See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/235560550

The Culture of Bullying at a Primary School

Article  in  Education as Change · December 2004

DOI: 10.1080/16823200409487090

CITATIONS READS

34 1,426

2 authors, including:

Estelle Swart
Stellenbosch University
51 PUBLICATIONS   1,216 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

the effect of animal-assisted reading programme on the reading skills of grade 3 children View project

Teachers’ collaborative practices in developing inclusive education View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Estelle Swart on 27 February 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 33

The Culture of Bullying at a Primary School

Helen MacDonald
Rand Afrikaans University

Estelle Swart
University of Stellenbosch

Abstract
This study focused on understanding how the unique culture of a particular
primary school influenced bullying, by identifying and thickly describing the
values, norms, beliefs and attitudes of the various members of the community
that contributed towards and sustained bullying behaviour. The findings are based
on a critical ethnographic study of Hillside Primary School A pseudonym, an
upmarket governmental school situated in Gauteng, which was purposefully
selected for the study. The design allowed the researchers into the here and now
perspectives of the participants at Hillside Primary School, through participant
observation, once a week, over a period of approximately two terms. Data sources
included interview detailed field notes, interview transcripts, questionnaires,
photographs, learners’ drawings and various documents produced by the school.
The emerging data were continuously analysed through the constant comparative
method. The findings indicate that bullying is a complex phenomenon that is
interwoven into numerous values and norms of an authoritarian culture. The
findings also indicate that the researched school appears to have a conflicted
culture underlying bullying, conflicted in the sense that an overriding authoritarian
ethos has prevented the school from implementing democratic procedures
effectively. This has disempowered rather than empowered members of the
community, thus unwittingly contributed to the vicious cycle of bullying.

Keywords: culture; bullying; school

Introduction
School bullying has become a major problem in many countries (Sullivan, 2000:2).
Although not much research has been carried out in South Africa, researchers
worldwide claim that it may be the most enduring and underrated problem in
schools. Research has indicated that as many as one-in-four learners are reported

Education As Change Vol. 8 no.2 • p33-55

 34

to be affected, and as many as eight-percent of learners miss a day of class per

month for fear of being bullied (Smith-Heavenrich, 2001:1; Mulrine, 1999:24).
The devastating effects of bullying may lead to psychological problems, violence
and suicide. Coggan, Bennett, Hooper and Dickinson (2003:20) recently found
a significant association between experiencing chronic bullying and high levels
of mental distress among young people, between the ages of nine and 13 years
of age, in New Zealand. According to these authors one in five learners had
attempted to harm themselves deliberately, and one in nine reported attempting
to end their own lives. Research has also shown that this behaviour has long-
term negative consequences for all those involved; bullies, victims and the peer
group (Craig, Henderson & Murphy, 2000:6). Sullivan (2000:15) points out that
a common myth among people is that bullying is seen as something that happens
only in ‘other’ schools. According to Sullivan (2000:15), Sharp and Smith (1994:xi)
and Tattum (1997:47) bullying occurs in all schools. It is imperative that bullying
is stopped within our schools, because schools as powerful socializing and
enculturation agents form and shape the youth’s perceptions and expectations
about the self and life (Davidoff & Lazarus, 1997:8; Lee, 2001:30).

The literature has shown that the definition of bullying lies at the heart of whether
it will continue to prevail or be prevented, for if a behaviour is not condoned as
bullying or recognized as bullying, then it will inevitably persist (Sullivan, 2000:9;
Kalliotus, 2000:49). Bullying may be described as a repeated, psychological or
physical act of aggression, which causes embarrassment, pain or discomfort to
another (Kalliotus, 2000:50). It can take on many forms, varying from gesture,
verbal or physical abuse (Sullivan, 2000:11), exclusion (Soutter & McKenzie,
2000:96) and extortion (Berthold & Hoover, 2000:65). It is an abuse of power,
which can be intentional or non-intentional and either carried out by individuals
or groups (Sullivan, 2000:9). Bullying occurs at all ages, but research indicates
that it is most common in late childhood through middle adolescence. This may
be explained by the fact that learners in this phase of social development are
striving to fit in with their peers (Carney & Merrell, 2001:367).

Until recently, research on bullying has focused on a positivist or deficit perspective,

which has the tendency, among others, to make causal links between the individual
and an event (Sullivan, 2000:4). For example, Sullivan (2000:22-23) and Craig,
Pepler and Atlas (2000:23) point out that research on bullying has been limited
in the sense that it has focused on the characteristics of individual victims and
 35

bullies, thus implying once a victim, always a victim and once a bully, always
a bully (Sullivan, 2000:33). Donald, Lazarus and Lolwana (1997:178-179) explain
that from this perspective schools have tended to see a problem such as bullying
as being the individual’s problem, by laying blame on the bully and/or the victim
and/or on the family (Sullivan, 2000:27). As a result, schools tend to believe that
the ‘cure’ lies in trying to change the behaviour of the bully by punishing him
or her (Sullivan, 2000:62), or at best by sending the bully or the victim to
counseling (Donald, et al. 1997:178). Such strategies do not deal with the problem
of bullying at other levels of the ecological system, thus resulting in persistence
of the problem or its reappearance in a different way or at a different level of the
system (Donald, et al. 1997:180). Sullivan (2000:4) therefore argues for a
constructive perspective, so that individuals as well as society will benefit from
long lasting solutions. Cairns and Cairns (1991) and Cole and Jacobs (1993) as
cited by Craig, et al. (2000a:23), recommend an ecological approach that also
considers interactional influences. We also contend that although some recent
international research, such as the Sheffield Project (Sullivan, 2000:213), has
focused on the importance of whole-school anti-bullying policies in prevention,
they do not adequately address the powerful nature of school culture and its
influence on bullying.

