonzi. Bukowski. Ortega. Farrington (1998) indicates three family factors linked to the risk of engaging in school violence: • Absence of affection and emotional warmth between fathers and mothers and in general in the family group which is apparent in the first years of school life. & Swettenham. Binney. the high probability that children from families where abuse occurs (between parents as well as from parents to children) are likely to repeat the same insecure patterns in the relationships they have with peers. for example. especially for being a victim of bullying. Hodges. compared to boys (Bennett. Sutton. living in a family setting where domestic violence is common. Farrington. coming from adults. able to sense the details of their actions and. Regarding parenting styles. about conduct. 1998) Attachment theory suggests that early on children develop an internal working model of relationships which explains. Sánchez. Baldry and Farrington (1998) found that boys who bully tended to have authoritarian and punitive parents. Theory of mind explains why some children bully their classmates (Smorti. for female victims. friends can be either a protective or a risk factor for being victimized. and have difficulty in making friends. 1998). 2004). can help us understand the gender differences found in children involved in violent and criminal behaviour. & Bagwell. are shy. For example.

VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence 5 .

such as schools. O´Moore & Minton. harmony. Ortega & Lera. 2004. Some pupils lack motivation. 1999.. just as no pupil is the same as another. fraternity. whether they occur amongst the pupils or amongst the teaching staff. and the resolution of conflict through dialogue or other non-violent means” (Ortega. Violence flourishes in institutional environments. that underpin convivencia. there is no better way to create convivencia and a non-violent culture than to face up to conflicts in an honest and problem-solving way. The concept of convivencia allows us to explain the phenomenon of school violence within the framework of interpersonal relationships that take place at school. 6 . it is the social networks formed by pupils and teachers. 1994). 2003. or may be abused or bullied at home.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence School context Interpersonal relationships. Ortega. & Genebat. However. 2003. MoraMerchán. the action of living with others. some have difficult family backgrounds. Relationships amongst peers. Conflicts are an inevitable part of social life and schools are no exception. the idea of convivencia can help us with the prevention and reduction of school violence by harnessing those very interpersonal processes that are embedded in the life of the school. in which frequent contact among the participants can perpetuate stereotypical roles of dominance and submission (Ortega. In this sense. No school is the same as another. several programmes to combat bullying and violence in schools emphasise the importance of discipline systems for the containment of school violence (e. or are bored at school. Smith. p. It is essential to know how the social networks that support convivencia are established. Unresolved conflicts and unchallenged bullying behaviour can be selfperpetuating and so contaminate the processes of convivencia in the school. with “…a spirit of solidarity.g. Olweus. co-operation. a desire for mutual understanding. 169). we may not need to employ outside agencies to resolve the problem of violence since the solution lies within the structures and networks of the school itself. Those conflicts must be resolved in a positive way since they provide pupils and teachers with a source of real learning and of a chance to change. grounded in the family. and between teachers and pupils are a common source of conflict in schools. Ortega-Rivera. Teachers often complain about the behaviour of their pupils while not considering the impact that their own behaviour may have on the school climate. Stable contexts like schools have the potential to create conditions that encourage positive relationships through the process of convivencia. or resent rules and regulations. del Rey. the desire to get on well with others. del Rey. 2000. Ortega. as well as the counteracting forces that undermine convivencia. 2004. are further developed at school. & Mora-Merchán. At the same time. If we grasp this idea. Sánchez. 1997) Additionally. An important source of conflict between teachers and pupils involves the system of discipline that the school adopts. and their particular ways of behaving towards one another.