The field of educational psychology has recently undergone a paradigm shift

from a deficit-based model to a health-promoting model, in an attempt to help
manage the transformation of schools’ growth towards becoming healthy learning
environments (De Jong, 2000:339). A healthy learning environment accommodates
the needs of all learners without discrimination. It is characterized by a barrier-
free and well-maintained physical environment, as well as a psychosocial
environment, which reflects mutual acceptance and respect (De Jong, 2000:341-
342). In addition, the values laid down in the Constitution (Act 108 of 1996), the
South African Schools Act (Act 84 of 1996) and the Education White Paper 6
(Department of Education, 2001: 11) challenge us to take up the responsibility
of building a humane and caring society for all South Africans, which is free from
discrimination, intolerance and violence. Bullying in schools, appears to flourish
in a culture that is stained by unhealthy attitudes, values and behaviours (Smith-
Heavenrich, 2001:4). Although little research has been conducted in South Africa
on bullying, we cannot afford to turn a blind eye to the problem of bullying in
our country. One only has to open the local newspapers to become aware of the
tragedies of bullying. De Jong (2000:352) argues that if schools could humanize
 36

their culture to promote more personalized and respectful relationships between

all roleplayers, then safer schools will be created. Since culture is viewed as the
most pervasive element of a school organization, from a whole-school
developmental perspective, it was natural to focus on how the culture of a school
influences bullying.

Whole-school development is a framework for managing the process of change

(Davidoff & Lazarus, 1997:36). From this perspective, schools are viewed as
organizations which comprise several interdependent elements, each of which
needs to be functioning healthily for the whole to be healthy. Any unhealthy
element will have a negative ripple effect throughout the whole system (Davidoff
& Lazarus, 1997:17). School culture is viewed as the central factor when
considering interventions (Davidoff & Lazarus, 1997:20). Whole school development
is premised on the belief that unless the overall culture of the school is made
conscious and transformed, then any strategies aimed at improvement and change
will not be effective (Davidoff & Lazarus, 1997:36).

A school’s culture is comprised of the prevailing norms and values that are
reflected in the way the role players behave (Donald, Lazarus & Lolwana,
2002:145), which together contribute to the atmosphere or ethos of the school
(Donald, et al., 1997:87). Davidoff and Lazarus (1997:42) claim that the culture
of a school relates to ‘the way we do things around here’. While the curriculum
conveys the main purpose of any school (Donald, et al., 1997:18), Hinchey
(1998:10) claims that educators’ actions may promote agendas they would not
support consciously. Donald, et al. (1997:87) refer to this as the hidden curriculum,
and claim that because these actions are inherent to the culture of the school,
they have a powerful influence on behaviour. Keith Sullivan’s continuum model,
for example, shows that there are three hypothetical types of school ethos: the
dysfunctional school, which reflects a do-nothing or do-little approach; the
conflicted school, which reflects a half-measures approach, and the safe school,
which reflects a whole-school approach (Sullivan, 2000:54). Both the dysfunctional
and conflicted school convey messages of an unsafe learning environment, while
the safe school is one in which learners feel safe, as it is bully-proof. Sergiovanni
(1994:4) claims that schools therefore need to examine their unstated assumptions
before putting new structures in place, and need to have a set of shared values
and norms for change to be possible.
 37

We therefore argue that in order to combat bullying, schools need to do more

than focus on the bully or merely implement programmes. We claim that a
positive culture or school climate is needed to prevent bullying, thereby making
schools safe. Consequently, in view of the problem of bullying in and around
Gauteng, it was the aim of the present study to gain a deep understanding of how
the unique culture at Hillside Primary School contributed to and sustained bullying
behaviour, by identifying and thickly describing the attitudes, norms, perceptions,
beliefs and values of various members of the community, that underlie bullying.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The research question, namely, “What are the beliefs, the attitudes, values and
norms of the various role players that contribute towards and sustain bullying
behaviour at Hillside Primary School?” is derived from a constructivist, an
ecosystemic and a critical perspective. These perspectives or theoretical frameworks
are grounded in phenomenology, and emphasize Verstehen, the interpretive
understanding of human experience (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998:23). Because
qualitative research is interested in the meaning people have constructed in
context, and the experiences they have in this world (Merriam, 1998: 6; Bogdan
& Biklen, 1998:2), it lent itself naturally to answering the research question.
Moreover, the attempt to describe culture and identify shared patterns of language,
beliefs and behaviour is called ethnography (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998:28), which
is a form of qualitative research (Merriam, 1998: 13). Because a central element
of bullying involves the abuse of power, it lent itself to critical theory. Critical
theory is above all else a way to ask questions about power (Hinchey, 1998:17).
The format of this research study is thus based on a qualitative critical ethnographic
research design.

Sampling

Sampling in field research requires the selection of a site, people, time and events
(Merriam, 1998:60). We used a form of nonprobabilistic sampling, namely
purposeful sampling to select the school. Such samples are selected non-randomly,
are small, information-rich and are purposeful. This was important because we
needed a sample that provided us with rich information, to help us discover, as
well as gain a deep understanding (Silverman, 2001:32) and insight into the
various experiences (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994:56) and perceptions of bullying,
in order to find out how the school culture influences bullying behaviour. Criteria
 38

for the selection of people were based on an emergent design. Theoretical

sampling, a procedure popularized by Glaser and Strauss (1967:45) and cited
by Merriam (1998:63), allowed us to incorporate ongoing samples of participants
into our design, as we were not in a position to tell, ahead of the time, what
participants we needed to provide us with rich information. Participants of this
study included educators, learners, parents, tuck shop conveners, the caretaker
of the school and the tea lady. Through the ongoing process of coding and
analyzing the data, data emerged that gave us clues when, where and whom to
go (to) next (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994:57).

Gaining access
‘Gaining access’ is viewed as a crucial methodological issue in conducting an
ethnography, because participant observers usually spend longer periods in the
field, as well as coming into closer contact with the participants, both at a personal
and physical level (Silverman, 2001:57; Flick, 1998:54). Flick (1998:57) points
out that undoubtedly “… research is a disturbance and it disrupts routines…
” and that negotiation, as well as the development of trust, is a crucial first step
in making research possible. Flick (1998:56-59) distinguishes between gaining
access both to institutions and to individuals.

After gaining access to the institution, our role as researchers required us to find
an identity and secure collaboration among the potential participants of the study
(Flick, 1998:55; Silverman, 2001:58), as we did not want to be viewed as
educators. We did this by firstly explaining to the learners the aim of our
investigation. After this we explained our role as researchers by using the metaphor
of “Big Brother”. In other words the learners knew that we would be watching
them closely all the time, but just like Big Brother, they should try not to see us
and only when it was necessary would we be interacting with them.

The context of the inquiry

Hillside Primary School is one of a number of ‘English’ primary government
schools that is situated in an upmarket suburb of Gauteng. The school is situated
on a large area of land and is attached to a pre-primary school. It is surrounded
by residential and business properties. The buildings and grounds of the school
are exceptionally well maintained, with numerous sporting facilities, and a trophy
collection, comprising mainly sporting trophies, adorns the shelves in the reception
 39

area. The property is well secured and all entrances to the property were locked
during school hours. An intercom system serves as a tool to gain entrance to the
grounds once the school day has begun. However, according to the caretaker,
security becomes a problem in the afternoons, because the gates remain open
to accommodate the coming and going of the learners from extra-mural activities.

This school has a total of 1002 learners and 44 educators. Some of these educators
are employed on a part-time basis only. We researched one of the five Grade
seven classes, as one of the systems of the school. This class had a total of thirty-
two learners, thirteen of whom were boys and nineteen girls. The cultural
composition of this class consisted of 21 whites (eight males and 13 females),
one Indian (male), eight blacks (three males and five females) and two coloureds
(one female and one male). Of these 32 learners, 29 spoke English as a home
language, one Sotho and two Tswana. Hillside Primary School had an invested
interest in bullying, as they had experienced several incidents of it. In addition
to acknowledging a problem of bullying at the school, the school had also tried
several strategies to deal with it.

Data collection

In order to answer Agar’s question, “What is going on here?” (Silverman, 2001:43),

so that we could gain a deep understanding of the culture underlying bullying,
we engaged in participant observation over a period of approximately two terms,
on a weekly basis. Participant observation consists of three phases, namely
descriptive, focused and selective observation (Flick, 1998:142), and is described
as a “mode of being-in-the-world.” This mode of inquiry consists of a variety of
methods that allowed us to gain access to the varying perceptions and experiences
that underlie bullying (Flick, 1998:141). This included, initially observing
participants in the field with a broad focus of inquiry, guided by a list of questions
to focus our observations in an effort to gain a deep understanding of the
participants’ perspectives (Silverman, 2001:61), rather than start with our own
preconceived ideas (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994:69). These observations were
recorded in a field journal, including descriptions of the well maintained school
property, and the security system of the school, the number and types of sporting
facilities, recordings of spontaneous conversations (ethnographic interviews), as
well as noting the numerous numbers of sporting trophies displayed in the school
foyer. The field journal, besides being used for recording data, also served as a
 40

form of introspection, in which we recorded any concerns, hunches, problems

and questions. These initial discoveries guided subsequent observations and led
to the second phase of focused observation.

During this phase of participant observation, besides becoming more focused in

our observations, we also became more participative in the process of research.
We engaged in ethnographic interviews, semi-structured interviews, document
analysis and administered two short questionnaires. The interviews served a
variety of purposes, one of which enabled us to capture the feelings, thoughts
and intentions of the participants that we could not identify through observation
alone (Patton, 1990:196 as cited by Merriam, 1998:72). Another enabled us to
probe deeper or ask for clarification in order to gain a deeper understanding of
the situation from the participants’ perspectives (Merriam, 1998:7). Educators,
learners, parents, tuck shop conveners, the tea lady and the caretaker were
interviewed. Although the questionnaires are a form of quantitative research,
Silverman (2001:40) points out that such measures may at times be appropriate
in qualitative research, provided that the researcher does not depend on them
purely. The information gained from one survey was used to informally question
the grade seven learners about their experiences of bullying. The information
obtained from the second questionnaire was plotted as a sociogram, and also
used for interpretation. We also accessed documents that would highlight values,
attitudes and beliefs underlying bullying. Moreover, we photocopied extracts
from the learners’ books, which revealed findings of the research they had done
on bullying.

During the final phase of the research, we became more selective in our
observations and engaged in open-ended, in-depth unstructured interviews, as
well as focus-group interviews, which were all transcribed verbatim. For ethical
purposes, permission from the parents was obtained before conducting this type
of interview with the learners (Silverman, 2001:271). In addition, the interviews
were transcribed anonymously, in order to protect people’s identities and that of
the research location (Christians, 2000:139). From the thirty-two learners we
received fifteen proxy replies. Of these, three sets of parents volunteered to be
interviewed. During this phase we also made use of learners’ photographs,
drawings, and poetry, as well as video footage, to access the perceptions and
experiences of bullying. According to Bogdan and Biklen (1998:141), photography
is a rich source of descriptive data. This is clearly illustrated in Figure 4. Photographs
 41

were also used as a source of stimuli for probing the worldviews of the learners’
lives, when we interviewed them individually (Bogdan & Biklen, 1998:146).
Figures 1 and 3 depict photographs taken by participants who were asked to take
photographs of anything that reminded them of bullying. Collier (1957) as quoted
by Flick (1998:154) claims that such stimuli help to activate peoples’ memories
and encourage them to make statements about complex processes and situations
such as bullying. Drawings, on the other hand, can be used to cut through some
of the levels of pretence, when used as part of a discussion in a focus group
(Schratz & Walker, 1995:80). This became evident after we had invited all learners
at a feedback session to share their experiences in the form of a drawing or poem.
Although we did not have the time to interview these learners, the drawings and
poems needed no explanation - they spoke for themselves. This is clearly reflected
in Figure 2.