2005). It is all the more important for the education system to promote the values of collaboration. society and politics exert on school violence. low morale) which can result in poor motivation. disaffection and a general sense of hostility towards the school as a system. Hargreaves (2003) underlines the impact of globalization on the educational system and on the origins of violence. people tend to behave in an individualistic. lack of respect from staff. competitive way which perpetuates social class differences and highlights the situation of disadvantaged groups. Potentially.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence The wider context Sociologists and criminologists offer a wider perspective by charting the influence that culture. 1992) since there are certain sectors of the population that are particularly at risk of engaging in violence. these cultural differences can have an impact on levels of violence in different countries (Ortega et al. 2003). p. In fact. From this point of view. In capitalist societies. 1999. These particular groups “benefit less from the positive things institutions have to offer” (Vettenburg. under-achievement. recent surveys have shown how communities with a strong commitment to equality of opportunity have lower levels of direct aggression (Bergeron & Schneider. school violence is regarded as a result of social pathology and “social vulnerability” (Vettenburg. They frequently have negative experiences within the educational system (for example. Activity 1 Icebreaker: The name game (15 minutes) Purpose • To get to know everyone’s names • To begin to interact positively and purposefully with other members of the group Materials None 7 . Responsibilities of the Unit facilitators Your tasks within this Unit are to: • send to all participants information about when and where the session will be held and details of preparatory reading to be done • familiarise yourself with the Unit text and the facilitators’ notes • plan the session to meet the needs of the participants • ensure that all relevant resources/materials are copied and/or prepared • lead the session and all the activities Sequence of activities for Unit A1 This Unit represents a one-day training of five hours plus breaks. Walgrave.. cooperation and creativity by actively working to develop a positive school culture in schools. 1999. learning difficulties. 38) since too often they only confront the authority exerted by society (as represented in this case by the school) but rarely experience the benefits that society has to offer. suspension and exclusion.

This goes on until everyone has said their own name and all the others preceding them. Each participant has a short time (3-5 minutes) to do this. Ask each person to find out some interesting or amusing things about their partner – for example. what they like to do. The third person says the first and second person’s names and then their own. If you discuss it in the group. helpfulness.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Procedure One person begins by saying their name. Then they must come back to the large group and each person must introduce their partner to the group based on the information they have gathered. Debriefing The activity does not need debriefing but the facilitator can point out that some people found it easier than others to remember names. The facilitator goes last in order to show that taking the risk of not remembering a name is valued and that it is all right to make mistakes. it is worth noting that some people seem to have listened well and remembered the information given them whilst others did not. The person beside them then has to say the first person’s name and their own. where they live. Debriefing Without pointing out individuals. 8 . even those who would normally avoid it Materials None Procedure Ask the participants to get into pairs. Activity 2 Introduce your neighbour (30 minutes) Purpose • To begin to feel more comfortable in the group by interacting purposefully with one member • To discover your own level of skill in questioning someone else and in talking about yourself and in listening • To get everyone speaking in the large group. preferably with someone they do not know. empathy and support of the group. you will probably find that some people took up more than their share of time talking. An additional benefit is often that people begin to help others when they cannot remember the person’s name and the process of valuing individuals’ different strengths. so crucial to group cohesion. This can be pointed out without judgement by saying that one of the things you hope each person will learn is which skills they need to work on. The information should not be too personal or revealing. begins. etc. unusual places that they have visited. whether they own a pet. However. the memory process was also enabled through the co-operation.

Debriefing Key discussion points are noted by the facilitator and participants are invited to comment on the process of arriving at the group definition (or definitions if the plenary did not reach consensus). Perhaps some people took up more than their share of time talking. including the debriefing. Then form groups of 4 or 5 and give each group one copy of Resource 2 The essential characteristics of these examples of school violence. in plenary. Is violence necessarily physical? 9 . adapted from Smith (2003): 1. The definition is documented by the facilitator on Resource 3 Our definition. Allow 10 minutes for the individual task. Ask the groups to complete as a group a summary of the essential characteristics and the distinctive elements of these individual examples as shown in Resource 2.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Activity 3 Defining school violence (70 minutes) Purpose • To be aware of a range of interpretations of school violence Materials Resource 1 Individual examples of school violence Resource 2 The essential characteristics of these examples of school violence Resource 3 Our definition Flipchart Procedure First. Ask participants to return to the plenary where the facilitator notes key points on a flipchart. Allow 30 minutes for this task. hand out Resource 1 Individual examples of school violence which participants complete individually. the large group tries to formulate a possible definition of school violence. These are summarised by the facilitator on a flipchart. Perhaps some opinions were discounted. Bring all the small groups into the plenary and ask a representative of each group to present their findings. Ask the groups to compare ‘Our definition’ with the definitions of the international experts. including the debriefing. Allow 30 minutes for the small group discussion. based on the characteristics and elements identified by the small groups. Points for discussion could include the following questions. Allow 40 minutes for this part of the activity. Finally. Allow 30 minutes for this part of the discussion. Activity 4 School violence as defined by international experts (70 minutes) Purpose • To understand the definition of violence from a range of perspectives Materials Resource 4 Definitions by international experts Procedure Ask participants to return to their small groups and hand each group a copy of Resource 4. The process of attempting to reach consensus can be discussed without judgement by saying that the next activity will illustrate the difficulties that experts experience when trying to arrive at a common definition of school violence.

VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence 2. Each person is asked to think about and write down a specific case of school violence that they have experienced or observed. taking into consideration their individual cases. Has the definition of violence changed over time? Debriefing The facilitator ends the activity by pointing out that by thinking. Allow 40 minutes for this part of the activity. The facilitator then gives each group a blank copy of Resource 6 Types of school violence and Resource 7 Summary of case studies. or is just the threat of this sufficient? 4. Allow 30 minutes for this part of the activity. Is violence necessarily against a person? 3. Activity 5 The context of school violence (115 minutes) Purpose • To get participants to identify what they know about the context of school violence and to listen to the perspectives of others Materials Resource 5 Case study of a violent incident Resource 6 Types of school violence Resource 7 Summary of case studies Resource 8 Model of the school system Procedure Individual task: The facilitator gives each person a copy of Resource 5 Case study of a violent incident. They are asked to describe the protagonists. Once each example has been shared. Not only that: the way people look at school violence determines their attitudes and reactions to it. Group task: Participants form small groups of 4-5 people. the group task is to reach consensus about how to complete Resources 6 and 7 collectively. Plenary: Each small group reports back to the plenary session on their process of reaching agreement about the content of each of the boxes in Resources 6 and 7. Allow 25 minutes for this part of the activity. Does violence actually have to be manifested as behaviour that damages someone or something. events and contexts where this violence took place and to complete as many of the boxes as they can. Is violence still violence if it is legal? 5. Does violence have to be done by somebody. discussing and working with definitions we are enabled to understand how different opinions and perspectives arise across cultures and over time. or can it be done more impersonally by a social group or an institution? 6. The facilitator summarises the responses from each group on a flipchart (Resource 7 Summary of case studies). Each member of the group shares the example of school violence that they have entered into Resource 5 Case study of a violent incident. 10 .

Resource 8 Model of the school system can be used to synthesise the findings of the activity with the theoretical points about convivencia as described in the Summary. D. It is important to conclude with reference to the links and influences of different related factors. 29. Baldry. • We need to provide interpersonal and organisational support … • … and to reflect about the schools we want. Discuss what each person will take away with them to their own school setting... W. Key aspects of the debriefing should include the following: • School violence is a complex phenomenon which requires complex interventions. 139-145. (2005). • We need to select the most relevant and whole interventions for our schools (see again Modules D and E. This is also an opportunity to share commonalities and differences in the ways in which the groups have interpreted the task. • … and share responsibilities inside and outside schools (see Module B). E. & Farrington. C. for different examples of preventative and integrative practices)…. & Bagwell. R. P. C. Baldry.. (1998). Parents’ influences on bullying and victimisation. not only the simple influence of one of them on school violence. Stability of aggression during early adolescence as moderated by reciprocated friendship status and friend’s aggression. and about the education we want to give our students. 17-31. International Journal of Behavioral Development. for the analysis of school context. Finally.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Debriefing (20 minutes) For this part of the activity the facilitator may find it helpful to use the theoretical content described in the summary of current thinking (individual.. (2000). References Adams. M. social. The analysis. 237-254. Bukowski. The facilitator can indicate how convivencia is facilitated in schools or how it may be inhibited. should be continued in the plenary session. Compare findings and discuss how they confirm or disconfirm the VISTA model. Bullies and delinquents: Personal characteristics and parental styles. & Farrington. interpersonal. D. 10. using Bronfenbrenner’s bio-ecological model. 3. P. • It is important to have a clear definition of violence (Unit A1)… • … and an analysis of what is happening in our schools (Module D). Explore what are the most common themes and those that are least common. A. Legal and Criminological Psychology. A. 11 . C. school contexts). Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology.