Data analysis
From the outset of research, the processes of collecting, coding and analyzing
the data went on at the same time (Fielding & Lee, 1998:30). We used Glaser
and Strauss’s (1967) constant comparative method, which is a form of inductive
qualitative data analysis (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994:126; Merriam, 1998:159),
to analyse the data. Inductive approaches to analyzing data begin with a focus
of inquiry that determines the data to be collected (Maykut & Morehouse,
1994:126). Important aspects that arise from the data are then analysed (Maykut
& Morehouse, 1994:127). The constant comparative method of data analysis
enables the ethnographer to move beyond pure description, to another level of
analysis, which is to capture recurring patterns in the data (Merriam, 1998:179).
It is a circular and continuous process (Flick, 1998:234), whereby coded data
are simultaneously compared with all obtained units of meaning (Maykut &
Morehouse, 1994:134). There is continuous refinement of the categories, as the
initial categories are changed, merged or omitted, creating room for new categories,
as well as the discovery of new relationships (Maykut & Morehouse, 1994:134).

Reliability and validity of the study

The primary goal of this research was to add knowledge to educational practice
and theory, and not to pass judgement of the school, so that educators can learn
about their practices. However because this study is a critical ethnography we
also attempted to raise awareness of power and control issues and to challenge
the status quo.
 42

In order to enhance validity and reliability the following strategies were

implemented. The internal validity of this qualitative research study was strengthened
by using strategies understand the perceptions of various members of the community
(Huberman & Miles, 2002:43). This was important so that we could uncover the
complex nature of bullying at Hillside Primary School, in order to provide a
holistic interpretation of what was happening (Merriam, 1998:203). One of the
strategies included crystallization, a concept used in lieu of triangulation
(Richardson, 2000:934), whereby multiple methods and sources of data were
used to capture the various perceptions of members of the community. This
enabled us to better understand the different perceptions of various members of
the community (Huberman & Miles, 2002:43). Another strategy, namely, member
checking, involved checking tentative interpretations with participants of the
inquiry throughout the research process, as well as providing feedback to the
participants at the end of the inquiry (Miles & Huberman, 1994:275). In addition,
we spent a long time in the natural setting, simultaneously making use of participant
observation in conjunction with comparative analysis, to gain meaningful insight
into the various participants’ perspectives. Furthermore, rich, thick descriptions,
as well as an audit-trail of the research process, indicated how we collected the
data, derived our categories and how decisions were made throughout the inquiry
(Merriam, 1998:207 and Miles & Huberman, 1994:279).

The reliability of this qualitative ethnographic study is concerned about whether

the process of this study was consistent and reasonably stable over time and
across researchers and methods (Miles & Huberman, 1994:278), rather than
examining the extent to which our findings can be replicated (Merriam, 1998:
205). This was increased by the quality of recording and documenting of our data
(Flick, 1998: 228). In addition to our detailed field notes, transcriptions and
analysis of data, a detailed exposition of how we collected our data was also
provided in an audit-trail.

Finally, the external validity of our qualitative research study, deals with the extent
to which our findings at Hillside Primary School make sense to a variety of
different educational practitioners and researchers across different contexts. This
was important so that they may compare whether their situation is similar to the
researched situation, in order to transfer the findings (Merriam, 1998:211). Using
rich, thick description enhanced this.
 43

Findings
The purpose of this research was to gain a thorough and hence deep and critical
understanding of how the unique culture of a particular primary school contributed
to and sustained bullying behaviour, by identifying and describing the attitudes,
norms, perceptions, beliefs and values of various members of the community,
that underlie bullying. It is important to bear in mind that the focus of this study
is on bullying. Bullying is a negative concept and therefore is based in negative
findings. This does not therefore imply that the school lacks positive qualities. It
does have a positive identity. Five main categories, with sub-categories emerged
in the final configurations of data analysis. These are presented in Table 1.

Table 1: Findings of the study

1. Culture of Authoritarianism
[ “There is a clear line between black and white” (LBW)]
• Conflicted power relations
• Autocratic structures and procedures
• Hierarchical channels of communication
2. Culture of secrecy
[“Do not tell” (DNT)]
• Fear of safety
• Lack of awareness
• School tolerates bullying
3. Intolerance for diversity
[“I’ve got it and you don’t” (IGI)]
• Intolerance for multiple intelligences
• Racial conflict
• Socio-economic status
• Intolerance for different learning styles
4. Culture of disrespect
[“I don’t care” (IDC)]
• Disrespect for self
• Disrespect for children
• Disrespect for teachers
• Disrespect for parents
5. Culture of gangsterism
[“A culture of gangsterism” (COG)]
• Nature of gangs
• Types of bullying they engage in
 44

The quote “… a clear line between black and white…” (T/R8/399-400) clearly
depicts the essence of this school’s character. The main finding of the research
revealed that Hillside Primary School has a conflicted culture underlying bullying.
Conflicted in the sense that an overriding authoritarian ethos, in a bid to remain
in control, has prohibited the school from implementing democratic procedures
effectively, thus unwittingly condoning bullying and culminating in perceptions
of an unsafe environment. The authoritarian culture depicted by conflicted power
relations, autocratic structures and procedures and hierarchical channels of
communication, was found to prevent the school from adopting more positive,
collaborative and creative approaches in solving problems relating to bullying.
Consequently, any efforts to resolve problems of bullying were either short-lived
or unsuccessful. Perhaps conflicting messages such as found in the policy on
discipline, lay tribute to these behaviours: “A healthy balance in teacher-pupil
relationships should at all times be maintained. Familiarity does breed contempt.
By all means be friendly and kind and approachable, but maintain your professional
distance” (D/DP/1).

This perception of dividedness seemed to be anchored in the way all members

of the school community related to one another and is clearly illustrated in a
photograph (Figure 1) taken by a grade seven learner to symbolize what bullying
reminds her of.