U. London: RoutledgeFalmer. M. U. The ecology of human development. V. 1076-1086. C. (1998). 31.. M. A. & Schneider. P. Teaching in the knowledge society: Education in the age of insecurity. Bronfenbrenner. & D’Aes.) & R. D.). G. Menesini. New York: John Wiley & Son.). Potentialities. Serrano (Ed.. An ethical and social interpretation of crime through the concepts of “linkedness” and “integration-disintegration”. Lerner (Vol. & Morris. 33-48). Explaining gender differences in crime and violence: The importance of social cognitive skills. 29. Fonzi. D. A.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Baldry. Blaya. Violence in schools: The response in Europe (pp. Vettenburg. Bennett. 1.). Handbook of child psychology: Vol. E. W. Luxembourg: Council of Europe Publications.. (2006). 421-475). New York: Teachers College Press.. In P. Deklerck.. Farrington. (2003). Ed. A.. (1998). Farrington. Sanchez. J. C. Depuydt. MA: Harvard University Press.pdf Debarbieux. & Farrington. & Huesmann. N. Debarbieux. Bergeron. Experiments by nature and design.. School violence in Europe – Discussion. Child Development. London: RoutledgeFalmer. S. Restorative justice for juveniles. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. V... Moral emotions and bullying. Cambridge. I. Youth violence (pp.). Leuven: Leuven University Press. In M..coe.int/t/e/integrated_projects/violence/06_Our_publications/Viol ence%20in%20schools%20a%20challenge%20for%20the%20local%20com munity. 12 . H. Individual differences and offending. (2003). Aggression and Violent Behavior. & Frame.). E. (2005).). (2003). & Perry. K. Walgrave (Ed. E. K. Dodge. Victimization by peers: Associations with children's reports of mother-child interaction. A. Tackling violence in schools: A report from France.. D.. In W. L. 263-288. 620-635.. A cross-national comparison of differences between bullies. Ortega. knowledge and uncertainty.. Social cognitive biases and deficits in aggressive boys.. In P. victims and outsiders. 75. C. 137-156).. Aggressive Behavior. P. N. & Lo Feudo. D. Violence in schools: The response in Europe (pp. Tackling violence in schools: A report from Belgium. risks and problems (pp. The ecology of developmental processes.. P. D. http://www. (1982). 10. (1998). 53. (1979).. Costabile. In L. 107133). 515-530. Vidal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. A. Aggressive Behavior.Theoretical models of human development (5th ed. 993-1028). (1998). Tonry & M. 116-137. Huybregts. Explaining cross-national differences in peer-directed aggression: A quantitative synthesis.. Smith (Ed. Hargreaves.. Acoso y violencia en la escuela (pp. R. &. Hodges. E. Damon (Series Ed. Ariel: Centro Reino Sofia. Applications to restorative justice. H. (2004). In A. Individual risk factors for school violence. 17-32). G. A. Finnegan. Bronfenbrenner. E. B. A. (2003). R. Moore (Eds. Smith (Ed. (2003). R. pp. K. In Council of Europe Violence in schools – A challenge for the local community.