The following extract reveals her perception:

“Well it’s like they come from all sides, like you are in this
corner and they come from here and here and here and they’re
just blocking you and blocking you and you can’t get out and
they’re saying look at this and look at that and everybody is
saying something and it’s not one person that actually bullies
you, till you can’t take it any more. It’s plenty of people that
pick on you little bit, little bit, little bit, then finally it’s like a
bomb, just scrape away, just scrape away, finally you just
explode and you can’t take it anymore and you do something
really stupid, just to get them away from you, just to please
them, just to let them, because they keep on bullying you until
you can’t take it anymore, until you do something that they
like. The whole thing about bullying is to gain power, as well
as to feel good about yourself and have lots of friends and that
you’re cool…'85” (T/R13/132-147).

Figure 1
 45

Moreover, the authoritarian ethos prevented the school culture from being
explicated and shared by all. Decisions related to bullying appeared to be
conflicted in nature, in the sense that different types of decisions were made by
different individuals. For example, it became evident that decisions related to
policy development and procedures about bullying, were made by people in
positions of authority, while on the other hand decisions pertaining to dealing
with issues of bullied learners seemed to be left up to the individual educators.
These independent decision-making styles, rather than collaborative ones, seemed
to result in confusion and/or distrust when learners approach different educators
and get different responses, which may also explain why learners refrained from
reporting bullying incidents.

“Do not tell” (DNT) encaptures the prevalent culture of secrecy at the school,
which is clearly reflected in a drawing done by a learner from grade seven (Figure
2), and which was also found to contribute to the ongoing cycle of bullying.

Figure 2

One of the motives found for not reporting bullying incidents related to a fear
of safety. Another finding revealed that a lack of awareness of the definition of
bullying, as well as a lack of awareness of a reporting procedure, and erroneous
beliefs hindered reporting. Moreover, a perception that the school tolerates
bullying also prevented individuals from reporting incidents. This was revealed
in perceptions that nothing gets done about it and that it was a waste of time
reporting bullying incidents to educators, as learners believed the punishment
the bullies received was too lenient and did not alleviate the bullying. It stands
to reason, that if incidents of bullying are not reported, then naturally nothing
can or will be one about it. Together, these findings unequivocally reveal that in
 46

one way or another, the role players do not feel safe enough to report incidents
of bullying. Without reservation, this indicates a lack of involvement or participation
among role players, when dealing with issues of bullying. Therefore, it stands to
reason that this reflects a non-inclusive culture, which emerged as an additional
theme.

“…I’ve got it and you don’t” (T/R8/279-280) is a response indicating the nature
of this school’s culture. Intolerance for diversity reflected a non-inclusive culture,
which undeniably fed the vicious cycle of bullying. An emphasis on sport appeared
to be a powerful non-verbal message that was conveyed through an overwhelming
amount of sporting trophies and scrolls. An intolerance for multiple intelligences
surreptitiously led to an intolerance for intellectually bright learners. These learners
were labeled as “nerds”, while the learners who participated in sport were
perceived to be the “cool” learners. This powerful message also consequently
led to ostracization and loneliness and seemed to prevent academically bright
learners, who are not sport oriented, from achieving their true potential, as
evidenced in the following photograph (Figure 3) which a grade seven learner
took to convey what bullying reminds her of.

This is her interpretation of the photograph:

“Well this photograph is like a pathway to a door and
you can’t reach the door, because they are blocking
you, they’re in your way, they’re like a wall. It’s like
your career is at stake, they are like in front of you and
not letting you achieve to your highest potential,
because I could have got 100% for one of the tests
last year, but because they were saying “Ag, you
couldn’t get this for your test,” I started worrying that
I’m going to get bad marks and then I get sick before
a test, “Oh, please let me pass this test, because they’re
going to ( ) and I’m going to fail and then you learn
to say that I’m not going to pass, because they keep
on telling me that I’m not going to pass. So the more
you say I’m not going to pass, the more you aren’t
going to pass” (T/R13/355-368).

Figure 3

Moreover, it also became transparent that issues of racial conflict served as a

breeding ground for aggression. This emerged as tension between white, black
and coloured groups, as well as lack of integration of learners when viewed on
 47

the playground and forms of racial dissing (verbal insults). Socio-economic status
also appeared to be another factor underlying bullying at the school. A teacher
claimed that,
“A lot of our bullying starts here, is because the fact that it is a really
wealthy school and a lot of the really well to do children pick on the kids
that come from the slums, you know they pick on the kids that don’t
have…” (T/R8/273-278).
Furthermore, an attitude of indifference towards different learning styles seemed
to set the stage for acts of bullying. This was reflected in learners being given the
same work to do, an intolerance for different learning paces, and handwriting.
Besides, lessons being teacher-centered, it was observed, that every child was
expected to do the same work or exercises in the observed Grade seven class.
This resulted in learners not taking responsibility for their work, passive learning
and hence boredom and frustration. This in turn laid the foundations for bullying
behaviour, characterized by a lack of care and disrespect among educators,
parents and learners.

“I don’t care” (T/R9/541) is a response that indicates a culture of disrespect at

the school which ultimately fed the cycle of bullying and which simultaneously
culminated in a perception of an unsafe environment, resulting in learners wanting
to run away from school or stay at home. To explain this one child said: “…'85they
try and do something that will not want you to come to school” (T/R13/361-362).
Disrespect took on many forms and occurred among and between the various
members of the community. Firstly, disrespect for the self became evident in the
way some individual learners treated themselves, in a bid to be accepted by their
peers. For example, behaviours such as drinking and smoking (T/G1/R4/300),
defying school rules by bleaching their hair (T/R5/164-169), as well as the lack
of care about the consequences of their dysfunctional actions (T/G1/R4/418-423),
emerged as attitudes underlying bullying. Secondly, disrespect for learners
included disrespect for girls by boys, among peers, and by educators. For example,
most boys in grade seven showed little respect for the young teen adolescent
girls who had commenced puberty, while behaviours among peers included
dissing, swearing, name-calling, teasing, spreading rumours and extorting money.
Disrespect for the learners by the educators emanated from humiliating learners
in front of their peers, name-calling, passing sarcastic comments, picking on
learners and gentle but aggressive physical forms of retaliation. These behaviours
conflicted strongly with a statement found in the Discipline Policy, which stated,
“Please be careful of remarks made to pupils. Nicknames and sarcastic remarks
 48