Newbury Park. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. K. Ortega. The nature of bullying. 117-127. 8. Violence in schools: The response in Europe. Duck (Ed. 304. NoVAS RES CONNECT Initiative. Vettenburg. London and New York: Routledge. A.. Ortega. H. Convivencia: A model to prevent violence. Retrieved June 14. K. Relationships of children involved in bully/victim problems at school. Smorti. 253-280. Washington: BID. P. (2004). 167-185). D.torino. Revista de Educación.. SAVE model: An antibullying intervention in Spain. (2003). Madrid: Ministry of Science and Education. 3. R. P. J. Bullying and theory of mind: A critique of the 'social skills deficit' view of anti-social behaviour. & Genebat. 2006. P.. Violence in schools. prevention.. Ortega. (1993). Bullying in schools: The UK experience and the Sheffield Anti-Bullying project. Slee (Eds. Aggressive Behavior. London: RoutledgeFalmer. J. Awareness-raising. Informe Sobre la Violencia en las Escuelas de Centroamérica. CA: Sage Publications. In A. Sánchez. Smith.. 13 .. R. Defining violence: Towards a pupil based definition. Bowers.. P. Bullying in schools: How successful can interventions be? (pp. Smith..). R. Ortega. K. & Lera. D. P. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. R.).. & K. K. K. R. Smith. parents and other professionals. Junger-Tas. (2000). Smith P. In P.. R. J. Understanding relationships process. Smith. In S. (2003). Smith.htm O´Moore. & Ortega.comune. (1997). Dealing with bullying in schools: A training manual for teachers. N. & Slee. Ortega. 29-44).). J. del Rey. Smith. J. Y. & Cowie. The importance of culture for a theory of mind: A narrative alternative.. del Rey. J.. (Ed. R.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Olweus. L. Morita. penalties. & Myron-Wilson.. M. J. Cultura y Deportes de Nicaragua. R. Sutton. J. Mora-Merchán.). Pepler. 2: Learning about relationships (pp. Ortega. 2-27). (1999). S. 113-123.. Olweus. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publications. (2002).). Violencia escolar en Nicaragua. Rigby (Eds. V. Cultura y Educación. (2003). O'Moore.. 14(2). Ortega. (1999). P. (n. La convivencia in the classroom: Problems and solutions (pp. Ministerio de Educación. General Report. In P.. (1999). Catalano. Junger-Tas.. 26.. Binney. Violencia interpersonal en los centros educativos de enseñanza secundaria. Ortega-Rivera. D. 184-212). & Mora-Merchán. Moreno (Ed. J. Olweus.. Smith. & P. (2006). Irish Journal of Psychology.. & Swettenham. Clinical Child Psychology and Psychiatry.d.. from http://www. & Minton. London: RoutledgeFalmer. 147-159. R. 191-201. V.it/novasres/newviolencedefinition. R. A. D. Sweden. (2004). (1999). Social Development. The Seville Anti-bullying in School Project. M. Parenting and school bullying. K. Vol. 18. K. Y. Un estudio sobre maltrato e intimidación entre compañeros. R. Enseñanza de Prevención de la Violencia en las Escuelas. R. (1994). R. K. (1998).). Morita. The nature of school bullying: A crossnational perspective (pp. Catalano. M. 405-417..

Paris/Génève: Méridiens/Médecine et Hygiène.int/t/e/integrated_projects/violence/06_Our_publications/Violence %20in%20schools%20a%20challenge%20for%20the%20local%20community. C. Geneva: Author. Violence reduction in schools – How to make a difference.). http://www. Websites Council of Europe Violence in Schools – A Challenge for the Local Community.coe.int/T/E/Integrated_Projects/violence/ UK Observatory for the Promotion of Non-Violence http://www.com 14 . Further reading and additional materials Books and articles Gittins. (1992). (2006) (Ed.pd f Council of Europe Responses to violence in everyday life in a democratic society http://www. World Report on Violence and Health. Strasbourg: Council of Europe Publications.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Walgrave. World Health Organization (WHO). L. Délinquance systematisée des jeunes et vulnérabilitité sociétale. Luxembourg: Council of Europe Publications.coe. (2002).ukobservatory.

individually. one or two situations in your school in which violence occurred.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 1 Individual examples of school violence Note down. ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 15 .