are totally unacceptable” (D/DP/1). Disrespect for educators by learners emerged

from interviews conducted with the educators and learners, but not from the
observations. This took on several different forms ranging from back chatting,
being rude, being naughty to gain attention, so that others in the class can laugh,
as well as making overt threats. We found out from the learners that it was
perceived to be “cool” if one engaged in disrespectful behaviours towards the
educators in front of other learners. This was regarded as an important attribute
in order to be accepted as a member of a group. Disrespect among teaching
colleagues and staff also became evident. The apparent lack of care among
teaching colleagues, seemed to emerge in a photograph (Figure 4) of messages
written to ‘care bears’, which depicts a cry for more care.

Figure 4

Examples included a perceived lack of care by the younger members of staff

towards the tea lady when she was sick, a lack of empathy for a member of staff
who was in a car accident and a “… feeling that you’re left with that you don’t
do enough – there’s always somebody else… that does more than you – more
than you are doing… They like to compare. I have spent so many hours and so
many minutes and so many…” (T/R14/363-372).

Disrespect by parents towards educators was exemplified in the way parents felt
they needed to speak to educators in order to gain attention. A concerned father,
for example, felt that the only way to get something done about his son’s bullying
incident was to confront the headmistress in an aggressive manner. Disrespect
for parents by educators resulted in perceptions of dishonesty. For example, a
parent felt that he had been lied to by the principal about having already discussed
“A culture of gangsterism” (T/R8/65-66) was an appropriate response which aptly
describes the powerful nature of bullying at Hillside Primary School. Gangsterism
aptly depicts that bullying in this school, is definitely not a case of a “… one-
 49

on-one situation” (T/R9/162), but rather is executed by groups of boys and girls.
Characteristics of gang members included the following descriptions. It became
apparent that learners who bully feel empowered by supporters. One father
claimed that, this is why it is apt to call it ‘thugerism’ or ‘gangsterism’ because,
“…when there is a gang, where he has four or five backing him, he’s got a big
chest. But when you take him away from that gang and it’s just him on his own,
he’s a weenie…” (T/R4/957-960). A teacher claimed that the learners in these
groups “…could be considered leaders in terms of the children…” (T/R9/152-
153), while learners described them as ‘cool’ as in being “…great people…”
(T/G1/R4/248) or “…popular…” (T/G1/R4/285) learners. It became apparent that
these ‘cool’ learners wear the “…right clothes…” (T/G1/R4/319), as well as
“…often swear…”(T/G1/R6/ 295), “…smoke and drink alcohol” (T/G1/R4/300),
at “…cool places where you’re supposed to hang out in” (T/R13/254-255), such
as at the movies at “…Monte…” (T/R12/168) or “…Sandton…” (T/R12/160).
Other findings revealed that they “…(look) down on the people who are actually
doing really well in school…” (T/G1/R4/320-321) and besides emotionally bullying
learners (T/R9/19), they also tend to “…backchat the educators or do something
naughty” (T/G2/161). It was also found that these learners, “…don’t mind getting
into trouble…” (T/G1/R4/422) and “… don’t actually care about the consequences”
(T/R9/539). Because, “cool children, when they’re being rude to the teacher, they
normally think they are funny, so they try and make everyone laugh in order for
them to be cool. Cooler actually” (T/G1R2/436-439). After backchatting educators,
“… they tell their friends at break and everyone hangs around and says, ‘Oh,
that’s so cool you back chatted the teacher,’ … and say, ‘Oh gosh, we must try
it out!’” (T/G1/R5/425-429).

Furthermore, the group itself appears hierarchical in nature, as described by a

teacher:
“You have the little sort of upper, the top of the pyramid - the bees.
These ones will stay pristine; their hands are very seldom caught in the
cookie jar. Then you’ve got the wannabees. These are almost like the
henchmen. They are the ones that are desperately desperate to be part
of the main group and invariably are the ones that get sent out and get
caught and get into trouble. Whereas the other ones somehow just
manage to get away with it” (T/R9/478-488).
A disturbing finding revealed that some of these primary school gangs extend
into high schools. The leaders of these gangs appear to belong to gangs of learners
at local high schools. It became apparent that if a learner has a fight with a leader
 50

of a gang at primary school then “…he’ll say, ‘My boys will come and get you
on Friday. Then they’ll come and beat me up, here at school” (T/R12/390-402).
Although these ‘gangs’ partook in different forms of bullying, it appeared that
verbal and non-verbal bullying seemed to be more rife than “pushing, shoving
and punching” (T/G1/R3/190-191).

From the above it can clearly be seen that the school under study, appears to
have a conflicted culture underlying bullying. Conflicted in the sense that an
overriding authoritarian ethos, in a bid to remain in control, has prevented the
school from implementing democratic procedures effectively. The authoritarian
ethos dominated by power relations, has prevented all members of the school
community from engaging in participatory decision-making processes, even
though the problem of bullying concerns them all. The resulting lack of mutual
accountability also led to a break down in communication. This has emanated
from a failure to report bullying incidents among all members of the school
community, differing perceptions of what bullying entails, as well as an underutilised
bullying procedure. Moreover, the non-inclusive culture, which places an emphasis
on sport, has subtly resulted in distinguishing between the ‘cool’ and the nerds,
which fuels the cycle of bullying further. This, in turn, prohibits the fostering of
collaborative and co-operative relationships, and instead interactions are marked
by disrespect, in the form of verbal, non-verbal and physical bullying. The apparent
power relations at Hillside Primary School seem to have also been mimicked by
the learners in the form of gangsterism. Thus in spite of attempts at dealing with
bullying situations, as well as engaging learners in collaborative decision-making
and co-operative learning, an overriding authoritarian ethos has disempowered
rather than empowered learners, hence contributing to an ongoing cycle of
bullying.