........ ………………………………………. ……………………………………….. ………………………………………. ………………………………………... ………………………………………. ………………………………………... ……………………………………….. about your experiences noted in Resource 1 What are the essential characteristics? What are the distinctive elements? ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS DISTINCTIVE ELEMENTS ………………………………………. ……………………………………….. ………………………………………. ……………………………………….VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 2 Group discussion of the essential characteristics of these examples of school violence Tell one another.. ………………………………………. in small groups.. ………………………………………...... ……………………………………….... ………………………………………… 16 ........ ………………………………………... ………………………………………. ………………………………………. ……………………………………….... ……………………………………….. ………………………………………... ………………………………………. ………………………………………... ………………………………………... ………………………………………... ………………………………………... ………………………………………. ……………………………………….......

…………………………………………………………………………………….. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………. 17 . ……………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………….VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 3 Our definition ……………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………….

injures. slagging. Emotionally abusive behaviour. Persons who are developing a feeling of linkedness with their environment will deal with it in a different. p. or kills another or others. socially and morally harmed” (Ortega. threats. p. taunts. is where a child. unpredictable fact originating outside school. & Vidal. Developing.12). p. 2003. burning or any other form of physical assault on a person(s) or on property.). punching. and malicious rumours. squeezing. shoving. The aggressive behaviour can involve pushing. which can be found in the etymological root of the word itself. 137). p. 1999. but also the result of frequent banal irritating.it/novasres/newviolencedefinition. adolescent or group directly or indirectly ill treats.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 4 Definitions by international experts DEFINITIONS OF SCHOOL VIOLENCE GROUP COMMENTS “Violence is defined as behaviour intended to cause injury. shaking. “Violence or violent behavior is aggressive behaviour where the actor or perpetrator uses his or her own body or an object (including a weapon) to inflict (relatively serious) injury or discomfort upon another individual” (Olweus. small aggressions… Violence will be viewed through three groups of variables: crime and offences. 35). 2006. physical or material damage or injury to persons in or around the school and violating informal rules of behaviour” (Huybregts. “Antisocial behaviour in schools refers to the full spectrum of verbal or non verbal interactions between persons active in or around the school and involving malicious or allegedly malicious intentions causing mental. Sexually abusive behaviour is where here is sexual assault or rape” (O’Moore. micro-violence and the feeling of insecurity” (Debarbieux. kicking. Vettenburg. brutal. n. & D’Aes. Blaya.torino. “De-linquency denotes the absence of an experienced link with the victim(ized environment).comune. Physically abusive behaviour. more respectful way” (Depuydt & Deklerck. 18 .htm “Interpersonal violence and bullying are an illegal way of confronting motives and needs where one person. “Violence is aggressive behaviour that may be physically. p. or others. 18). The aggressive behaviour is conducted by an individual or group against another. is where there is verbal attacks. http://www. 107).d. “Violence is not only an exceptional. exclusion. group or institution has a dominant role and forces others to submit to it. sexually or emotionally abusive. yelling. reinforcing or repairing a link of an existential quality with the environment is therefore a key issue. being physically. mocking. 2003. 1998. but it also includes threats” (Baldry & Farrington.

against oneself. 19 . or against a group or a community. p. “The intentional use of physical force or power. death or psychological harm.VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence 2006. 2002. threatened or actual. that either results in or has a high likelihood of resulting in injury. another person. 31). maldevelopment or deprivation” (WHO. 5). p.

VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 5 Case study of a violent incident Participants (Do not use their real names) What happened among the participants? Participants´ characteristics Where did the action take place? Related Contextual Factors You can represent the case with a drawing or diagram if you want: 20 .

social exclusion 21 .VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 6 Types of school violence * * * * * * e.g.

VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 7 Summary of case studies Society Individual characteristics of participants School context Dynamics of interpersonal relationships Conclusions 22 .

VISTA Unit A1: Understanding the definition and context of school violence Resource 8 Model of the school system Interpersonal Relationships Activity Discourse Teachers’ subsystem Working Organization and cooperation Teachers/pupils subsystem TeachingLearning Culture: scientific and social knowledge Pupils/pupils subsystem Learning Culture: scientific and social knowledge CONVIVENCIA in the school 23 .