Discussion and recommendations

To answer the research question, “How does the culture of a school influence
bullying?” it can be unequivocally argued that an authoritarian culture unwittingly
feeds the vicious cycle of bullying. The major reason for this is that the very nature
of an authoritarian culture prohibits members of the community from actively
sharing in, and being committed to, meaningful and purposeful values and
ideologies that bond them together. Rather members of a community are prescribed
roles, rules, values, and expectations which are designed to regulate their
behaviours, in a bid to enforce compliance rather than commitment (Sergiovanni,
 51

1994: 58). This lack of shared understanding consequently results in messages

that are unclear and inconsistent, signaling that it is okay to bully. Parents, learners
and educators in these schools do not have a shared understanding of what
bullying is. Neither do they have a shared understanding of the rules and strategies
to prevent bullying, nor the procedures to follow in event of bullying incidents.
This results in confusion as to what to do, culminating in sounds of silence, an
ongoing cycle of bullying and a perceived unsafe environment (Sullivan, 2000:
60). Furthermore, an authoritarian culture by its very nature also decries humanistic
values such as care, respect, cooperation, collegiality, inclusion, participation
and inquiry, despite contradictory claims in this regard. This became apparent
in the conflicted messages that emerged between what the school says they do
and what the members of the school experience. This conflict clearly emerged
in documents such as the policy on discipline, and policy on punishments which
tried to maintain an authoritarian culture whilst acknowledging the importance
of humanistic values. The bottom line is that whilst holding onto an authoritarian
culture, it is impossible to practice democratic values. For the same reason,
schools that are serious about not tolerating bullying will not be successful if they
are operating from an authoritarian culture. Hillside Primary School is evidence
of this. In spite of concerted measures they took to combat bullying, the cycle
of bullying continued. Some may argue that in light of the slow process of
transformation, this is a naï'efve comment to make. However, we wish to remind
you as reader, that this is a critical ethnographic study that aims to raise
consciousness about what we may unconsciously take for granted. In turn, this
may provide educational leaders with an opportunity to effect change from within,
rather than rely solely on governmental policy.

The present authoritarian culture thus denies learners and educators a sense of
belonging, care, and unconditional regard, which are also lacking in some
families. Sergiovanni (1994: 9) and Beane and Apple (1999: 13) argue that a lack
of care has infiltrated our communities as a result of individualism, which is
based on self-interest, rather than caring about others. Sergiovanni (1994: 12)
claims that learners seek alternative ‘families’, such as becoming members of
gangs, to fulfill their unmet needs for security and belonging. He warns us that
although conforming to peer pressure is a normal part of adolescent development,
it becomes dangerous when the norms of the gang distance itself from the
mainstream norms of schools and society. When this happens, Sergiovanni claims
that parents, educators and principals lose control. From an ecosystemic
perspective, we need to take cognizance of the fact that educators tend to develop
 52

a sense of helplessness when burdened with stress, which naturally depletes their
reservoirs of strength to care for others in the manner in which they are accustomed
to care (Weissbourd, 2003: 9). Learners, on the other hand, then bare the brunt
of the stress and fall prey to victims of malign and non-malign bullying, because
of inappropriate behaviour that has been modeled by the educators. Unquestionably,
Hillside Primary School needs to fulfill the basic needs of security and belongingness,
so that the potential of learners and educators may be actualized.

This necessitates a shift towards building an authentic school community.

Sergiovanni (1994: xiii) points out, there is a great difference between an authentic
community and a counterfeit community. An authentic community requires us
to “…think community, believe in community and practice community.” A
counterfeit community on the other hand “…peppers its language with community
and labels itself as community in its mission statement.” To do this effectively,
Hillside Primary School needs to substitute the authoritarian values with authentic
democratic values and ideologies, embedded in the spirit of community building,
for the sake of citizenship. Building communities will not only eliminate problems
of bullying, but will simultaneously eliminate problem behaviours, such as drug
taking and violence, as well as improve academic motivation, ethical and altruistic
behaviours and social and emotional competencies (Schaps, 2003: 31). The
school can use this as a stepping stone to develop a new vision and plans of
action to change.

This research study has unequivocally revealed that the need for safety in
authoritarian schools is a practical reality. Given the fact that most schools in
South Africa are still described as authoritarian (Davidoff & Lazarus, 1997: 9),
the above has serious implications for South African schools in general. In light
of this, schools need to become authentic communities. The first step towards
becoming an authentic community involves becoming a purposeful community.
According to Sergiovanni (1994: 71) schools need to first become purposeful
communities before they can become caring, learning, professional, collegial,
inclusive and inquiring communities. A purposeful community is one in which
members of a community identify and commit to core values (Sergiovanni, 1994:
72). These core values are not just concepts that are written and spoken about,
but rather inform the way a group of people think, feel and behave. These core
values provide a vision, which should then be reflected in every element of the
school organization, such as whole-school policies, decision-making procedures,
interpersonal relations and leadership styles. If this is attended to, then schools
 53

will undoubtedly become bully-proof, harmonious, caring places in which

educators and learners can actualize their potentials, because their need for
security and belonging have been fulfilled.

CONCLUSION

“If people are to secure and maintain a democratic way of life, they must have
opportunities to learn what that way of life means and how it might be led.”
(Dewey, 1916 as cited by Apple & Beane, 1999: 8)
From the above it has become apparent that the culture of a school is so pervasive
that it is conveyed in everything that is said and done. As educators we are
responsible for the moral development of the learners, so that they may become
moral citizens of the future. In view of the problem of bullying in and around
Gauteng, we cannot afford to continue to convey values that conflict with our
conscious intentions. As previously mentioned the field of educational psychology
has recently undergone a paradigm shift from a deficit-based model to a health-
promoting model, in an attempt to help manage the transformation of schools’
growth towards becoming healthy learning environments. In light of this we argue
that schools need to become proactive in their approach to dealing with bullying
in order to create safer schools. This requires humanizing the culture, which will
invoke more personalized and respectful relationships between all members of
the community (De Jong, 2001: 352). A safe and healthy learning environment
needs to reflect a sense of care, cohesiveness and synergy that bonds people
together, direct communication that is open and honest, equitable distribution
of influence and power, innovativeness, adaptability and problem-solving
adequacy” (Swart & Pettipher, 2001: 32). This implies that an important first step
to eliminating a culture of bullying and creating safe environments requires
becoming a purposeful community.

REFERENCES

Apple, M.W. & Beane, J.A. 1999. The case for democratic schools. In M. W. Apple and J.A. Beane (eds.).
Democratic schools: lessons from the chalk face. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Berthold, K.A. & Hoover, J.H. 2000. Correlates of bullying and victimization among intermediate students
in the Midwestern USA. School Psychology International, 21 (1): 65-78.
Bogdan, R.C. & Biklen, S.K. 1998. Qualitative research in education: an introduction to theory and
rd
methods. 3 edition. London: Allyn & Bacon.
 54

Carney, A.G. & Merrell, K.W. 2001. Bullying in schools: perspectives on understanding and preventing
an international problem. School Psychology International, 22(3): 364- 382.
Christians, C.G. 2000. Ethics and politics in qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds).
nd
Handbook of qualitative research. 2 edition. London: Sage Publications.
Coggan, C., Bennett, S., Hooper, R. & Dickinson, P. February 2003. Association between bullying and
mental health status in New Zealand adolescents. International Journal of Mental Health
Promotion, 5(1):16-22.
Craig, W.M., Henderson, K. & Murphy, J.G. 2000b. Prospective teachers’ attitudes toward bullying and
victimization. School Psychology International, 21(1): 5-21.
Craig, W.M., Pepler, D. & Atlas, R. 2000a. Observations of bullying in the playground and in the
classroom. School Psychology International, 21(1): 22-36.
Davidoff, S. & Lazarus, S. 1997. The learning school: an organization development approach. Kenwyn:
Juta & Co, Ltd.
De Jong, T. 2000. The role of the school psychologist in developing a health promoting school. School
Psychology International, 21(4): 339-357.
Department of Education. 1996. South African Schools Act. Pretoria: Government Printer.
Department of Education. July 2001. Education white paper 6: special needs education: building an
inclusive education and training system. Pretoria: Department of Education.
Donald, D., Lazarus, S. & Lolwana, P. 1997. Educational psychology in social context: challenges of
development, social issues & special need in Southern Africa. Cape Town: Oxford University
Press.
Donald, D., Lazarus, S. & Lolwana, P. 2002. Educational psychology in social context: challenges of
nd
development, social issues & special need in Southern Africa. 2 edition. Cape Town: Oxford
University Press.
Fielding, N.G. & Lee, R.M. 1998. Computer analysis and qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
Flick, U. 1998. An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.
Hinchey, P.H. 1998. Finding freedom in the classroom: a practical introduction to critical theory. New
York: Peter Lang.
Kalliotus, P. 2000. Bullying as a special case of aggression: procedures for cross-cultural assessment.
School Psychology International, 21(1): 47-64.
Lee, W.O. 2001. Moral perspectives on values, culture and education. In J. Cairns, D.
Lawtton and R. Gardner (eds.). World yearbook of Education 2001: values, culture and education.
London: Kogan Page.
Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. 1994. Beginning qualitative research: a philosophic and practical guide.
London: The Falmer Press.
Merriam, S.B. 1998. Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass Publishers.
 55

nd
Miles, M.B. & Huberman, A.M. 1994. An expanded source book: qualitative data analysis. 2 edition.
London: Sage Publications.
Mulrine, A. 5 March 1999. Once bullied, now bullies-with guns. U.S. News & World Report, 126
(17):24.
Available from:
(Accessed 1 November 2001).
Republic of South Africa. 1996. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act 108 of 1996).
Pretoria: Government Printer. Available from: (Accessed 26 September 2001).
Richardson, L. 2000. Writing: a method of inquiry. In N.K. Denzin and Y.S. Lincoln (eds). Handbook
nd
of qualitative research. 2 edition. London: Sage Publications.
Schaps, E. March 2003. Creating a school community. Educational Leadership, 60(6):31-33.
Sergiovanni, T.J. 1994. Building community in schools. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Sharp, S. & Smith, P.K. 1994. Tackling bullying in your school: a practical handbook for teachers.
London: Routledge.
nd
Silverman, D. 2001. Interpreting qualitative data: methods for analyzing talk, text and interaction. 2
edition. London: Sage Publications.
Smith-Heavenrich, S. May/June 2001. Kids hurting kids: bullies in the schoolyard. Mothering, 16(10):
70-79. Available from:
(Accessed 1 November 2001).
Soutter, A. & McKenzie, A. 2000. The use and effects of anti-bullying and anti-harassment policies in
Australian schools. School Psychology International, 21(1): 96-105.
Sullivan, K. 2000. The anti-bullying handbook. Auckland: Oxford University Press.
Swart, E. & Pettipher, R. 2001. Changing roles for principals and educators. In P.Engelbrecht and L.
Green (eds.). Promoting learner development. Engelbrecht, P. Pretoria: Van Schaik.
Tattum, D. 1997. Developing a programme to reduce bullying in young offenders’ institutions. In D.
Tattum and G. Herbert (eds). Bullying: home, school and community. London: David Fulton
Publishers.
Weissbourd, R. March 2003. Moral teachers, moral students. Educational Leadership, 60(6): 6-11.

Helen MacDonald Estelle Swart

Department of Educational Sciences Faculty of Education
Faculty of Education and Nursing University of Stellenbosch
Rand Afrikaans University Private Bag X1
PO Box 524 Matieland
Johannesburg 2006 E-mail: estelle@sun.ac.za

View publication stats